that the american press is writing about it, it is not accidental, especially since the connections of carlson, who is a favorite among journalists, since the days of fox news, with trump are quite obvious, and what he could then take secretly to trump, all the same, that moscow is ready to cooperate, i think that trump and his entourage already have channels, for that you don't need a publicly confirmed carlson to specifically lead something there, i think that there are opportunities for exchange, for sure, but it is important here.

and as carlson articulates, says: we have the right to know, we must find out what happens. mark, look, well, the key story is what was in the pockets of carlson, who was going to putin, and what did he stuff, some kind of information baggage or some kind of information package, he stuffed it in his bosom when he was returning to trump, here is the key story, here it is the signals are not there... he has exactly that psychology, the psychology of a businessman, moreover , semi-criminal, semi-eccentric , a person who is either casino, or women, or beauty contests, not some warren buffett, who is always about one thing. lyubertsy developer, or is there luzhnikovsky or sonevsky?

you understand, when there are beauty contests, a little bit of cinema, it’s all some kind of mass media, he probably thinks like this: listen, don’t negotiate, you get 20% of ukraine, we take 80, great business, you get a bare 20%, that’s territories and all preferences connected with access to the sea , some new geopolitical situation for you, putin does not want 20%, he wants 100%, this is important to understand, and here is this hope that even if... trump wins the election, they will not agree, because 20% is not enough for putin. moreover, 100% is not enough for him of ukraine, his goal is what was stated in his memorandum in december 2021. the entire former eastern bloc, its demilitarization from the borders in may 1997, preceded the nato membership of these countries. that's what he's going to push for, and the hope is that...they

don't end up making a deal, because for trump it was a concession for nothing on air trade. i think that putin can now maneuver without revealing all his cards. he wants to simply change the atmosphere in the united states, in the political establishment or in the government in which he can come trump in order to start talking to him at all. secondary, there are sanctions, and oil, and an embargo, and the removal of its military status. this is all putin wants, of course, and will make these demands, it goes without saying , we understand it, but it is only a derivative of that main demand, that he wants all of ukraine, he will never be satisfied with what he has left 20%, and 80% will go to nato and the european union, this is important to understand, they will never agree on this, even with such a convenient partner for him in negotiations like trump. in my personal opinion. trump knows where to stop, also

because such a task of positions is unacceptable for the american elite, for the american doctrine. for everything that the united states has done in the last 30-35 years after the fall of communism, victory in the cold war, etc. therefore, in reality, carlson can only make a kind of framework offer, an invitation to the so-called arrangement, behind which he does not even hide, even in this interview, perhaps somewhere out of sight, out of the interview, out of the frame. someone i am about this. numa to start a dialogue. let's negotiate. we can agree on everything. i am prone to everything. i am ready for anything. it was precisely in such expressions that putin could convey something to trump. we hope that the administration of the current president biden will be able to implement what was announced or promised. but we see that everything slips somehow again and again. in your opinion, what are the possible underwater currents. yes, well, on the one hand, we understand

that the republicans are for ukraine, yes, but in fact we see that they cannot come to an agreement, and everyone is starting to shake this unfortunate border with mexico, right? which also gained importance, i don't know, well, the same taiwan, it turns out like this, but it cannot be considered outside the context of the election, the election in america is a determining factor for which the republicans definitely use the situation, maybe the pressure on the democratic administration, biden himself, on his entourage in order to achieve the maximum benefit for themselves in the elections, because the dispute about the border, about illegal migrants, by the way, is now going around and insisting that there is no person at all, which looks quite logical and right on the part of the same republicans, but the problem is why it is associated

with ukraine, why it is interconnected with international issues, which, to put it mildly, is not included in the american agenda at all. the ukrainian issue does not affect taxes. not on migrants, not on health care reform in the united states, not on anything, just cynical american politics, whether we like it or not, is largely determined by the nomination of trump, because if nikki haley were nominated, this problem would not be would be, if she had a high rating and was the first applicant, then most likely such a situation would not have arisen. us senators, republicans who influence the issue, depend on trump's opinion. but it supports him, there the price of the question is six republicans who constantly torture the rest and the republican electorate in many respects and the head of the speaker of the house of representatives , johnson. six people who can throw their votes into the balance, taking into account the democratic

