helicopters per day, 12 planes that took off and then hit with missiles, against which these systems were working, we destroyed 12, it was just something at once, mr. oleksandr, very briefly, maybe you understand what president zelensky said, the partners are probably right understood, that is, there were obviously planes at the airfield. and helicopters and we hit these airfields, right, i understand? i think that the helicopters, we are talking about when we used the atakams at 165 km, remember, and then the helicopters were destroyed on the occupied the territory of ukraine, and planes , as far as i remember, there was also a case of the use of atakams, and i do not rule out, including, that it was a missile... warheads

probably more than 300 km away, and probably up to 450. i think so i understand that volodymyr zelensky hinted to our partners to give us more such weapons, perhaps the situation will change in this way, including at those airfields where flights take off there in the voronezh region, in the rostov region, in the saratov region, where you can simply fate, where these rockets can reach, why in your opinion for... the west is so cautious about giving these long-range missiles, by the way, rishi sunak said today that the packages that the uk is promising will have long-range missiles, does that mean that the uk is considering this option that these rockets will really fly to a long distance, i wouldn't rule it out, especially since i'm my own, let's say, this is my assumption, which is based on certain information, insiders and analytics. i would not

rule out that a certain number of missiles could already be used by ukraine with a range of the stormshadow version up to 45,450 km at military bases the enemy in the occupied crimea, that is, it was already possible, but here the question is that i think that they will be transferred and it is precisely these missiles that we are talking about, the question fundamentally remains whether we will limit our actions only to them. on the territory of ukraine in the occupied part, will there be permission to strike on the territory of russia? well, i will tell you that this is actually an important element, because now it is also a test for the west, because the countries of the axis of this evil, ah, aggressive, for example, north korea, are transferring ballistic missiles to russia, with which it has already hit territories of ukraine and will probably still strike, then immediately this is a question of... serious escalation, and another solution

is also a question of escalation, what the wall street journal writes, again about the deployment of russia's nuclear weapons in belarus, at least two serious reasons, to which the west can respond, in particular, by allowing strikes with its weapons on the territory of russia, and this would, i think, be fair and justified, even in front of those who say that ukraine should not be allowed to do this, because it could be unnecessary escalation, so russia... led with north korea and can even if iran joins in this, there are such risks as well, so the measure could be used here, use this excuse and say that it is not the west primarily playing for escalation, but russia, and the west is responding helps ukraine defend itself. mr. oleksandr, the issue of future funding and assistance, financial assistance by the united states of america...

remains unresolved, the united states of america has so far stopped supplying ukraine with weapons and military equipment due to the lack of budget funds for such programs. this was stated by the coordinator of the national security council of the white house, john kirby, at a briefing . insure the americans in this situation and help ukraine, or after all the issues that are domestically political in the united states of america, they will be overcome in the near future, and ukraine will still open, or rather the united states of america will open this package of 61 billion dollars for ukraine . i hope that they will open, that is, well, this situation, it cannot be undefined for a long time at all, after all.

it is clear that, as it seems to me, an agreement will be reached, after all, about the southern border, and accordingly... about aid for ukraine, because this situation cannot remain completely undefined, and the members understand that of the republican party, many of whom also supported and support ukraine, but regarding europe, i must say that it is very important that europe also understands that the countries of the european union and in general, that they also have to play a certain role in ensuring safety. europe, because let's be honest, when certain politicians in the west start talking about the fact that in 5 or 10 years russia will be at war with nato, will it be ready, or will they still use the wording, will wage war in europe, then i have a question, and where russia is now waging this war,

isn't there a war in europe now, isn't it a powerful aggression, when rockets fly, when such shelling happens, it's already a crisis and... you don't have to put off what's needed for tomorrow settle and decide today, and in this sense german chancellor olaf scholz is absolutely correct when he addresses his fellow european leaders and says that it is necessary to provide plans to increase support for assistance to ukraine by february 1st, not just, say, statements what is there, but to increase it, because it is really important, and in fact, it is very important for europe to look into the internal potential and see that not everything is so bad and exhausted from the point of view of the defense industry, opportunities, it can all be restored, it just requires political will, funds, and you need to work, factories and production of

