[000:00:00;00] and they are blocked, well, that's why, it's such a huge territory that actually ceased to be a transit route, remember, two years ago, all the planes that flew from europe to asia, all through russia, everything went through russia, i remember i see, as my russian colleagues told me, after the maidan in 2014 , please, we need summer... yes, but i didn't understand why it was more or less, well, a shorter way, well, for a few hours, but just so you know, i didn't think in that category yet, i thought i had to get on a plane in frankfurt and get off in tokyo, they explained to me no, you can't fly in the upper airspace of russia, because you are subject to the introduction of sanctions by the russian federation, yes, and people against whom the introduction of sanctions cannot fly over the russian federation, because god knows what will happen to you if the plane suddenly

will sit down due to an emergency landing , you are not a child, you will stay in vladivostok for the rest of your life , and it was such an interesting recommendation for me, and then everything changed so that i learned, by the way, that the diplomats of many western countries do not fly in that direction when they fly to countries asia-khakan basin, and then it turned out that now planes don't fly there at all, it was a huge story, the profit of the air fleet is huge, you can imagine the tens of millions of dollars russian airlines received for this, for this opportunity to fly over russia. now an aviator in kazakhstan actually gets paid quite well for this. of course, of course, because kazakhstan has become a transit country, transit routes have changed, transit airports have changed, i recently saw a board photo of flights, ugh, belgrade and istanbul, but it is interesting that

these two flights. were translated into only one language, which one? guess? yes, well, russian, thank god, but the translation is definitely not english, why, well, listen, well, tell me already, chinese, and in chinese, russian and chinese, that is, that is, this is also a civilizational choice, yes, in short, how do you do you see that i see two... moments where the interests of the parties may coincide. the united states is talking about the need to restore the mechanism of military consultations, which existed before the visit of the speaker of the house of representatives of the american congress nancy pelosi to taiwan. after that , the ministry of defense of the people's republic of china, which was headed by this famous minister, who has now disappeared somewhere and no one knows where he is,

we can mention the name of our father in our conversation. er, now there is a great desire in the united states to restore this mechanism, and many in washington generally believe that the resignation of the minister of defense of the people 's republic of china is to some extent a signal that china is ready to restore such a mechanism, and the united states needs such mechanism, exchange of information to get ahead the possibility of an attack on taiwan, or to warn, let's say, the chinese, is realistic from a military point of view. what could be the consequences of this attack, this time, the minister of foreign affairs of the people's republic of china, wang wan, talks about the need to create a mechanism for regulating differences, this is a chinese interest, an american interest is a mechanism for informing the military, and the chinese are interested in military information, the chinese want

to talk to the americans about these problems that separate them, so as to always find tools for a certain mitigation of the situation, that's it this is the main content of this summit, the creation of such a mutual mechanism that would not allow us to come to some critical point, this is all that these two forces can agree on now, and this is what is worth meeting for, because if we think, that at a certain point. relations between the united states and the people's republic of china may reach a certain, i would say critical point, then this point must be prevented, that's all , and it means that it is now clear that joseph biden and sidping are aware of this for some reasons of their own, maybe the primarily economic character also realizes this, everything else

, but these are such summits, in your opinion, this is, in the meantime... medicine and delaying the moment or a real possibility to systematically and periodically come to some kind of understanding, you know, the dictatorship of democracy itself understands. i understand that what i said was an oxymoron, but why could the soviet union and the west create a model of peaceful coexistence, by and large this model was torpedoed only by putin's russia. one way or another, the soviet union in the united states, back then, when china was a poor country that could not claim the role that china claims today, a mechanism of peaceful co-reconciliation was created, at least from the time of joseph stalin's death until the time of vladimir putin's appearance. ugh. it was a peaceful coexistence all along, first of the soviet union, and then in russia certain mechanisms were created to discuss the breakup, this is what i would call a critical point of misunderstanding between the west

and the east, as ukraine looks like now. west berlin was surrounded on all sides by the soviets the army, they created a wall there, there was a blockade, there was an air ... of the western allies, but the soviet union and the united states together with great britain, france, for decades we discussed what the status of west berlin should be, and ultimately the interests, and the federal lands as part of the federal republic of germany, not recognized by the soviet union, it ended without a war, but imagine that you live in west berlin, and all the time you follow these negotiations, and you think, maybe the soviet army will dare. and to you come, when president biden came to us and said that he is actually ukrainian here, there were two famous speeches in west berlin by joseph, john kennedy and ronald reid, this wall is a great

