[000:00:00;00] glory to ukraine, this is the verdict program, my name is serhiy rudenko, i congratulate everyone and wish everyone good health, today in the program , a large-scale attack on odesa, russian terrorists bombarded the city with mortars and missiles, what are the consequences, abrams is already in ukraine, when american tanks will go to the front and how they can affect the situation, and weapons and joint military production - the results of zelensky's visit to the usa and canada, which he agreed with the leaders of these countries. the conflict is growing, is there a way out? duda complained that zelensky insulted the poles by bringing food dispute for the whole world. how will this affect relations between countries? today we will talk about this and other things during our program with politician and diplomat valery

chaly. however, before starting a conversation with him, look at the consequences of today's night attack by the russian occupiers on odessa, the naval station and the hotel are almost destroyed , the enemy attacked massively, combined with

the use of strike-type drones, with the use of two types of missiles, high-precision calibers were also used and super speed supersonic speed onyx. the building of the sea station and the nearby hotel, which has not been in operation for many years, but was perceived by the enemy as a decision-making center, were destroyed. if they tell you on your televisions that there was some kind of military production here, we produced it. paper with laminations for sugar joints, for cardboard cups, the production is destroyed, for those who are currently watching us live on youtube, i suggest you take part in our survey, today we ask you the following: do you support the ban on the russian branch of the russian of the orthodox church in ukraine, yes, no, your option, please write in the comments why we are asking this, because the speaker of the parliament ruslan stefanchuk admitted that the verkhovna

rada... will not find the necessary 226 votes to ban the activities of the uoc mp, if relevant draft laws will be put to the vote. well, we are already in touch with a politician, diplomat, ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of ukraine to the united states of america in 2015-2020, and in 2019, valery chaly. mr. valery, i congratulate you and i am glad to see you on our air. i congratulate you. glory to ukraine. glory to heroes. because we ask our viewers. on youtube, how do they feel about whether the activities of the roc branch in ukraine should be banned or not. stefanchuk says that there are not enough votes in the verkhovna rada. do you think that in the conditions of war, such a question can be resolved positively, that is, this branch, the activities of this branch should be banned or not? well, this is a question in

principle, it has more internal aspects. aspect, but it really goes to the external level, i know this area very well in my time, and i understand what the problems are, i will only say what i know for sure, first the russian war against ukraine, and even more so the large-scale invasion, this public organization, although it is called a church, dealt with completely different issues, there is a lot of evidence that they used the buildings... of this organization for that , in order to keep weapons, in order to kill from this territory, a lot of agents through this structure were involved in ukraine, and this is a fact, i cannot say about the whole community in this church, because people, of course, did not know many things, but still a lot of reports

there was already after the invasion of the russian large-scale about the role of this organization, so it is not about a ban, as far as... i know, what is currently being considered in the verkhovna rada has a somewhat different contest, but uh, why is there no reaction, uh, serious. on the subversive activities of this public organization, whether it is a church or an ngo of a different nature , there is no difference, from the point of view of ukrainian law, it is a public organization that must comply with the laws of ukraine, why is certain organizations treated more carefully, and this kind of privilege, i am surprised by the position of many deputies in the parliament, they are thinking of moving on, so they want to play on these problems, national... the danger of the state, like then, and when everything is transferred to the executive power, sometimes they say, there is the president, the national security council , here please show your steps, i am surprised by such a position, because a lot of obvious facts have already been proven, and

therefore, i emphasize once again, this is not against people, but against the organization that should be dissolved, and this is my opinion, and should be created in its place some others, but we see a different process, it is politicized. i absolutely agree with you, because the ukrainian parliament should be primarily ukrainian, especially during the war. let's move on to foreign policy, because over the past few days, the foreign policy activities of the president of ukraine, as well as the world in general, have been quite active . of canada, justin trudeau, there was a classroom discussion between duda and zelsky, today, zelensky is already talking about the fact that the first abrams tanks are already in ukraine, although literally a few days ago, the appearance of these