the same weapons, not all european countries, but in germany, in france, in italy, in sweden there are, thank you, mr. alexander, it was alexander. musyenko, director of the center for military legal studies. friends, we work live on the espresso tv channel, as well as on our youtube and facebook platforms. for those who are currently watching us on youtube and facebook, please like our video and vote as well in our survey. today we ask you about the following: does the office of the president exceed its powers? yes, no, please vote, everything is quite simple in youtube, choose either yes or no, if you are sitting on tv, pick up your phone. and vote, if yes, then 0800 211 381, no, 0800-211-382, all calls to these numbers are free, vote, at the end of the program we will summarize this vote. next up is glen grant, a

retired british army colonel and military expert. sir colonel, i salute you, thank you for being with us today. thank you for the invitation. mr. colonel, today is president zelenskyi. together with the prime minister of great britain , rish sunak, he signed an agreement on military cooperation and security, which will be valid until ukraine joins nato. in the british government, this agreement is called historic. mr. colonel, explain what is the historicity of this agreement? yes, it's a historic deal because... britain usually doesn't do that, and if we think back, before the second world war, we had a similar deal, for us, this is something unusual, because after leaving

the european union, of course, yes, we are still a member of nato, but we are now talking about an agreement with a country that is not a member of... nato, and of course there are certain contradictions in the uk who are asking why we are doing this, but i know that a lot of people i talk to, they welcomed this deal because they felt that the uk was not doing everything it could for ukraine, so is this a historic deal? rishuna says that in addition to the air defense system and anti-tank missiles in the package. the promised help great britain in ukraine, it also includes and , it also includes long-range missiles, does this mean that very soon ukraine will get the right to use these long-range missiles,

and these long-range missiles will fly to military targets that are outside the borders of the ukrainian state. a very good question, and i'm sure, of course, that was a large part of the discussion that was between the prime minister and the president of ukraine and... i want to say that we don't know what 's going to happen, and we shouldn't know, after all, if there are attempts, and shoot them missiles outside ukraine, then it should be some kind of surprise, it should be a surprise, and of course, for ukraine, ukraine needs to destroy the crimean bridge, which turns the course of the war, it will be a turning point for both sides, mr. colonel. another question that follows from today's reaction of dmitry medvedev, the deputy chairman of the security council

of the russian federation, who reacted to the signing of the agreement between great britain and ukraine, he said that in the case of the placement of their official military contingent in ukraine, it is meant, great britain, this will mean a declaration of war on russia. can it literally happen that russia perceives the presence of british troops on the territory of ukraine as a declaration of war on russia, or is medvedov simply bluffing in this situation and trying to threaten great britain once again, i repeat, once again? an interesting question. i think that russia has been talking for a long time about the fact that it is waging

war with the west, with nato members, including great britain, so these words, which we hear again, have already happened, this is not something new, my view is that this kind of rhetoric is aimed at a domestic audience, and especially for those who are ... close to putin, and maybe even someone they see as a potential successor to putin. of course, if they want to declare war on us, they actually declare it, this war after every step we take, directed to help ukraine. that's a great answer, colonel, because the amount of what medvedev has already threatened. great britain, i can't even count on my fingers how much accommodation is possible

of the british contingent, limited or unlimited, maybe they will be some retired officers, but british on the territory of ukraine in order to help the ukrainian state in its struggle for independence. first of all, i want to say that in the short term, in the future, great britain will not station its troops, its soldiers on the territory of ukraine. yes, they can send certain advisers who will help representatives of the defense sector of ukraine. a week, therefore, valuable, when, speaking of mobilization, he said. said that i actually have it, he asked me if i would advise

someone who could help the ukrainian military, it is about foreign ex-military or military analysts, and i answered that yes, of course, her actually, when we talk about soldiers who learned from our military. in principle, ukraine should not make such a request to british officers, but of course we know that when we talk about f-16 fighters, about them, their technical support, and ultimately help in training, mastering new equipment and equipment, yes, such help would be very necessary, so it is important here whether there is a request from ukraine, no one hides from you, sir. to the colonel, on the night of january 12, the united states of america and great britain struck with

