[000:00:00;00] the fact that it was published in the economist, i think it is not bad, one way or another they should be addressed, the discussion that was and is in expert circles, regarding the help of our western partners, we know that how we are helped so that we did not lose, but this is not enough, and zaluzhnyi honestly said that if everything is left as it is, or even if the amount of aid is reduced, it is not even about the amount, but the quality of the aid, then the same trap will follow. they say, i quote, we need to break out of the trap of positional warfare, that's a straight line quote, therefore it is really possible to interpret in different ways that a war of position, in fact there can be risks, and the risks are political, if we do not receive quality help, then after a certain time there may arise and, well, let's say, not very good alternatives, but they are comparable, i said, some people are already offering their options, well, there is a proposal, let's make peace immediately, but that side does not

want to make peace. piskov answered, yes, they will reach, as he says, the entire svo, yes, that side does not want to put up with shaiga now, on the contrary, they say that we ready, this is shoigu, and here is another thing, that now the party that will first start, well, proposals for negotiations, will be in a weaker position, so it cannot be done like this, and now here is a signal to our western partners that we need a high-quality help is needed, by the way, literally, this article, an open letter from congressmen, republicans, to biden, where they say what is the strategy, here is our answer, requirements for continuing aid to ukraine, there is a very ambiguous list, in fact, such a new speaker said that before giving money, let's figure it out, are we transferring them to ukraine with cartridges, or are we here with shells, look, that's the impression i get , i'm listening to my colleagues that this is supposedly the only way to convey ukraine's position to western partners, these

are articles like this, and listen, and listen. what has the president of ukraine, the government of ukraine, the diplomatic service been doing for the past year and a half during the period of open aggression, this is exactly what they are doing, and what has appeared in ukraine now as a weapon, what was at the beginning of the open aggression, or internally, or in a couple months, remember what they told us, long-range artillery, and what are you talking about, western tanks, and forget it, and also, never in your life. you won't even see the f-16 in the picture. all this is already, or is already on the battlefield and is successfully used by the ukrainian armed forces, by the way, often much more effectively than the armies of nato member states. and there will be planes, because ukrainian military pilots are studying. well, are you seriously saying that it appears because of articles like this? well, you know, this article, this article appeared more

more questions than answers, this is the first. second, our military also has its own channels of communication, let me remind you of the ramstein format , where, for example, the minister of defense communicates with his colleagues from more than 50 countries of the world , including on issues of weapons, and on what we need and what is the strategy, thirdly, you are talking about the question, and what is the strategy of ukraine, but it was not only raised in the congressmen's letter, during the visit of the president of ukraine to washington, when meetings were closed in the same senate. and in the house of representatives there were such questions, and the president answered them, and of course, the strategy should definitely not be disclosed in articles, the truth is, that is why there are, there are appropriate channels of communication, you know, such things like silence, weapons like silence, if we told the press every time about the results of our negotiations and would happily run to the press, report, i think that we would still not have those types of weapons, and those

successes on the... battlefield, would still not have happened, and it is very important, by the way, to effectively evaluate the weapons that are supplied to us and to give objective assessments of how effective they are the weapon works effectively, because then we have to tell our colleagues in the western countries, that's what we gave you, and they say, something, some kind of dissatisfaction is felt and so on, here is the answer to your question, and why then there was such a need for valery fedorovych to write this article and publish it now? you are asking me, it is probably better to ask him, i can explain it very simply, i think you can guess it yourself, i think that it was the initiative of the magazine, especially since there was already an article earlier, and they have already written several times, i know some journalists of this publication, they are constantly even here, well, not constantly, there every day, there in passing, yes, but even there, they bought housing here, that is why it is already such a permanent location,

a journalistic sensation. well, in my opinion, the important thing is that they don't forget about ukraine, they created an informational excuse, we all said, yes, they started paying attention to israel about ukraine there... i think that yes, i agree, it is necessary to maintain a certain balance between public and non-public, yes, there is also non-public diplomacy, and the fact that we have achieved a lot and received a lot and done a lot, there is no doubt about it, let's talk about the results then, but just the last thing, and what is now in the current situation, yes, i think that some additional impulse was needed, it was from zaluzhnyi, i think, not bad, because in principle, it is enough, let's say, it is perceived in a neutral, non-political context inside the country, and in principle , attention is also paid abroad, so no one