tanks in a few days or weeks was said at the time during the meeting with biden, and these tanks are already in ukraine, says zelensky, today, information appeared with a reference to the dnr, a former special assistant to the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of ukraine valery zaluzhny, that literally, this week, atakams (m-39, with cluster ammunition), with a radius of slightly more than 100 miles, will be delivered to ukraine , and it can happen a stepping stone, as he said, to the longest-range missile with a unitary warhead, well that is ... all fears that the united states of america is slowing down, or will continue to somehow delay in giving us the atakamsi, seems to

be a thing of the past, or am i wrong , you know, i suggest you approach this a little more strategically, because we are reacting to today, sometimes we gave attacks, sometimes we didn't give attacks, all this should happen during the war... not even at the level of the president, at at the level of the presidents , the issue of strategy should be decided, to what extent our strategy and tactics of waging war against russia coincide with the american one, to the extent that the expectations of the americans regarding the end of the war coincide with ours. there is no complete coincidence here, unfortunately, if you ask directly if there was a delay of a political nature for certain reasons, for some types of weapons, i will say this, precisely for issues of a political nature, there was a delay for aircraft, for missiles, we are talking about long- range, to what long-range action, this is actually what

russia is currently using, well, you see, 2 each 000 km, or even 3.5 range, and we don’t even have 300 km, well, single copies, what are we talking about, we cannot balance our capabilities with the enemy, they tell us all this drop by drop, they will give it, well , okay, we, we are grateful for this, but to the direct question, are they delaying, i answer, yes they are delaying, the reasons here can be different, but eh, wars are not won like this, wars are not won like this, that's for sure, eh- eh, the approach of controlled escalation that the us took and deterrence, it may have been useful for a while, but definitely not now, now it must be a concentration of all possible solutions. and if they constantly feed us with promises, breakfasts, then we cannot plan normally, well, i mean our general staff to plan operations, well , they have been feeding us those breakfasts for a year and in tanks, then

they make decisions, then they will appear, then they won't appear, now it's the same story with missiles, but with other types, the americans help a lot, without these weapons and not only hymars, here... everything is interconnected, everything that is provided in such volumes, it is what enables us to first defend the state, and then count on de-occupation, without the united states it was not possible, but why are we not succeeding. to convince them not to drag it all out, to concentrate, i don't know, because in my opinion, dragging it out will only escalate the escalation, i can explain on my fingers why stretching it will escalate the escalation, because the more time putin has, the more he can escalate resources, and then the escalation will be, the less time, the faster the result can be, and it is obvious, it is obvious to me, why is it not obvious to political leadership.

of the united states, they probably do not believe 200% that everything will be as we see it, or maybe they do not understand what to do with russia in such a broken state after the defeat, this is also a challenge, that is, in in principle , the main issue is our strategies and tactics, and the vision of security development in the european region, the euro-atlantic region, and in particular. there is no way to act against russia now, everything else, the provision of weapons, there are sanctions packages, or political support, or perhaps some problematic issues, that’s all the consequences of already defining the strategy, well, maybe it is connected with the status of ukraine and the united states of america, or more precisely, with the indeterminacy of the status, because we talked so much about the main ally outside of nato, and whether this status

would somehow help ukraine to determine the attitude of the united states of america in this situation and regarding the supply, including weapons? well, in short, we turned the page, actually, because many things that could have been introduced precisely for the purpose of granting such a status already exist in ukraine, in the united states such decisions are to be made, even more so than this status carries. we speak. about the status and our goal of membership in nato, about real allied relations between the usa and ukraine, while we do not have such relations, we have strategic partnership relations, that is, this means that the us is not obliged and has never been obliged to join us on our side in the war , because when generalli, the commander of the joint chiefs of staff, who is now ending his term this month, was asked in the senate what was needed to quickly defeat