votes, and re-elect speaker johnson. it is not profitable for him, so he slows down the introduction the issue is on the agenda. let's see how it ends. we do not decide in advance, we will see, but this blocking is caused precisely by the actions of rabid supporters of trump from among the republican congressmen. the fact remains that somehow it turns out that some small group sets its conditions for the republican majority. so, someone benefits from this deep, maybe deep state, and maybe it also somehow fits, i don't know, into the program regarding ukraine, well, i wouldn't like to be. such a pessimistic conspiracy theorist, well, but some such strange coincidence, you know, when americans can't find money and promises, promises, promises. for the democratic administration, this is also a very profitable moment, because president biden, apart from the decision of congress, has the opportunity to help with weapons and

military aid, first of all. there is such an opportunity, bypassing congress with his decisions on the pentagon budget, etc., but what does he say? he says: no, we. we will not do this, let all the responsibility be on the republicans, if they refuse to allocate these 60 billion, let them for everything answer, that is, it is some kind of game on the part of the democrats. we know that within the democratic administration there is a line aimed at forcing ukraine to negotiate with moscow through concessions, to give up this 20% of the territory, to get what is still unknown, there are not even parameters for possible negotiations with moscow. we don't know what would be beneficial for ukraine, because the previous conditions for the liberation of the occupied territories are rejected from the threshold by moscow, and in general the west also calmly reacts to this ultimatum from moscow. therefore, yes, we can assume that for the democrats as well biden is in a very comfortable position, according to which he

will say: "i'm ready to help, i've even made concessions on the borders, i'm ready for a fence on the mexican border, but they don't want it, you see how the republicans behave." in an ultimate manner, so for some part of biden's entourage, giving him additional points, it is profitable to present it as if the problem is only with the republicans, here , of course, there is a more complicated pattern of the game and an unambiguous conclusion: ukraine has become a hostage of the election campaign in the united states, and until november probably it will all happen this way. we're already in february, there's at least another six months to go, but sooner or later it has to end. well, in any case , putin is going to visit his esteemed partner erdogan in the near future. well , we understand that syria, libya, the red sea, these are all understandable stories, but for putin to go personally, it means that he must bring something, hear something and get something. i

believe that putin is going to negotiate with two countries. he was in saudi arabia before, now he will go to turkey to to choose whether for... which was accepted by saudi arabia, and there were negotiations with trump as the future president, it will already be in november, if suddenly the elections end with his victory, then on january 20, 2025, he will already be inaugurated and will be ready to hold with it will be the venue for negotiations, and perhaps the venue , of course no one will go to moscow or washington, it can be istanbul, jeddah or riyadh, this is the global south, it can host, and not some kind of geneva, as happened with biden, it seems to me that putin is interested in supporting such an idea. from the global south, the initiators of the summit in jeddah, saudi arabia and other countries, and the istanbul format

was already in 2022, and putin now appeals to it, says: "you fools, you didn't agree with us then." so, i can well assume that, in addition to other issues related to the relations between turkey and moscow, erdogan and putin, it will be a priority to resume negotiations on their site on favorable terms for putin. it seems to me that he... will agree on this, talking about these framework putin's visions and proposals, let's remember how many were thrown in there, devoted to the istanbul format, threw in, i don't know, careless wording and so on and so on and so on, well, they tried to make the then prime minister of great britain boris johnson an extreme one, although in any case we understand that it was not his decision, not his vision, simply, well, a collective event could not accept such a thing. there, the exit from the istanbul agreements was a combined decision, the deanery in buchi really influenced the