tomahawk missiles at the military facilities of the iran-backed houthis in yemen. in response to a series of attacks on merchant ships plying the red sea. according to the air force of the united states of america, more than 60 strikes were made on 16 targets from using more than 100 high-precision ammunition of various types. during his visit to kyiv, british prime minister rishuna commented on the events in yema. and commented on the consequences of this strike and the reasons for this strike, let's listen to what the british prime minister said. the uk-us alliance is carrying out strikes against the houthis in yemen. this was aimed at destroying sites from which

drones and missiles were launched by the houthis against. merchant ships in the red sea, it brought destruction and trouble, it led to a threat to sea navigation, after repeated warnings about the need to stop these attacks after the un speech, none of this happened, which is why today britain, in particular, took limited steps on the samosa. and in the face of this aggression, we will always uphold the rule of law. colonel, how is it possible that the conflict with the houthis in yemen could turn into something more when iran is supporting the houthis, when turkey is supporting the houthis, when the arab

world is treating this as a strike on... its entire territory, that is, does it have the world other fuses in order not to keep the situation in yemen and in general in the region? yes , from many angles, it's very interesting, because we know that from yemen there were missiles at american military...bases, and again, the attacks and the airstrikes that were carried out, again, it's not only that, it's touched merchant ships, actually in the region, this is a kind of declaration of war by iran and yemen against western countries. all this can

happen because these countries, iran and yemen, they consider themselves western countries. are weak, they consider the us a weak state, perhaps it's because of the withdrawal of troops from afghanistan , maybe, but for several years they , because of the influence of other countries, they have this impression: so yes, it was a powerful attack last night, in my opinion, once people lose some fear, then a lot. .. even hard for them to regain that fear, so you mentioned iran, you mentioned turkey, so after such a blow, i think these countries will be quite careful not to make the situation worse, because they were hit back, especially turkey should be careful, because it is in nato, and it does not want to

to upset neither the uk nor the us, and iran will now be thinking very well about what... the us, they're going to lose it. just a few days ago, mr. colonel, the american magazine time identified the top 10 risks for 20024, these are global risks. among them are the creation of an axis of evil, russia, iran and north korea. actually. we now see how regional wars are being played out in different parts of the world, that is, russia is waging a war against ukraine, although this is not a regional, but a european war, a continental war, we see how iran is indirectly involved through its proxies in the middle east,

north korea joined russia's war against ukraine and the threat. south korea , can we say that this risk, prescribed by our colleagues at time, is high enough, the creation of this axis of evil, perhaps the formalization of this axis of evil, by some kind of treaty, as it was before the second world war between germany, italy and japan. and first of all, this axis of evil that you talked about, i would also add china, and others and... the arab emirates, switzerland, again, they have money, they have there are technologies, and thanks to their technologies

, russia replenishes its reserves, so yes, they are already de facto at war with ukraine and with russia, they, this news of evil, they want to instill fear, they want to make it so that the united states cannot focus on something very important. they constantly make sure that the us is distracted by some conflicts, whether it is conflicts in africa, whether it is the threat of an attack on taiwan or others. now the top priority is ukraine, because if russia captures ukraine, it will become much stronger, it will capture technologies, people, people, other resources, and you you know what they are currently doing in donbas, for example, yes, they are mobilizing. ukrainians to fight in the ranks of the russian army, and therefore it is now very important not to be distracted from what is our main priority, from

ukraine, from the war in ukraine, there is no need to scatter our attention on other regional conflicts, we must understand that there is most important now. mr. colonel, the leaders of european countries are talking loudly about a possible war with russia. against the north atlantic alliance, more precisely, against the countries of western europe, can this war be preempted and in which how can this be done? when we talk about preemption or safeguarding, it's about making sure that russia doesn't replenish its reserves, its power, and if we don't do that, then we'll... ultimately lose if we have to make it so that russia can't war, respectively, then both korea and iran,