russia. said, in principle, the entry of america into war, and this would be a decision, i am not saying that history will judge whether they did right or wrong here, this wound still hurt a lot after afghanistan in america, it was almost impossible, but he told the truth, that is, ukraine itself should not, no may or may not hold this entire defense alone and single-handedly, i think that it is precisely the question of the status... it is now the question of joining nato, allied relations, the angel of security, because if this does not happen, then any deoccupation will not lead until the conflict and war stop, it will then be either smaller intensity, conflict, more intensity, but nothing will stop the russians from shelling their territories after even reaching the borders, that is, they did it and in the 14th year from scratch they were shooting at our villages with their mlrss, and they... continue the same

do next and why do we think they're going to stop, so i think the key issue really for us today is our definition of post-war status, and that's what our diplomacy should all be focused on, you saw, there was a meeting with henry kissinger, the guru of diplomacy, of the second in general there is probably no such person on planet earth, who rejected, among other things... the possibility of ukraine joining nato, not only that he said, it was a year and a half ago, he said that the territory of ukraine should be given away, he said a lot, but what he says now, ukraine should be in nato, and this is the only solution, so, you see, a person is 100 years old, the brain works normally, that is, but why does he say that, that’s what everyone thinks, well, only about his experience, wisdom, you understand, henry.

kissenger, in fact, is now the wrong person what he advises, he is a person who is trusted and respected, his achievements in diplomacy, i say unique, because he remembers at a mature age how the second world war began and knows all the conflicts, but to a greater extent he conveys his impression of the , what the ukrainian side says, and this is the most important thing, he was a spy, including during his time in berlin, i think that precisely the task here, when the president of ukraine, volodymyr zelenskyy, and his assistants were talking, yana kissenger clarified the situation , as far as ukraine is confident. its purpose, regarding membership in nato, regarding the de-occupation of the territory, regarding the confrontation with russia for a long time, from what they explained and told him, he will pass it all on, not only, by the way, to joseph biden, he has many people to whom he can pass it on, and it

is important that everyone the parties will indeed see a stop to the war in the center of europe, but without surrendering the interests of ukraine, because it will be for them ...' so when you ask about the status, then membership in nato, and before membership in nato there can only be one solution, a bilateral defense treaty, joint defense with a nuclear power, the us, or it could be at least great britain, or together great britain, france, the united states, as parties to the budapest memorandum, well, we must remind our viewers that kissinger was the laureate of the nobel prize in 1973 just as a sign, as it was said, of recognition of merits in connection with the truce in vietnam , that is, he also has such a track record that, unfortunately, kissenjar's decision did not bring anything good,

because immediately after leaving the northern part of vietnam, more precisely, when they stopped defending the southern part, the northern captured that is, communist vietnam then took revenge on very many people and that is why he is remembered very badly there in vietnam, he stopped the war but he did not stop the conflict and still vietnam is not in a simple situation, still the economy of vietnam is not developing as it could be due to certain historical reasons, that is why henry kissinger is a peacemaker, but he is not, i do not consider him a person who stops wars, no, he only drives them into a frozen state from my point of view and they turn into long-lasting ones conflicts, he succeeds, he simply succeeded and more than once, what detente was in china, the soviet union, then, well, in vietnam, he is already , you know, acting as a crisis manager when politicians can no longer act, and i think that he has this talent, of course, as a negotiator, but

kissinger understands that if the parties are ready to continue the struggle for themselves, the struggle for their territorial integrity, this is not his time. that time comes when politicians and the military cannot do anything, and very often the military, when they were stopped, when they could solve the issue, it was very wrong the idea that stopping the warriors was a better solution, then it turned out that the conflict that continued, it took far more lives than a short-term military conflict of serious intensity, but short-lived, could have been, so... i'm, you know, a fan of the book, diplomacy henry kissinger, but definitely not a fan of henry kissinger's approaches. you are talking now about what the future plan should be for ukraine, including in the north atlantic alliance, but from what has been said and heard over the last