example of such coexistence, because the secretaries stood on that side the berlin constituency of the socialist united party of germany thought the price was a tool of internationalism or something else stupid. but the war did not take place around west berlin, we can still recall many such moments, of course there were critical moments, such as the caribbean crisis, but in any case such a mechanism existed, this mechanism was to be supported until the last moment, until february 24 last year, he was already trying to talk to putin all the time, now such a model, mechanism, is being created with the people's republic of china , perhaps with china it may be more relevant, why, because one way or another, china has institutions that russia does not have. in china, there is a standing committee of the politburo of the party central committee, in china there is a central military council

of the communist party of china, all of these are collective governing bodies, of course, we realize that sysimpina has enormous power, personal, but institutions work one way or another, the problem of modern russia is that soviet institutions have been destroyed, and post-soviet institutions look like a mafia, inter-dusaboychik, and clear functions of the leadership of the russian federation as there is no such thing, we gossip all the time about putin's meetings with the members of the security council of the russian federation, but the question arises, what can these members of the security council actually do, we saw an open meeting when putin made a decision about the attack on donetsk and luhansk. regions of ukraine, allegedly, when he recognized the independence of the so-called dnpr, he demanded from the members of the security council of the russian federation that they agree, it seems that it was several points, and he skipped the first and immediately

moved to the second, naryshkin left, that was it, you know , the famous story about the absolutely soviet, christeningly about how the shtananda furs, otto von stirletz came. to the cabinet of sss rector heinrich gimbler to tell that someone is negotiating with the allies, while, according to the version of this wonderful tape, the negotiations were authorized by rex fury himself, well, he was saved there, so the same thing happened there, this standantrer, fsb naryshkin came out and instead of saying that i was for the recognition of the independence of the dpr, the lpr, he said that i was for the war. no, their acceptance into russia, war, it was, it was the third point, the first point is recognition of independence, the second point is war, and the third point is annexation, or maybe i wanted to warn, you know that, people give

signals, sent to the astral, the event that will happen is the same person who is the interlocutor of the event, he could want to send signals from himself, putin saw that standar was playing a dangerous game. game, that's why he stuttered, because he wanted to appeal to the west through putin's head, that's what will happen, and he basically, we now understand that he said what they planned. enter, recognize independence, then enter, and then annex the east, just like that, and the south, well, so what, but in any case, these people did not show any desire for discussion, for discussion of the situation, for speeches, if you consider , that it is so new politburo, then we now read all the minutes of the meetings of the politburo of the central committee of the cpsu, where the people who had power, not that of

the secretary of the administration. leonid elych, this is the wrong approach, the right approach, as it seems to me, and leonid elych then said, comrades , we are voting, i believe that there, we have listened to the opinion of the comrades, my position is that we must support the resolution introduced there by comrade ryabov, and the position is such that it is the position of comrade ustinov, let's vote, of course, as a rule, the majority of politburo members supported the general secretary, but the situation of citizens entering czechoslovakia, the members of the politburo split in half, and then the general secretary supported the part that voted for the introduction of troops, but he could have voted differently, and then the troops would not have entered, and this is a perfect example of how it all works , of course, the last word is in the first person, but people can express themselves about their positions, in the state duma of the russian federation there was simply no such thing for discussions, so it means it means. that in russia there is no collective

leadership, as such, collective leadership that would be consultative to the führer, and the main task of these people is simply to say what the führer will like, this is what lost adolf hitler when he was planning his offensive operations there in the year 39, reex marshal henry goering told him that we, the furovals, will not be able to fight on two fronts, and he immediately said , listen, get out of here, you idiot, and everyone saw...' understood that there is no need to argue, when the head of any state becomes such a führer and his employees cannot tell him the truth, yeah, it means that the collapse is absolutely inevitable, that such a state is in an absolute frenzy, but you and i very often talk about the fact that little will change on the part of the russian federation in relation to ukraine, putin or anyone else, in general it doesn't matter, as if...' will continue to exist if putin doesn't happen