they will simply lock themselves in their hole and stay there, because they will not feel such powerful support from their partners, they will not move and advance, they will not talk about any wars with such giants , like the us, so it's very important now to help ukraine by all possible means. thank you, colonel, for speaking with you, this is retired british army colonel, military expert glen grant. friends, we work live on the espresso tv channel, as well as on our youtube and facebook platforms. for those who are currently watching us on youtube and facebook, please vote in our poll. today we are asking you about the powers of the office of the president of ukraine, and the survey reads as follows: in your opinion, does the office of the president exceed its powers? yes, no, or please write your comment under this video. during the telecast, we also conduct this survey. if you are sitting in front of the tv, pick up

your phone and vote. if you believe that the office of the president of ukraine exceeds its powers. 0800 211 381, no, 0800 211 382. all calls to these numbers are free. vote, at the end of the program we will sum up the results of this vote. next on our air is political expert volodymyr tsybulko. mr. volodymyr, i congratulate you, thank you with us today congratulations, glory to ukraine. glory to heroes. today, great britain says, the british government says that they have signed a historic security agreement with ukraine. this is a top topic, i think it will be in today's news as well. of the world after yemen, of course, and tomorrow's first pages of the british press, what can you say about how the british actively

support ukraine during this war, and why they do it, despite everything, despite moscow's threats to start a war, despite that putin hinted to boris johnson. one minute and you have rockets will be, that is, what is ukraine for britain and what is britain for ukraine? well, in fact, in recent days we have been living under the pressure of moving nuclear ammunition to belarus, which essentially meant the final and irreversible burial of the budapest memorandum, so this is very timely. and the very strong gesture of great britain is, in fact, the beginning of the process that was announced at the vilnius summit about...

about signing bilateral guarantees with the g7 countries for the period until ukraine became a full member of nato. and it was rishonak in kyiv who spoke about the fact that britain is putting up a shoulder, and if ukraine ends up in nato as soon as possible, then this agreement will exhaust itself. actually, it seems to me that it was great britain with this act that started such a wider one. the process of preparing ukraine for nato, there are great hopes for the summit, the anniversary summit of nato in washington, but this is the first of these bilateral security agreements, the first such agreement, and we can say that in the next couple of months, we will probably conclude such a thing with the countries of the big seven , these security.

agreement, which in fact will be such a very strong gesture to other countries, let's say, junior nato partners, to be ready to accept ukraine. while rishi sunaak was in kyiv, shmyhal's government was rewriting the mobilization bill, zelensky said that the mobilization bill, after taking into account all the proposed positions, should look in such a way that it answers the main questions, well, first of all, about justice, we will hear that said volodymyr zelenskyi, regarding your question regarding the law on mobilization, i know that the military worked with the deputies,

i have not seen the final version. for me the most important thing is that this law is fair, when i see all the details, i can then say, because this law has been quite actively discussed during the last three weeks, since christmas, what do you think, mr. volodymyr, is fair in law, and should be fair in the law on mobilization, well, the first thing is guarantees, social guarantees, guarantees of wages and... on the position of the state in relations with its soldiers, unfortunately, during the two incomplete years of the war, the government repeatedly changed the rules for payment of work, and completely strange stories with these medical commissions, with a completely dekun story, sometimes with the granting of the status of a participant in hostilities, when people are in the war for a year and do not

have id cards of combatants. actions, and most importantly, what is important is for the state to build an honest and very long-term relationship, so as not to plug holes during the war, when everything is on fire, and then retroactively dismiss a large number of military personnel, i want to remind you that after after the election of zelenskyi , approximately 40,000 highly qualified military personnel were dismissed from the army, and so on... we are also talking about, so to speak, more serious things, that is, the economy of war, it is very important here, because the question is to take away a fighter, take away a person , a civilian labor specialist and make him a military man, this is not, let's say, a defining event, a defining event when a military man has guaranteed security.

material resources, a material base for the training of new specialists and sufficient reserves of weapons so that nothing happens so that again, as in the 14th year of the family, the soldiers bought up and provided their soldiers with helmets, body armor, uniforms, well , everything, because now ukrainians. if you see the stories of people in military uniform twisting one or another person on the streets, then this is not about high-quality specialists for the armed forces. in fact, it is not about recruiting half a million people with shovels and machine guns, which is actually called a militia, but about the fact that such a mobilization law has ...