belittles the success of diplomacy in that we received, of course, but the question is that even our friends and in the congress and presidential candidates, they criticize the current president of the united states for the fact that there is no state of war, that is, what... what are the goals, and actually, from the point of view from the point of view of, let's say, military goals, and what we need was announced, from the point of view of what we want as a major political goal, well, of course, there is a formula for the peace of ukraine, that's in general, the end of the war and when peace begins, that's clear thing, but from the point of view of the campaign of the 24th year there are still such there are no clear wordings, well, i am public, and therefore, no matter what, no matter what contacts there are on the military line or diplomatic or political in the final derverim, it is of course very important, but these voids that are in the information space and in the mind above all our friends, i am not saying that there are people who do not like us and will vote against the provision of aid and try to tear up

this package, to separate us from israel, there are some other things, they cannot be convinced, but we must give arguments to our friends that is three sober assessment, the ukrainian side is not engaged in throwing hats, and in order to have an advantage... then we need certain means and training of certain forces, so it seems to me that everything is quite logical, how these two articles changed the ukrainian information background, let's let's talk with timofey mylovanov, because i read mr. timofey's facebook, and i was struck by how accurately, in my opinion, subjectively, of course, mr. timofey chose the words to characterize these two phenomena, and the publication in tyme magazine and the public in the economist, therefore, if you are in touch, mr. timofii, we have force majeure today, because an expert was involved in the traffic jam and mr. timofii also 3% on charge, mr. timofii, we congratulate you, we congratulate you, yes, your vision of these

articles, how did these two publications change the emotional background, what did you notice, see, in my opinion, the article by the worthy after, the next day, well, two columns, yes, the interview column in the economist after... time is a plus, because otherwise, there would be just a half, and in my opinion time has done very, very much damage to ukraine, it's very good that few people read it, especially in america, but it did damage, and especially the story drawn there about the president, that he does not understand reality, yes, i wrote on twitter for an english-speaking audience, which is possible - these are people do not understand reality, and in fact the president does not accept reality and changes it, and it was also possible to write in the first week of the war that ukrainians or the president does not accept reality, that we should surrender and leave, yes, and that is what this article

did, in my opinion, in a narrow among politicians, it is a grain of doubt stood up, but really, really, maybe there is some truth in what the journalist is saying. one who used to give very good interviews about ukraine and did them with the president, etc., that is, this is a very bad article. against this background, zaluzhny shades it and brings it up, says, look, we have four external points on weapons, two internal points, and there, if he were to publish an article now that was outrageous, it would be perceived as propaganda in the west, yes, and he came out with such, well, you have to take into account that tone, in my opinion, well, they played back, that is... time did a lot of damage, i don't know, i don't think that there was a bad guy planning something and it happened so accidentally, i think, rather, the price control quickly pushed these articles after time came out , yes, they pushed me faster, maybe, maybe it coincided like that, yes, but i think it’s good that zaluzhnyi’s article came out,

maybe we don’t like it, it doesn’t correspond to some things inside ukraine, but from the point of view of how it works there mass informational work, i have the feeling that they did a good job, but the damage was done in time, mr. timofiyu, do you think that for the american mentality, we need some additional explanations from the ukrainian authorities , perhaps political ones, about what, what were these... it is given at a high level, yes, the level of the first persons, second, third states, at the level of some experts, analysts, it is necessary to work it out, work it out systematically, what i saw, that the republicans, trumpists are certain and that such people who are there around elon musk, david sachs, and some others, they have worked precisely for

in that thread in the times that the president doesn't understand what's really going on, people are afraid to tell the truth, it's not the truth, i know that , well, from my own experience, well, i just know that, that 's why i know a lot of people who communicate with the president, i myself rarely, but i do not bother, but sometimes we correspond, and i know that you can say anything, and this does not mean that he will agree with you, that is a completely different story, you should not confuse these things, but i think this, this narrative should be rejected. that the president understands everything that is happening, he is a strong leader, he is not alone, people are all behind him, ukraine supports him, it is necessary to continue to work systematically with it , to launch direct strategic communications, i think this is the most important thing, you know very well the internal agenda that the congress and the senate live by, tell me, do you connect the publication of the article in time with the fact that ukraine has not yet received financial aid, and this package of 100 billion dollars. it was never transferred to ukraine, taiwan, israel, only

