[000:00:00;00] and these warnings about the stability of russia, unfortunately, yes, i think we have, we are faced with this idea, just as we saw it 33 years ago when the soviet union was destroyed and when bush came, bush the elder came and warned the ukrainian elite against danger uh, from a member of the empire, the world somehow coped with it. i think that this is a smaller problem. i think there is a bigger problem that they are afraid that russia can use tactical nuclear weapons or that russia and america can directly enter the conflict, but here i think it is possible find different ways to avoid this, even including the fact that america and other countries give security guarantees

for the security of ukraine, for example, america can use long-range weapons that have only been used on the territory of ukraine against russian forces on the territory of ukraine. in my opinion, this keeps this conflict more - less under control er, well, at the level under control, uh, to your previous answer to the question about nato , when you gave an example of a country that, contrary to our supposedly established norms, was taken into the alliance , in particular, as an example of germany, which was then divided and claimed and considered east germany to be its heritage, can there be such a conspiracy theory, you know that ukraine will be included in nato even before the end of the war and it will have occupied territories, but in this way, the conflict is certain that time will be frozen for the largest part of the country, there is such a possibility but i think it is more likely

that what will happen if the conflict continues, yes, membership will be granted or the right to membership or the process of integration of ukraine, which we obviously believe should be with the increased example of the swedes and finland, sweden, finland, but still, i think that means that it supposedly protected this territory, which at a certain moment when ukraine enters is under the control of ukraine, if it is under threat, ukraine will have all the rights of joint collective defense of nato countries but that these forces will not advance to fight against these countries on this territory that is not yet under the control of ukraine, this is possible, this may be the way of this processing, actually

, this is the process of integration into nato, or it is possible in the actual provision of these security guarantees during the transition period. i simply believe that there are different formulas where , say, tens of thousands of soldiers of the american or any other nuclear country do not have to be used on the territory of ukraine, but they can use high-precision weapons from afar , which complementarily helps ukraine in the conquest of their own territories. thank you mr. andriana adriana karetnytskyi senior research fellow of the atlantic council presidenthadovs 94th 2000 was with us in direct communication united states marathon on the new ones, who will comment on the opinion that you heard from america and do you think it is such a form of what it is? is it definitely already the dominant opinion?

why did stalin die and the korean war immediately ended, that is, another leadership came, which was ready to first of all adhere to obligations and borders, because back in 1948 there was a berlin crisis, when they actually blocked west berlin for this next, germany exchanged the neutrality of austria. why? because the soviet union actually created a chain of countries that did not allow free troops to be transferred from one part of europe to another , i.e. switzerland, austria were neutral countries, and hungary followed . uh, just the deoccupation, including austria, that is, more complex processes actually took place and then the question is about compliance with obligations . is the soviet union ready, for example, to go across borders and not move like they did in abkhazia

by the way, that's why this question is tricked here. because integrity, territorial integrity is a direct legal consequence of the fifth article of the nato charter . why? because if they say that we don't control some territories, we actually have to admit that we're losing them. well , let's face it . and the question of what are the guarantees that russia under the current putin will adhere to these guarantees that the border will be well, for example, theoretically if it is occupied, but here i do not agree with what matfel showed, the former us ambassador to russia said what he noticed and then changed his rhythm. red prigozhina showed that putin is ready to go to negotiations even at the slightest threat . look how scared it was. when two battalions of soldiers just went to moscow, it got so angry and immediately ran off to negotiate, he showed that he was not ready. to escalate as he did, they are there openly, everyone tells this, it means as he

told everyone, this is all ukraine should show no more in a long war, they are afraid of a long war. said again, we will get all the bombay residents, as they say, and so on , they talked about what they are afraid of a protracted conflict . points of view on ukrainian conditions and so on, because when they start talking we will accept you into nato from the occupied territory and why you did not accept georgia from us, i have a question, the longer it is, the worse it is for russia, because before on the contrary, there was an opinion that they say that a war of attrition is beneficial to russia because they actually have more people, but the problem is that the russian elite does not see the light of day , that is karagan, that is his logic to say the next thing, well, we are theoretical, uh