week, because zelenskyi spoke at various tribunes, from different tribunes, is it clear that this is the future in the articulation of the ukrainian government, and there was a summit in vilnius, now we are already at the end of october, that is, where and in what way are we going now and are we going to nato, are we not going to nato, are they waiting for us there or not, in your opinion, are the efforts of ukrainian diplomacy sufficient for the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of ukraine to somehow speed up this plan for ukraine's accession to nato, or do we have nothing to expect from the washington summit , everything depends on us, the ball, no wonder, still on our side, although this decision seems to depend no longer on us, but on the political positions of nato countries, first of all the usa, i really hope that all this

was discussed, but there is a program that must be carried out in ukraine, lest any of the nato countries accuse us that something is not ready in our country, and that is according to this program. i have some doubts , because i see that the activity as it is , for example, in the direction of european integration, specific decisions of the parliament or the government, there is no such thing, that is, political will, in order to give some kind of impulse, you know, popular impulse, that is lobbying, to coordinate all this somewhere politically, as was the case , for example, with visa-free travel or european integration, that is, the opening of the negotiating... process, there is no such thing here, we rely on , that it will somehow suck itself up, that russia will weaken, nato will become somewhat bolder, and will eventually make this decision, well , i think that this is a false strategy, and relying on plan b, which was announced before these bilateral agreements, where there will be

fixed level of support and weapons and joint production, it goes on without agreements, even, but we do not have a defense agreement , an alliance agreement, without this ukraine will not be able to develop, we will not be able to receive investments, we will not be able to place production closer than, well, there 200 km. to the border, i hope, at least, i am not talking about the fact that, unfortunately , it is not possible to go to the border yet, but it will happen later, therefore , without a security umbrella, there will be nothing beneficial for ukraine, and under during the second world war, these issues were already discussed several times years to completion, here we are still working as if without wheels, that is why i think that the president of ukraine volodymyr zelenskyy raises this issue at internal meetings and in particular washington has not become an exception, i have no doubt that the position on the peace formula

is constantly maintained, it is declared, nothing we haven't heard anything new from our partners , but i'm a little worried that they could help us more as a future member of nato, if you already think that the only issue is ending the war, as stated, well, get out, though would put on borders, from russia, spread the attention of russian a little through training on the perimeter, this is what is preventing you, this, and why this cannot be done, this is about the security of europe, and the black sea, why was it not possible to do earlier what is just beginning now gradually, romania and bulgaria got involved a bit and are already showing russia that you can't collude, you can't be in a waiting position, nato should understand that this alliance is responsible for that. including for what happens on his

borders, if he will only sit and to calculate whether that missile flew with motivation, whether they say purposefully or not purposefully, then it will fly to brussels , and they will sit in their office and think about whether it was purposeful, well, i say this a little cynically and simplified, but it was created to deter soviet the union, this is known, you look, even the types of weapons that russia has there , in accordance with the soviet union and nato standards, they are prepared against each other, so-called, prepared, all specialists know this, therefore the armor, the thickness of the armor, there projectiles, type projectiles, all kinds of weapons, everything was done that way, so putin actually completes, if he wants to, not what to complete , jumps into the last wagon, this great confrontation of the ussr, including other territories against nato countries, and does it by soviet methods, while nato does not

can answer adequately, because on the one hand they have already entered a new era and for them they did not prepare for such a war, and on the other hand, well, i think that they did not think about their preventive actions in a more targeted way, so in principle , that is not really, this is about, and not about ukraine, this is about how to counteract the violation of the world order and the rules of international international law, now on the part of russia, but if russia can do it, there will be others, so i believe that nato is late, and i really hope that the washington meeting of the presidents and the words of our delegation will give, well, some new understanding for the us that it should adjust its strategy somewhat, such deterrence. preventing escalation to a strategy of preventing, you know, war on a wider