israel received more than 10 billion, yes, why just now the times changed its complementary rhetoric, well, look, this journalist, he is on it, well , he has a history of change, he was in crimea and said that the reality is like this, now for rubles, and he also wrote about the fact that the civil war, and at the same time, he wrote a lot at the beginning of the full-scale invasion, why putin is a threat to the whole world, that is... he is radically different from different points of view, yes, he dynamically changes his position and somewhere, in my opinion, tries to guess what what is expected of him, he is a little bit like english it is said, yes, he is trying to jump into a new topic ahead of others, and he did it, the real atmosphere is like this, among a certain circle of politicians, really now, even today, there is a conflict between nothing, the lower and upper houses, the us parliament, the senate promises to vote differently aid package for israel and ukraine, together, the lower house voted only on israel without ukraine, they promise

to vote differently, separately under certain conditions, that is , they have an internal political struggle between the democratic upper house and the republican lower house, he gets there, there is a request for this, but again, it is not the mainstream, it is not the main one, it is not the new york times, it is not the wall street journal, it is not the washington post, you just have to technically work it out, yes, but they are trying to play along, get write what people want to hear and do it with the pretense... that oh, we have access to zelenskyi's close people here, yes, but what is the weakness of this article, that all sources are anonymous, everyone, well, there is a bit of noise there and shurma's position is simply discounted, devalued and criticized, everything else, all anonymous sources, well, it's kind of anonymous, you can bet on that too, thanks to you, mr. timofiyu, and to you, elon musk, for letting you agree, after all, and you have a good gadget, you found something to thank for... well

, wait, okay, and for the starlinks on our front, thank you very much, mr. igor, i want, i don’t want to ask you what is false in the time article , i want to ask you, and what is true in the article there, nothing is true, i honestly haven’t read it there for three or four times, i read it once, i did not see at least a grain of fact, come on, you are journalists, journalism qualitative should be evaluated... i ask you this, tell me, the emotional background, i am interested in whether it is true, whether it is true, look, you, as the deputy head of the president's office, is it true that the office is intimidated to such an extent, and that it is impossible to go to the president come up and say that we are not winning, and we have a positional impasse, and what does that mean , the commander-in-chief can write articles and the addressee is washington, obviously, or, well

, no, well, each of us has absolutely the opportunity to communicate with the president, and even more than once a day, each functional in its own way, me i can say for my function, foreign policy, you understand, the president has several events a day, or phone calls, or conversations, meetings with leaders, or articles are submitted, the president is angry because there are failures, the president is angry because there are failures , the president is not angry, what failures is he talking about, respected or not respected mr. jury, i do not understand, again, where are the facts, what failures on the diplomatic front, let's talk, another narrative, you are talking about journalism, literally several weeks therefore on... back in one also respectable in the west loyally, the narrative appeared that the global south turned away from ukraine, ukraine built that way, that is, it built a balance, and here after the events in israel, the global south turned away, after this article, the telephone conversation of the president with the prince of saudi arabia, the telephone conversation with the emir of qatar, the telephone conversation with president par,

the telephone conversation with the president of turkey, malta, which was so fleetingly mentioned, let's talk about it, well, what a global world turned away. from ukraine, when 66 countries are present in malta, you were there, and most of they are the countries of the global rooster, then we chose atakamsa for so long, so what a failure, we are successfully advancing on the f-16, so what is this failure, what is it about, what is the general mood of pessimism, fear and so on, mr. timofey he said very correctly, absolutely normal communication, the president listens to everyone, but he makes the decisions , he is not the president, but there is no, no one has 100 billion, so far, no one has 100 billion, in israel there is no, no, still has to sign, no, there really are two chambers, yes struggle, there is a struggle within the united states of america, between the two parties, but look, again, at the beginning of the week

, a delegation from the lower house is coming to ukraine, three representatives, three congressmen, one republican, two democrats and they say with one voice, we will give ... or we will give it to ukraine separately, it will definitely be ukraine, even the new speaker has already announced it, it seems like yesterday, or we will give it together as a package, representatives of the other party say and the representatives of the senate say the same, that's all, we are looking at this struggle, not just we look, we observe actively, we are in contact with both parties, our embassy is working, our ambassador of the united states of america is working, the president is meeting, other members of the team are working, so it is not easy, but when it was easy, at the beginning of the war it was easy to get funds. to get weapons and so on, it will never be easy for us, but such articles , i agree with mr. elevanov, they do not bring any benefit, to someone they bring some kind of pr success, i don’t know, some kind of dubious journalistic glory, they definitely bring pleasure to our aggressors’ enemies, or