, we are conquering some part of ukraine there but this does not solve the question that ukraine will become an aggressive state, and it is theoretical. well, as you always know , they have imperialists that if we even conquer all of ukraine, what do we get? they did not support the most important thing about ukraine at all with weapons because they understand that the erosion of their power goes on and on and so on , so it is nice to say what you know. and i'm saying well, it's a threat to itself when it's scared, when it starts looking for its suitcase over there where is it talking, uh, making its secretions over there yes, you saw this one didn't look for everything, he disappeared for a day and i never heard that no and this is in the system

authoritarian government and this is unacceptable when you wait longer in russia in russia they are ready to forgive an alcoholic forgive a tyrant forgive a bloody but not a weakling that is, it is an influence primarily on lada, do you remember how lukashenko came forward with this when the elections were held, it came out of the machine you what in front of the president yes, as he said, plow in place, plow in place, i am ready to fight to the end, that is, a signal to everyone else, let's fight , let's see, yes, what is he ready for, sir, your position is that because you heard the united states and this is an interesting topic that we did they really catch the pseudo-butt beauty of the united states because somehow the information immediately went out that the attacks would be given almost a day later and again there were signals, then once they somehow announced that ukraine would not become a member of the alliance based on the results of the same freedom well, i i think that we did not count on this. i did not count on the fact that we

will become members of nato tomorrow or in two days, but let's still proceed from our own interests, because now we hear that we are being offered the option of germany. to give up some territories, we are offered to partially listen. in my opinion, you have already passed the stage when we talked or not , our partners talked about ukraine. the first point is that all territories must be liberated, the point about which the partial joined nato, we say we have and by the way, we talk about this to our partners , he tells our partners about what, thanks to your help, we have to free the territory of ukraine and put me in the place of a dictator and when these articles appear about what will happen to russia without putin, these are

actually narratives of the kremlin where they put a--and the equal sign between russia and putin is exactly what russia will be without putin to exist to one degree or another without this regime that introduced this chaos that violated all international agreements that went and started this war because of the manipulation due to the fact that it is alleged that the removal of putin from power will lead to even more chaos, the eyes of some kind of disaster well again well, i agree with what was said about the example of george bush sr. , who for a few weeks and before that was also afraid of the development of the soviet union and asked ukraine not to go anywhere. options, but let's lay out the options. okay

, escalation, escalation of the use of tactical nuclear weapons. we are not talking about strategic. to proceed from the fact that what will be the consequences of this use of these tactical weapons on the one hand and what are the pluses for the russian federation with the use of nuclear weapons on the other hand and something does not agree here there were absolutely no deputies already all the experts said that you will get you have a hole on the front of 4 km and the political consequences , let's hit them if they are on the battlefield . with a warhead, what significant losses can be transferred, that is, it will not affect the course of hostilities, okay, we reject it, they will hit it to intimidate a civilian city, it is not that the state is a terrorist, but a rogue state and an absolutely nuclear

terrorist, three points were discussed: what will happen to russia if they use nuclear weapons tactically, fine therefore, there were potential possible reactions of our fleet to the destruction of military basses different . there are no downsides to this, and it’s beyond the scope of what kind of escalation can we talk about at all? okay, escalation was rejected, that is, what are we talking about, what will be the effect of ukraine’s promotion to donato ? yes , it will hardly lead to classes somewhere. membership in nato and the help of our partners in our way with more weapons and as a result of the loss of russia in the war and the collapse of the russian federation , will this threaten more than the system that exists today

? ba- tower of ladies there is a party out there, relatively speaking, in the united states, which is leaning towards the need to pacify the russian federation. i think that it already needs to understand that, first of all, there is no one to pacify , and secondly, the king is naked, as he showed, he showed , including riot prigozhynna about the fact that he can pretend to be a great tyrant who keeps everything under control, but we see that this is not the case and, by the way, this is a very clear signal to our partners that there is no need to be afraid. decision the summit when we talk with our partners including me there with the congressmen of the united states the decision that will be made at the summit this year is a zero sum game it won't be he it won't be or someone will lose or someone

will win or the west will lose or russia will lose if the west stays in the same positions that were from the open door policy , this means that russia won everything, this means that russia achieved the fact that we are not advancing into nato, regardless of what they themselves are doing, because this same year they invaded georgia as soon as they saw the slack, that is, if we, if nato does not advance at least somewhere yes we are not talking about what we put as members the day after tomorrow, we are talking about the fact that we should receive a political invitation, this is a step towards a meeting with ukraine from the side of the alliance, this is what we are talking about and our partners well, i see that they hear us because, again , to do nothing means to lose, it means to retreat, peter, let's make treaties with you about the united states, and indeed, the next part, we will move on to our expectations, which the scenarios suit us, which cannot suit why i want to finish with our partners after all, because

a lot still depends on them, if we had everything like that in 16, if we had already closed the issue of the land corridor and we would be facing a cut off crimea and this is more than realistic if we had received this six months ago, we must have been in a different position, and the white house perfectly understands that ukrainians are now paying with the lives of their infantrymen for the lack of an otakan, and no bradlich leopard will save them from missile attacks shelling on such a large scale, have the united states really calmed down, or do they have lines they are afraid of and are ready to spill there? or let the ukrainians spill blood, so that russia does not disintegrate into a controlled hm, do not look at the situation, it is really difficult and it has not been simple since the beginning of the invasion and even before the invasion, in fact, the application was already in the application and the material was very large, and the material was also in the policy . your post clearly stated the four positions that washington took and in november