readiness of the west at that moment in the spring of 22 to supply weapons in significant quantities for that ukraine could defend itself. and the positions of ukrainian society were taken into account. ukrainian society did not want any agreements through concessions. plus , it was clear that the success against which these negotiations began. moskovskii, when they attacked ukraine on february 24 and approached the kyiv region, it turned out to be imaginary, that is , the opportunity to implement this plan was very small, because in general the kyiv region was protected and moscow's losses were huge, besides, they were not ready, the plan predicted three days or seven days, maybe month, i.e. the short term of the blitzkrieg, it choked and no one was ready for the continuation itself. in the form of a blitzkrieg, it was necessary to retreat, regroup and start

a long, long war, which is happening now. you know, i think it wasn't some kind of wrong decision, the refusal to negotiate then. the problem is not that ukraine left the negotiations. the west had other intentions at the time, and the fact that the west does not fulfill its obligations, let's say, frankly, regarding the supply of such... ukraine did not ask for the event within the framework of ramstein, the big seven, two already nato summits promised to supply these weapons. i remember when i predicted that the war could be over by 2024, or the beginning of the 24th . it was at the end of 2023. and it happened against the background of the successful kharkiv operation, the liberation of kherson. and there were promises that almost tomorrow we will provide missiles to the attacks, ironclads and the rest to finish this matter on the battlefield.

but nothing happened, they did not provide anything. then there was pentagont, a scandal at the end of the winter of 2023, when the documents were revealed and it turned out that in general very little by little the supply of these weapons, which were promised, and tanks and the rest, and that in general the offensive neither in march nor in... untrained soldiers of the ukrainian army, as promised in the right amount, unsupplied weapons, of course, if you do not fulfill your obligations i don't know what to talk about then, but at the moment when the istanbul format was rejected on those well-known grounds, the agreements were a different event, and the promises of the event were different, so now... this problem cannot be blamed only on ukraine. like, their counterattack was choked,

more precisely, he did not complete the tasks that were set before him. and they fulfilled all their obligations so that ukraine would implement all these plans. good question too. therefore, today new negotiations will most likely be on new grounds. and moscow will lead them differently. putin was given a break. for at least six months , he managed to create the notorious line of surovikin in three rows, minefields and a sea of ​​other things. thus, he created a favorable position for himself for negotiations. putin would not achieve anything, nothing. this is solely due to the weakness of the west caused by the elections in which even the democratic current administration is forced to maneuver and not make drastic moves in order to pass the election period with a relatively

calm attitude of the voters, without giving reasons for intensifying criticism from trump and the republicans. how do you think it will fit into putin's russian self-reappointment agenda, this is the story with the war, and how willing they will be, so to speak, to go all the way in what is called an existential war. how many votes he will get, the mood is important to him, it is important to him that people do not riot, no were indignant, agreed, recognized and behaved quietly, this is really important to putin , it is pointless to deny it, and he monitors public sentiments, they have nothing to do with the election results, even if you imagine that 90% are against putin, putin did not

give up power would, he would secure the result for himself with bayonets and protect it, he would write that... it is 90% and he would not let people come out and be outraged by this violation, substitution or falsification of the results, but sentiments are still important, he must control them, they have to correspond to his wishes, his intentions , that is, so that in no case a serious, irreconcilable contradiction arises, the real picture cannot be replaced only by virtual, invented elections and their results, it is not possible, people must still maintain loyalty, he watches over this. the war is definitely a stimulus, people began to live worse, someone is sent to the front, someone is in the army, someone got scared and left, relocated outside of russia and wants to return, etc., that is, a lot of problems related to the war, but what about the rest? putin cannot take it pause, he is now, according to forbes, i read this article, preparing for an offensive in the kharkiv

region, it is possible that this is an attack and a pso, perhaps the actions of the russian army of the kremlin, precisely such that... provoke the expectation of an invasion from bilhorodsk, for example , the region to kharkiv or kupyansk, it doesn't matter. they say that 500 tanks, a tank army, armored vehicles, armored vehicles, in the same number, and 40 thousand troops were concentrated in kupyansk. that is, the situation here looks like putin would naturally like more success. to take kup'yand or avdiivka, which he did not take, to things that were not prophesied about avdiivka every two weeks. it remains, then everything, but putin did not take it, it is important for him to get this result, but he will not risk too much until march 17, there are six weeks left, not so much. it is better to live out these six weeks until march 17, and then start some new efforts in a new situation with a new government,