you know the president's reaction to this article, no, i didn't see a particular reaction, well, there is an article, read it, looked at it, moved on, and what is the first article, and what is the last article, are you sure, you can literally ask for help, and of course, there are restrictions on ukrainian diplomacy and direct communication between our president and the american one, since ukraine is an internal political factor in the united states, that is, no matter what we do good or bad, there is an internal dynamic, and actually the one you said about israel, which is voted he will not be voted in the senate for a simple reason, not even about ukraine, not because they tore the israeli package from the ukrainian one, there they are going to... cancel, or rather, lower taxes, that is, this is also a fundamental issue for the democrats even outside of ukraine, and that is why the issue is not being finalized here ukrainian diplomacy is not perfecting, there are internal factors. the next point is that the trumpians really are, they are vocal, and of course they are trying to throw ukraine out, they don't want to,

and they use it to be popular, but on the other hand, in the senate there are the majority and the leader of the majority mean that. the key senators are republicans, they are for ukraine to be included in this package, they want the southern border to be there , that is actually the question, but they want ukraine there, so ukraine will definitely receive help, israel will also receive it, and they will be torn off, maybe it will be possible, but only with the agreement that regarding the fact that pro-ukraine will be made public, i absolutely agree with the speaker, the speaker said the other thing that i am for russia not to win in ukraine, yes, that is, ukraine should be supported, but but need to be accountability, that is, the accountability of the task of control, well, you know, it’s a popali thing, because from the very first day, when they started giving us help, the inspectors general in this structure in the pentagon, they tracked these weapons, there are already more than 40 reports that say

not a single weapon fell into the wrong hands, most of the aid that is given to us, it is given in the form of weapons , according to investments in american industry, there are questions about the aid that goes to actually support the economy there, for wages, for budgetary things like that, and actually there, the same paratrooper said that this should not happen, and perhaps as a compromise that will be reached in congress, it will be that this part will not be transferred to us, that is, support for our finances, and weapons will be given, rather everything will be a compromise between the americans and the europeans, and the europeans will take care of it, so i think it's an if. yes , the americans are weapons, since it is clear here, although if we look at the dynamics, the minister met with the director, not for nothing either, listen, but if we talk about the demands, i don't... what's wrong with the republicans asking their president for points there in our interests, these are our words, these are our points, we

would also like to know, well , there will be enough populism there too, well, look, the republicans expressed the demands of the treasury of the ministry of finance, they should report to the congress about the level of use of anti-russian sanctions, we are also interested in anti-russian ones, why are there so many packages, and the russians are still making money, we have the same questions, that the sanctions are still not effective, so we are talking about what more is needed here are sanctions, we need more here, we also make our proposals, and about weapons, i complement mr. oleksandr, and we report on some types of weapons, specifically, excuse me, on each ammunition, how he lived, where he hit and what happened next happened, so here are the questions for us, well, no official question about the use of weapons to the ukrainian side, recently, i think, even the ambassador of the states stated, in an interview with the channel, that crimea is simply our playground for our missiles, which are provided our partners, that is , there are no longer those fears that were there at the beginning

wars that can be launched anywhere, on the mainland, but crimea is not touched by others, that is, the answer to the republicans with the specific actions of the current administration, that is all, that is, there is absolutely no such thing, another question that we must address, literally , a few days ago, gelb gave a survey of the public opinion of americans, there are certain nuances here , that is, there is an alarming trend, so far everything... everything is fine with the numbers, 41% of americans believe that too much aid is provided to ukraine, this is an increase since june with 29%, and what is sufficient correct aid 33%, not enough a quarter, that is, in principle, more or less normal, that is, it is 57%, whether it is enough or not enough and 41, but this, an important teriant, then 62%, republicans, believe that it is too much, that is, these trompians. well, because of them, this number increased, of course, regarding whether it should be unlimited, that is, as long as the takes, that is, as long as the takes, that is, as long as it takes, that much

should be added, 37% of americans, and 23 say that there should be a limit in in terms of financial aid, not weapons, financial aid, that is, these numbers are not bad for us, but the trend is certainly not very good, and of course there must be strategic communications here, and most importantly , of course, successes on the battlefield, because... you know what i'm talking about i was triggered by the fact that there is a reference to the once again named ukrainian military personnel, who say that the situation at the front is at an impasse, which means that it is difficult to get out of this impasse and there must be some other solution, not the borders of 1991, i today quoted a military expert who said that our the army cannot take, that means tokmak, accordingly, what can we talk about, what borders of 1991, no, wait , the military... the expert said that the army cannot take avdiivka, let's compare, this is the second, this,