it was already in the decision. they knew what would happen. the invasion, they understood it already in november 21, dear viewers, for a second, the sound of the air alarm, which we are listening to calmly, is very high on the 21st year. so, the first thing is to prevent a kinetic collision with the russian armies between the united states army , nato armies, that is, and the russian army and the second is not to allow the complete capture of ukraine, but they said then that they were ready for options , as they called it afghanistan, it is possible that this means that our country will turn into afghanistan, but the americans were, but that’s before about er, well, about the intentions and calculations of the high military command and the intelligence of the united states, they were ready only for this , that is, the stinger, what a weapon afghanistan is, but that's all, and the third important thing is to strengthen the nato alliance in order to prevent russia from going further. that is, nothing more, but in 16 months , a huge evolution took place, unfortunately, and we must pay a lot of respect to our fighters and our military command that it

happened thanks to the heroism and successful management of our armed forces. the united states is afraid, so they really don't want to allow the option of russia using tactical nuclear weapons, look at the last moment in a recent interview with the washington post, the brave commander-in-chief said that they will use practical weapons and that we should surrender, that's how i interpreted him the words that the higher military leadership will not surrender , the fighting will continue according to the approved plans , but very but have we heard a similar statement from , for example, the army of the higher military command and the united states or nato high command - there were no such statements, and that is why one of the missions of the diplomatic missions at the nato summit and you as parliamentarians and our executive power will be that you must give a clear signal that this is not the case through closed channels

and to openly tell russia that this is an unacceptable option and we will not allow it, so what exactly does it mean exactly ukraine's accession to nato, three points when we talk about diplomacy very briefly, we should talk not only about ukrainian interests a about convincing our allies that they include us in nato and that it is in their interests. a year ago, we received official evidence that we have long been part of the civilized european world. ukraine has become a candidate for eu membership, and this is only the first, albeit important, step towards full membership in the european union, so as not to remain in place, we are confidently moving towards the goal of establishing the rule of law through the total cleansing of the judicial system of the untouchables, there is no longer a reduction in the influence of oligarchs, an effective

anti-corruption program has been recognized by the world effectiveness of anti-corruption bodies, effective financial monitoring, prevention of money laundering, strengthening of human rights and freedoms, conditions for the development of independent media, and dozens more laws that implement the principles of the european union, there is still a lot of work to be done, and ukraine will pass this way, because we are creating a decent future for our children. ukraine is europe today . hello, how exhausted. i hardly sleep i know where you can go for help when i think that i will have to tell again and worry about everything or maybe it's my fault it's important i

need time to communicate hugs here's to our ongoing discussion in this studio, we're talking about expectations from the nato summit, which will take place on july 11-12 . it will take place in freedom . actually, we're talking about different perspectives. first of all, the plot, which we saw something, or another reminder about the topic, this is the price of delaying the event by our partners in making strategic and critical decisions, this is what we see that brothers lie together, well, in the same grave, and ladies will

remember, of course, feats, but to children from i don't think it's much easier than this. let's go, mr. petro. you must finish your opinion. you have listed three options, and let's move on to the main question that we ask. to whom it is possible to build such long-term security in our flights. thank you, this is actually not an option, but these are arguments, which, uh, which are we? they supply us with weapons and economic support, the first thing, as i said, is that a european war is going on, if ukraine becomes a member state of nato and joins the alliance - this means that russia will have to end the war. that is, it can still fight a long war with one state that weaker economically and demographically, weaker than russia, unfortunately, at current exchange rates, but it cannot compete with the resources of the entire alliance , which includes the leading major powers of the world

, the biggest powers, the second is the second argument. as you know, the alliance has made a decision and more in 2014 to increase defense spending and it should amount to 2% of gdp now i will tell you this this is a little secret now this is the united states and i uh-uh our baltic allies poland everything and everyone else can't spend and then we have such an argument look now, you can er spend directly supporting ukraine there 0.1% n-02 percent of your gdp give it to ukraine and with this you will save money because all these funds and all these weapons will destroy the potential of your main adversary russia, i.e. give ukraine weapons it is much cheaper for of course, this is your money and will save thousands of lives of our soldiers. the third argument is that i think it should be voiced