with new powers, possibly established in the new government by their successors, daughters. loved ones who are completely children, descendants, what putin wants, of course. then, it seems to me, the option of an offensive is more realistic. in my opinion, there is little time left before the elections. so let's imagine that they will go to kupyansk tomorrow. i was there in kupyansk. many say, why are you talking about it all the time? i can testify as someone who was there. not according to the globe or the stories of others or telegram channels, i saw. near kupyansk, i don't know how to overcome it without huge losses, probably everything is possible in the world, they have a lot of shells, the north koreans are supplying, they they will pelt the whole city with them, but i repeat , it is impossible to overcome this rift just like that, the river is small, but the banks are not elevated, further on is the forest, the terekons, the officers showed me , they are located there, it is not very visible from

the position even with binoculars, because the distance is great, i mean, i don't see how it can be done in six weeks. and not such that he wants to show russian voters the result before the elections. look, i took kupliansk. i don't think there will be enough time for that. thank you very much mark for this extremely interesting conversation, i want to remind our tv viewers that mark fegin, a figure of the russian opposition in emigration, a former member of the state duma and from blogger. hello, this is svoboda ranok, an informational project of radio svoboda. top guests every day. this is korabelny district, kherson. turn on live.

we are somewhere in the vicinity of bakhmut. we tell the main thing. on weekdays at 9:00. vasyl zima's big broadcast. two hours of airtime. two hours of your time. two hours to find out. about the war and how the world lives, two hours to keep up with economic news and sports news, two hours in the company of favorite presenters, presenters who have become like family to many, as well as distinguished guests of the studio, events of the day in two hours, vasyl zima's big broadcast, a project for smart and caring people, in the evening at espresso. our guest is matthew bryza, former adviser to the united states secretary of state. former director of european and eurasian affairs at the us national security council. glory to ukraine, dear mr. ambassador, i congratulate you. glory. well, the united states once again surprised,

unpleasantly surprised, and we understand that it can have disastrous consequences for us. in particular , it is about the lack of agreement between republicans and democrats on the ukrainian issue. i am not even going to take on the entire geopolitical situation and the domestic american situation, it is extremely complicated. but did not agree, can they agree? first of all, it is obvious that the lack of agreement goes beyond the issue of aid to ukraine. there is also no agreement on aid to israel and taiwan, as well as on strengthening the protection and administration of the us-mexico border, on what the republicans insisted, as a condition for providing aid to ukraine, israel, and taiwan. thus, the entire governing structure of the us congress, which covers both houses, begins. disintegrate. in addition to the above problems, there are other shortcomings of congressional leadership. president donald trump is flouting agreements reached by senators and members

of the house of representatives to voice his disagreement over legislation or bills as he seeks to create obstacles for president biden in the upcoming november election. such disobedience deepens even more dysfunction of the political and legislative systems of the usa. unfortunately, ukraine found itself. trapped in this chaotic state of affairs. currently, the political and legislative systems of the united states are disjointed, and the search for solutions for their unification remains undefined. the ukrainian issue has become a tool in the hands of donald trump's election headquarters, which he wants to use to publicly destroy the biden administration and biden himself. let's look at it from another angle. i don't believe donald. trump uses ukraine as a political tool against biden. instead, one of the theories suggests that president trump may not want to help ukraine because he wants to support

putin. however, it appears that ukraine has become an unwitting collateral victim in trump's desire to prevent biden from achieving any legislative victories in the united states congress. as i mentioned earlier, the law is aimed at strengthening the security and administration of the border. the us and mexico, to better control the flow of migrants, received widespread support. however, at the last moment , president trump intervened and did not allow it republicans to pass it, because he does not want biden to be able to claim certain victories. thus, ukraine was not the center of attention of this political battle, but rather became a victim of this process. what tools does president biden have now when we talk about aid. for ukraine. in fact, as he does not have such tools, when congress approves the money, it is intended for ukraine, since it is congress that controls budget expenditures. the president