this is the opponent of the first military expert, that that army cannot take avdiyivka, but well, from our side, they say that the common opinion is that, unlikely, they say the common opinion, they say the common opinion, yes, if possible, i, no, not from a military point of view sight, we are fighting with, no matter how we there glaze with the russians, that they are the second army in ukraine, but still from the point of view of iron and meat, it is a big country, and it is learning , unfortunately, it may be good that it is not so fast, but it is learning, and therefore, of course, that all these successes and failures ours, they are related to this resource factor, the second point is that we as experts have the right, unlike our colleagues who are currently in power there or in positions, that they cannot publicly criticize our partners, that they they gave a small and untimely one, yes, or at all, so let’s say with certain eyes ugh, it really gave a chance the russians to strengthen, and now we are with additional blood, we are actually

solving those issues that might not be before us, the third point , you know, i like it very much, this is the parable of the lawmaker salon, who boldly said that i will say, were you, successful, rich and happy, only when you die, when we get our help, then we will appreciate how impossible it was to do certain things, because really. ukraine has already broken several times, starting, you know, with the maidan of the 14th year, yes, we agreed, let yanukovych sit down, no, we don't, we don't agree, and then the ukrainian nation constantly goes against what is obvious, as if, yes, well, from such a logical point of view, it seems to me, the same story, this war, we have to prepare for the long haul , it's a war, any war, it's a struggle, the enemy has it, unfortunately, it's not there yet , that is, it is, in fact, but we don't... it's not decreasing, and it's a war, it's a matter of resources and logistics, so far we have, let's say, certain advantages, but in order to make

such a leap, we definitely need something that says our chief military officer, and he actually, i'm not sure that everything is written there , what is needed, he clearly did not open the cards that are needed, but, but this is basically a very important signal, this article is missing a question for me, one question, that's a big one, you already touched on it today alexander, the actual question about the enstate of fo, can we count, count on the fact that as a result of this election and this whole storm, america will finally formulate a final goal for itself, because we we perfectly understand that when the ultimate goal will be formed politically, the 91st year from crimea, without crimea, one way or another, then the military will absolutely simply calculate the forces and means needed to fulfill this task, and then the question will not arise about an endless flow of weapons and aid there, but for it takes so much to complete such a task, please take it, do it, we can expect that finally america will clearly formulate what it needs and how much it needs to be given for this, the fork that remains is, on the one hand, escalation, that is, pressing

the red button, they are still afraid of it, now less, because we are also hitting moscow. everything is there, it remains, and the second point is the disintegration of the russian federation, they do not want, at least until now, they did not want such successes of the ukrainian armed forces, that russia would start falling, that is, these things, they did not go anywhere, we pushed the boundaries a little, yes , that we can hit anywhere, but not with american weapons, we have some there, and so on, that is, we will continue to exist within these frameworks, then there is the internal political in america, then there is the so-called global south, what they don't want, we understand very well, what they want, they understand themselves? well, in the 24th year, they want, okay, with us, it’s clear, there are no questions , well, they want us not to lose this war, and , if possible, to win it in such a way that russia does not fall, that there are no piles problems in connection with this and so on, that's what's important in my opinion, by the way, here's the thing by the way, why they gave us there very often what they couldn't give,

or didn't promise, or declared that they wouldn't give there abrams and so on, when they felt… began to feel that there were problems, but in the summer of last year, when the russians had a huge advantage in artillery, and then, okay, yes, they began to provide western artillery, in the winter, when it became obvious what threats from the air the pppo began to pose and even the patriots gave, yes, and now i think, i agree with the fact that yes, this signal about specific types of weapons is also necessary, i think, well, the president does it through his channels, yes, it is necessary through his channels, the main thing is that in the end, sorry, they cracked up and did what they had to do, yes, they did will not do 100%, unfortunately, yes, yes, because there are also internal political restrictions, and again they are afraid that russia will not fall, yes, but the understanding that now is the moment and the situation when we need to help, timely and high-quality, i think that the people of buda

always say red lines, so if you cross this one, well, you will definitely be fine. yes, they are what they put forward, we have already crossed several lines, we mentioned about crimea, here is to touch crimea, i mean, russia will do it now, yes, and we will assume that russia crossed the red line, that's russia, yes, that's russia with israel, it crossed the red line with israel, no, well, first of all, it is clear that the ears are primarily sticking out, iranian and their proxy forces, russia of course supports, it and politically supports the same terrorist group, and the weapons that bucinta ukraine sold and so on, that is, of course, that this is this, but