at the summit. now the decision of vilnius is being followed in moscow and in china and in tehran if a decision on political accession is not made. about the entry of ukraine into the political structure of nato, that is, the actual recognition that ukraine will become a member of nato right now, in the near future , it is possible that this is the 24th year. countries and what they say in english listen to kill and this license reached the license will look closely in iran and china and understand that nuclear blackmail works because the only thing that prevents you from giving ukraine nato membership and promising to make ukraine a full member in 2024 is not later this is that you also use nuclear blackmail, which means it works, which means the same will be used against you in the middle east, in the far east, and will also be used in europe, and in the end how

are the lives of ukrainians different from estonians latvians and so on and these questions will be asked by our allies, the poles and the rest of the ukrainians, they are no different , they are europeans, they are our brothers, but their lives are the same as ours. if you do not want to help them save themselves now, where is the guarantee that you will help us when russia attacks for us here, this is a very tough and difficult question for washington . own exsanguination of the russian federation now will lead to a reduction of threats from their side in the future, including to nato member countries. by the way, i returned from the front line tonight with two parliamentarians of nato member countries, a french senator and a german parliamentarian, who were also

equally surprised about the fact that, well, look at the leopard-2 tank, we went just to show how their weapons work and what problems there are with their weapons and what needs to be improved and the same marcus faber, a member of the german parliament, wonders we have 398 leopard 2 tanks, we gave you 18 , who is at war with us, what with you. that is, even this is an internal position, but unfortunately, the position of scholz, for example, or the leaders of other countries , to give a teaspoon a week, this may and will not lead to escalation, but no no will not allow us to end this war quickly and it costs us, first of all, our lives and our blood and we are now convincing them on all platforms and believe me the cluster munitions that have already been announced to us are behind this is a lot of effort communicating with

congressmen at all levels that were compressed on the white house, which put pressure on the pentagon. i have letters that they wrote at my request to this very press, but it's not happening so quickly, to put it mildly, and at such a slow pace that it seems that maybe our partners are interested in the fact that russia has bled to death yes, quite gradually and they don't want and they don't know yes and no they don't want this collapse but well let's be frank let's talk about it if there is time we will talk about it taras you wanted to add something let's immediately move on to our expectations what do we realistically expect from nato ? well, what can they try to offer us, that we are unlikely to be accommodated? well, look.

the question is that it will not stand like this, let's be clear and clearly understand this, because as this option of partial acceptance into nato , ukraine calls it intelligence , it's intelligence . understand everyone in this world a particularly successful nation loves only itself and a friend only for money or out of necessity yes. that is why these are the conversations there. well, i have a question. why didn’t you accept georgia then? she even held a referendum there, all the reforms were carried out. why is georgia not in nato? yes, she is. was ready in all respects, and because the issue of uncontrolled territories and that is why when they start, this is a twist , this is a twist, i am telling you, this is a story, a story, when we are fed, and i said that in germany, in germany, the situation is not as clear-cut as ours respected american experts also told us that the most important thing is that stalin

died once again. in our case, as long as putin is in power, they will keep some uh, promises , well, elementary, purely theoretical, uh, it remains conditional, the lpr, the dnr, under the control of the russians, purely theoretical, yes i agree that there will be a demarcation line, the question is what guarantees that they will observe this line together ranks and will not start an offensive, for example yes , there are no guarantees in the strike i think it is the fifth article i think wait wait here some more look, in order to be clear, in order to accept nato, there must be a clear line of demarcation and what this security extends to, this means that i have my own territories, in fact, we will say that this is not our territory anymore and it will actually be another territory, what kind of president is there will go to this, this is the first question, secondly. and this is a violation of the 75th helsinki treaty

signed by the soviet union on the non-violation of the borders of europe, this means that a chain reaction has already begun throughout europe before claims arise belonging to gdańsk, which belonged to germany. by the way, a story will begin that will never end. this is a realistic situation. we must understand that in the short term, the main thing is that we need weapons. we do not even need such promises that we will be accepted someday something so we need weapons f-16 superiority in the air so what does the president say, what he said in his article on the washington post, eh, if you translate from diplomatic terms what he said, dear, if you are talking about the integration of nato standards, then let's be honest , not a single offensive general will go. how do you

force us to go without 100% air cover. and therefore let's turn away the pressure. of course, give us more weapons and then the question is our production . we are guilty of this. remember that we will not be given weapons in order to strike on the territory of the russian federation. federation, this war in reality can drag on for quite a long time, so we must concentrate resources so that we have our own production has accelerated so much. finally, the leadership of ukroboronprom will announce. thank god there, yes, i hope that a new one has arrived , but i think it’s better, as restolivka beluchno does not need to tell him how to make alder trees, how he should make neptunes and other things , let the ministry of defense order go - it will be faster more qualitatively and so on to solve internal issues recently saw the decision