scale, which is, not surprisingly, providing more weapons, more types, more types, more pods, now not 30 abortians, sorry, not 30, but 300 abramsians should come, 300, otherwise in 2 years and 3x will not be enough, so let them hear my words, by the way, the head of the ministry of foreign affairs of the russian federation... serhiy lavrov, who was at the un general assembly , and openly delusional there, commented, including on zelenskyi's peace formula, which our president announced, proclaimed, including from the rostrum of the un general assembly. let's hear what lavrov said. zelensky, and everyone named after leaders in washington, in london, in brussels, firmly say in one voice: there is no other basis for peace except zelensky's formula, and zelensky's formula

is, i don't even know, possible. it is described in different ways, but it is absolutely, unrealizable, simply unrealizable, they all know this , but at the same time they say, this is the only basis for negotiations, and in general, russia must win on the battlefield, well, he said on the battlefield, so on the battlefield, there was a slightly broader quote, and he also said that we, well , frankly, we recognize the territorial of ukraine, but let's go back to 1990, when ukraine adopted a declaration of sovereignty and declared that it would be a non-aligned state, like, well, we are also ready to return to such a formula, well, that is , in fact, they are giving another ultimatum, that is, we are ready to end the war , but ukraine's non-aligned status, the territories

that we have already bitten off, they are there, ukraine must recognize the new... in the territorial reality, as they say, well, that is, what lavrov says, it does not fit in at all, nor in whatever formula the world considers, including whatever formula kyiv considers, why is lavov still a person who is accepted in the un general assembly, why is he listened to, and why does he continue , as a co-aggressor. and the sharer of putin nevertheless continues to have an international platform for articulating his aggressive actions and thoughts, well, because , unlike putin, he has not been included in the hague, so this is a submission, but there is also such an explanation that he is, in principle, of the poviden convention, which regulates

diplomatic relations, he is the minister of foreign affairs business formally. although it is true that he has not acted diplomatically in his activities for a long time, behaves rudely and lies in his appeals to other countries, for example, he said that it was ukraine that attacked russia, he was laughed at, but that is another story, the titanic is in the same boat , or what is his name there, they are now together, but at one point you mentioned a reference to the press conference, his to the declaration of state sovereignty, and i will tell you where it came from, do you think that, did you think in moscow? no, these are our homegrown, specialists brought it to them, and i will remind you, there was once such an initiative on july 16, in opposition to the initiative of ukrainian patriots and wise people on december 1, and this initiative was created on july 16, precisely with the explanation that the declaration of state sovereignty, i will also

remind ursr, not yet independent ukraine, namely in the ssr, the soviet republic. she was aiming for a non-aligned status there, so here are these good guys, i won’t call them by their last names, well, they are well-known ukrainian diplomats, and we believed that they were really one of the most experienced diplomats, they promoted it politically, and from medvedchuk, there were a lot of medvedchuk’s advisers there, it was such a strange symbiosis of these people who promoted this idea that ukraine, so they once declared that it was, er, non-aligned, so i said then, and apparently it was already accepted publicly, that one does not lie on the air, why? i used to be in the concession commission, er, and before that, when these documents were adopted, i watched how the preparation of the constitution took place, there was a section that decided how to

react now in the new conditions to this point, and it was said, including by the deputies of the first convocation and already after that, the act on the sovereignty of ukraine was adopted, they said that in principle, then they talked about the future in the ssr, that then they said that ukraine did not want to be in the bloc with moscow, and that's why they wrote down such a formula, but the legislators, adopting the constitution, by the way, in which there was a compromise on crimea as well, that is, it was a document that was accepted in moscow, how is it not surprising, although it is our internal, it was clearly written there that we already this principle from...' and we chose the european path from him of euro-atlantic integration, but unfortunately, this passage was included in our proposal last march, in the draft agreement on the neutrality of ukraine, which the ukrainian side handed over to moscow as a working document, and there this putin shows this passage about this declaration, this delusion it is necessary to cover up, because i see that some even in the office of the president at

one time, i know, talk about it... mr.