, hypothetically, of course, but again, the system can continue to exist if putin doesn't happen, but there may not be putin, but a person is inclined or forced to create a model of collective leadership, then we get what happened in the soviet union, or in early russia, we get a meeting at which some representatives of the leadership will say, you know, it is better for us to make a force option with the russian federation. it would be better for us to seize their territories, and others will say, why should we even risk troops now, let's create some kind of energy dictate, let's try to negotiate with the europeans on alternative energy routes, bypass ukraine, marginalize it, they themselves will come in 5 years, why we are now escalating, when we will receive them anyway, in principle, so that such a conversation

will take place in february 2014 in the kremlin. then now we would most likely have a pro-russian leadership in ukraine, this was an absolutely real development of events for us, but it did not happen because of putin's idiots who said that they did not understand why it was necessary to annex crimea, who said that it was necessary to use the east as a tool in overcoming the consequences of the maidan, these people were all marginalized and they are gone, we know that these people were. we know their last name, we know what they lost putin's trust. from this moment on, no one offers putin alternative options , again, i repeat, this is a serious problem for the reason that politics is, as a rule, in any situation, from democratic to auto-critical, it is always a competition of alternative options, in you should have two approaches on the table, preferably four, and you should choose the optimal one and listen to different people with different positions, when it all boils down to... what the person who comes to your office says,

listen, volodymyrovych, the only question in one: kill them with a missile or a cannon, well, and we're kind of lucky with that, because if, if they discussed the options, they could have found an option that was much more dangerous, as strange as it sounds, than, well , well no, well clearly, they are simply not crimea, and not crimea, not donbas, but rather the trojan horse, the government of national agreement after the maidan, since in 2002 it was not a blitzkrieg, but a real war, they would not have drunk kyiv simply by their numbers, or no... kyiv, but just stood near kyiv for several months in a row, there, i'm not sure what that any army can capture millions of cities, we know that from the lebanon war, from the israeli army at the walls of beirut, that's another story, but in any case it was a much greater danger, but when you accept the obvious an adventure,

because the alternative to not agreeing to an adventure is to lose your seat, even if you are aware of the situation, as we now know very well. a person who was in principle aware of the situation, let's say in 2022, we know the name of this person, this is dmytro kozak, well , where is he, have you even once heard of the fact that dmytro kozyk does, he is the deputy head of the administration of the president of russia, he simply disappeared from public space, and i can give many such examples, but in the 14th year , i would say such an example was mykhailo zurabov, uh, the russian ambassador to ukraine, but they at least they tried to convey: to putin, being his absolutely loyal associates, that there could be an alternative approach to solving the problem, they both wanted one solution to the problem, both wanted to take ukraine for themselves, but otherwise, that’s all, who will to risk one's future, here's the whole story, by the way, we in ukraine also

need to understand this, i keep saying, it's taken off the tongue, i actually wanted to ask if these trends are not proportionally smaller, but at least... a little characteristic and for us. well, that's why i keep saying that we need a government of national security or some kind of military cabinet in which the president of ukraine , volodymyr zelensky, is next to petro poroshenko, or yulia tymoshenko, or some other politicians from the national democratic party. not because i have sympathy for someone in particular, because i want zelensky to have alternatives, mr. president, you are a real moral leader. the leader of love, they said, you know, maybe, mr. president, there is another approach to this story, let's consider it, you can go this way, or you can go that way, these may be wrong positions, we read by the way, we read by the way

the transcript of the nsdc meeting in 2014, when oleksandrchynov, acting as president of ukraine, made decisions related to the russian invasion, whether to resist or not to resist, very different opinions. were, but performing the duties of the president, at least he could rely on different opinions, when a politician relies only on one opinion of his own, and those around him do everything possible simply to strengthen this opinion not by their own positions, but by imitation of positions, this leads to defeat, it should not be assumed that this can lead to victory at all, the only thing is that when we meet with the competition of authoritarian personalities, the one who is better wins here. chess, but there is no coach behind each of them, so imagine that these are two amazing chess players, but they play based exclusively on their own ideas about the game, no one can say, you know, you can rearrange this piece here, when behind

the contender for the champion, the title of world chess champion, there are three grandmasters, two of whom have already been champions, huh. they can offer him options for moves, he will still pass, but he knows that it is possible this way , and that way , mother of god, to me it seems that this is partly a very advantageous position, not to let anyone in, so that no one is heard, and then to say, well, i didn't know, i wasn't told, i wasn't supposed to understand this, but what is it , why not. .. they didn’t report because you don’t allow alternative opinions to approach you, well, this is the russian tradition of the government, we need to get rid of this tradition in our situation, that’s why i think it would be very useful, what if the president of ukraine would have an expanded, let's say, composition of the national security council or some narrow

military cabinet, as in israel, with the participation politicians of various political parties, it did not just add legitimacy to the government. it is obvious now, it needs, it would add possibilities of variable politics, not variable politics, it is not politics , ugh, that's it, the last conclusion, probably on this topic, regarding us, of course, there is an opinion that this alternative point of view now to our commander-in-chief, so to the supreme commander-in-chief, it is the military leadership that informs us about, well, you know, such a confrontation between the fields. and the military in the mountain, but less so, this applies exclusively war, i don't think that any of our military gives any political advice, but i, i think that now the war is the main thing, yes. because again, what is war, one way or another, it is a reflection of those political processes that will be after the war, but now the most important thing is the right approach to war,