cannot spend money he did not receive approval from congress. and although congress has already allocated a significant amount of funds for ukraine, after using them, biden cannot make any other decisions without the consent of congress. in such a scenario, president biden must rely on his political acumen, particularly in an election year, to convince congress, especially republicans, to allocate more funds for ukraine. however, trump seems intent on depriving biden of any victories, both in foreign policy and in any other area. therefore, he most likely folds the members of the republican party to thwart any such efforts. moreover, it is a question. applies not only to ukraine, but also to the entire united states. if president biden and congress cannot find a common solution, the us government could remain without funding until march 1. it appears that

president trump is happy to accept such a scenario because it might reflect poorly on president biden, who would appear incompetent. this situation highlights the breakdown of the entire us political system, which makes it difficult for president biden to implement new initiatives. i i recently listened to extremely important speeches by timothy snyder, the clinton speakers, they are all in... aware that the representatives of the american intellectual elites are aware of all the threats and all the problems, but the impression is that there is some, maybe an unspoken solution, this is not a reproach, i have a feeling of some double-entry bookkeeping, well, it really is, as we've discussed many times on this program, mr. borkowski, the vast majority of us political leaders at the national level, whether in congress or

at the ministerial level, both current and... others, are united in the fact that aid to ukraine is of crucial importance not only for ukraine itself, but also for the national interests of the united states. they understand that ukraine's struggle against russia has a direct impact on the larger geopolitical context, particularly the nato space. failure to contain russian aggression in ukraine could lead to numerous additional challenges for all members of the north atlantic alliance. it is obvious that the ukrainians. not only for himself, but for all of us. this understanding is widespread among experts and politicians. and in the us there is considerable support for providing more aid to ukraine. however, the main obstacle is one person and that is donald trump. he is motivated by the desire to prevent the political success of joe biden before the presidential election. trump is well aware of biden's priorities. in particular, the need to help ukraine, israel and

achieve agreements on better management of the us-mexico border, so trump wants to prevent such achievements of biden. although such figures as hilary clinton and timothy snyder cause deep respect and fascination, they lack the political power or ability to force donald trump to behave differently. it remains unclear whether trump will follow this approach to ukraine throughout the election campaign, or even if he is re-elected for a second term, an interview with former secretary of state and cia director michael pompeo, with whom i have worked closely in recent years indicates that trump may eventually give aid to ukraine and turn on the green light for it, because despite ukraine's requests during obama's presidency, it was trump, not obama, who allowed the sale of

javelin anti-tank missile systems to ukraine. this shows that he understands the importance of supporting ukraine's defense efforts. however, trump's actions regarding ukraine are inconsistent, which indicates a lack of strategic planning. he vacillates between wanting to provide more aid to ukraine and undermining efforts to do so. such inconsistency may be due to his desire to harm biden. unresolved feelings towards president putin, as well as a desire for positivity. relations with russia, so trump's approach to ukraine is characterized by a lack of consistency and long-term planning. well, i also have this feeling, you know, that the world has changed so much that the old political elites can no longer respond properly. do you remember, at one time there was such a beautiful film by the cohens, there is no place for old ones here, and accordingly people, representatives of the old political era can no longer

respond to... fundamentally new, cynical, terrible challenges, well, on the other hand, you mentioned now about the former head of the cia, the former head of the state department, mike pompeo, and mike pompeo assures that trump will be firm, but the key story here is how much we can trust mike pompeo in this situation, who is a person, basically plus or minus donald trump, right? as i mentioned, secretary of state pompeo expressed conviction. that trump would eventually support aid to ukraine, although i have not personally met donald trump. i worked closely with secretary of state pompeo. in my experience, i can attest to pompeo's reputation. he says frankly and sincerely. relying on his own an informed perspective gained from having served in key positions in president trump's cabinet.