to help, uh, to relations with allies, all this is connected, so i honestly don't think that the consultations around the war are some er, consultations in the extra-political field, given that now ukrainian politics - it is a war, but there is another question, i did not see it. to be honest, in all these discussions about what to call the current situation , there are some big disagreements between the president and the head of the zosu, well, because the only thing i saw, what it means there, is quoted as saying that we are at a dead end, says, that there is a way out, if there is no way out of the deadlock, he says that the positional war is a deadlock, we need to turn it into maneuverability, because the positional war cannot last forever, the state of the situation, if it turns into a permanent one

the situation that you and i are observing is such a very serious test , and if we see that there is a recipe for turning this war into a maneuverable one, that the recipe for a valiant one worked, we don't know that yet, we only have a recipe, you understand , it's like medicine, you get prescribed medicine, you eventually get it, it can be... very rare medicine or expensive medicine, you try to buy money, and then you take it and you don't get better, you need new medicine, right there it is necessary, but you do not yet understand the recipe, the recipe is not yet recovery, it is just a recipe, and there can be different ways to suffocate, ugh, i don't see anything here that suggests that there is some serious conflict between the political and military leadership, the only thing?

of course, i do not think that political figures, that officials have a voice to advise the military, to say something, not to say, it is wrong, i generally think that it is wrong, about the lack of consultation, if you could discuss all this within the framework of the institution of presence discussions the president of the country, you would not have to exchange positions through media, if you exchange positions through media, you are thus admitting that your own device does not have a platform for discussion, and this is very dangerous for yourself. and finally, i cannot but remember what is happening now in poland , a country that has, in fact, i would like it to be like that, after all, it does not save us from some common problems , which must be decided, as for our path and heading to the european union, then poland has its own demand, it is the exhumation of the poles, as they say,

volhynia is different, we have a position on the volhynia tragedy, let me remind you, but it is very strange to feel that poland is now basically on the same page with hungary, even somewhere, now, they are behaving the same way as the farmers behaved a few months ago, i thought that this pre-election fever, but there are obviously some deeper problems, and internally, in poland, this situation is political, they continue to form a government, a coalition agreement has already been signed, what does this mean, what is generally happening with our neighbors, as it affects relations, well first of all, let's congratulate poland on today's independence day, this is the most important thing you want to say, so freedom in the fight against cruel empires and, above all, with the russian, soviet empire, so we sincerely congratulate our polish friends on this holiday and wish that it never happens again interruptions to polish statehood, but i have to say. to say that i do not think that the position that we are talking about the position of poland regarding the exhumation of european integration there, this is the position of an official, the deputy minister of foreign

affairs of poland, will pass for several weeks, and this a person will not work in the ministry of foreign affairs, because it is toxic for the ministry of foreign affairs in poland , only because the leaders of the law and justice party had such, i would say specific ideas about diplomacy, and what they managed to create, complex relations with the two main partners of poland in europe, with germany and with ukraine, because ukraine was in difficult relations before the start of the war, this once again speaks of the diplomatic fiasco of the polish right and their entire camp, politicians, deputies, diplomats, experts, these people can clearly know that they have experienced an absolute diplomatic fiasco and that their activities, which yaroslav kaczynski did not tell about, did not benefit the polish statehood and the polish people, it is you who was clearly and clearly signed by the poles and the voters. now about

the relationship. of course, all these problems will remain. under any polish government, because there are national interests, there are interests of agricultural producers, you know how all european countries defended their interests when poland joined the european union, there the interests of carriers, well, there are interests related to the policy of national memory, we can have our own interests, poland can have its own interests, this is generally normal, the main thing is that these interests are resolved in such a way that it contributes to strengthening, and not the deterioration of our bilateral relations and our... european integration, because our european integration is largely in favor of poland. poland should be interested in our european integration, as i have always said, for one simple reason. if ukraine does not become a member of the european union, poland will forever remain a suburb of the civilized world. and if it does, it will be one of its centers. yes, we will be

in the vicinity, but we have such a fate, because we have such a border with russia. yes, we can't change geography, we can't, there are poland, slovakia, hungary, romania, if they don't want to live forever on the outskirts, they should promote our integration with all their might and drive away anyone who says that it doesn't correspond to their national interests, as well as how it corresponds, by the way, if we talk about nato, the same can be said, there are dozens of them kilometers that will separate them from the center of tension, so that. let's not