death or organizes their murder, uh, because by and large we can honestly say that putin restored the death penalty in russia, so you can say, obviously, then navalny did nothing to deserve the death penalty, they all the time inventing one crime after another, one after another, just making a mockery of what used to be justice, it certainly didn't start now, it started in a big way since... when they just decided to steal someone else's company, and then with them started talking about selective justice, and when it turned out that nothing could be done with them, they believed that they could do so, and from that time this regime began to become what it is. there was always this imperfect reaction of the outside world, the fact that they continued to communicate with them, have business, conduct negotiations, always allowed them to believe that they could hold someone hostage, well... they released them too, released after

many years interest on a personal request of former german vice chancellor hans dietrich genscher, but khodorkovsky was a figure, let's say, who did not engage in political activities during his time in prison, and for putin, it may have been an important moment that he could allow him to leave the country. it is also necessary to remember that the russia with which khodorkovsky left is not the russia in which navalny died, this is the russia in which navalny died, this is the russia of the third president, by the way, navalny was poisoned in the russia of the first president, he returned to russia of the second president and died in russia of the third president, it is also necessary to understand that this one the perturbation happened very quickly, i think that when we look at putin, in this conversation with kartsen, by the way, there is also an interesting moment, here... did not ask anything about

navalny, nothing at all, when he was asked about it, he said, that he didn't want to ask these questions that all american journalists ask, he doesn't want to talk about murder, leadership is always murder, he said, but that was before navalny's death, and what toker carlson looks like now with his trip to putin and with all this behavior, he essentially nullified all this the propagandistic... moment of this whole play, that too needs to be understood, and by and large, i think that what we watched , when there was this story from rurik to the present day, it was clear that he himself understands that he doesn't have to say that, well, he was just talking, he was carried somewhere, he wanted to say all this, but as a politician, there was only one head fighting there, which said: lord, let's come.

volodya, please, it’s for trump that it was easy for him to say that he could negotiate with you and stop the war, you have them deceive? no, volodya, i'm not done yet, i need to tell you about the austrian general staff. volodya, stop, there is not much time, you have to say something that is necessary for the american audience, we agreed, this is quite a serious calculation. we were sitting and preparing for this, volodya, do not interrupt, i have to tell about the poles and hitler, and hitler , and there is a third volodya, my god, how stupid you all are, my god, both of them, my god, who am i dealing with, yes, it will soak this carlson and everything was necessary, but see if navalny's death is actually multiplied by zero, impressions from the interview.

and not only the interviews of all those millions of people who watched it and somehow wavered in their sympathy or antipathy, or simply an equal attitude towards putin, because we understand that there are many such people in many countries and even in the same united states, is he now becoming toxic enough, at least for a while, that even trump does not put on him with his masks and so on and so on, well, i don't know how he was not toxic at all before... before this death, everything, everything he did previously, it was not toxic, but it was, so to speak, but they got used to it, this is addiction to toxins, after all , they can also get used to navalny's murder, but it just really happened very quickly after he reappeared on screens, it would certainly be a serious mistake to prepare for such an interview until 2024, so he has not given an interview to americans since 2021, to western journalists since 2022, that is, this is really the case.

a not very serious appearance on the screens happened as a result, then he had to do it a few days ago before... death navalny explaining everything he wanted to say in an interview to russian television is also, by the way, a huge problem that he is forced after an interview with an american journalist to then spend two hours explaining to russian journalists what he wanted to say in the previous text, that is also a problem, and as a result, all these efforts, all his publicity really turned out to be completely meaningless against the background of his next crime, because everyone understands that he is not a statesman, what does he need to show that he is a statesman, well... such a statesman authoritarian, but with his values, with his idea of ​​worlds, his idea of ​​justice, here he was deceived, here he wanted to join nato, he was not accepted, here he wanted to go somewhere else, and then it turns out that he is just a murderer, ugh, all the more again, with navalny , it is impossible to understand what he wanted from him,

well, by and large, what did navalny say, that he should have been killed about putin, that putin owns the gelendzhak palace, that definitely deserves death, or that putin exists.. some structures, so putin himself is great fighter, as you know, against corruption, he and lukashenka are the main fighters against corruption, well , some fight in one way, some in another, that is , i have a huge question, so to speak, about all this, uh, well, we will follow, there, by the way , today in russia they are trying to find navalny's body, there are also big problems with this, you can finally, this is the munich conference and the ovation for navalny's wife, i am sorry, but i know what it looks like. women who have just been informed of their husband's death. what do you think? i think that women who are in political the political, i would say, symbiosis with her husband for many years, they are ready for anything. so look not only at yulia navalna, look at svitlana tykhanovskaya.

how much, her husband is alive, fortunately, although he can be destroyed by lukashenka at any moment, she lives with it. you see, when you live with tragedy, you look different. than when you can't get along with her, that's why i ugh, and then you know, there's another moment of adrenaline, you're talking about yulia navalna, i saw that performance, well, you imagine, i don't know if it is possible to imagine, your behavior at the moment when you are informed of the death of a loved one, i cannot imagine, but i have repeatedly seen the behavior of women who have just received the news of their death. men, these are men who died in the war, and it would seem that these women also understood that this version of the development of events, it is probable, right, but they did not interact, they waited, waiting and interaction are not all the same, then again, people in such situations behave very differently to

it's absolutely obvious, some people just die in their grief, some people try to do everyday things, ugh, so as not to lose... common sense, that's how a person's brain works, everyone's different, and i 'm sorry, but i it seems that when you know that your husband is in the far north, he is kept in isolation all the time, you perfectly understand, uh, maybe not with your heart, but with your head, that something has to happen, and on the other hand, you don't think yet, that there is an obligation that you have to represent the person you are with the memory of her is also related. first the living person, and then the memory is accepted, because you, the same, are the same instrument through which this person can still say something to the outside world, the same always happened with the women of famous prisoners, they took upon themselves the mission of your husband, whom you either

kept him in prison or did not give him the opportunity to leave the country, and these women were his main representatives. olena boner received the nobel prize for academician andrei sakharov, winnie mandela, well , that is, you can cite a huge number of such examples number, and what happens to women who replace their murdered husbands in the positions of heads of state, as has happened there more than once, well, you can think that a woman who learns about the death of her loved one, the last thing she wants to do is become president or prime minister, but... the exact opposite happens, such women become flags, political leaders, very often more important than their husbands. well, actually, you already mentioned tikhanovskaya, yulia navalna met with her, and here is a question, can it be a continuation of what he started. the problem is that navalny himself

was not a person who could concentrate all this russian opposition energy. yulia navalnaya may just be a reminder of navalny's own sacrifice, but then again. we are with you, well, listen, sirima bandaranaik, the first prime minister of ceylon, which is now sri lanka, who headed the state after the death of her husband solomon bandaren, who was killed, was not there. she became the head of the country, well, i remember a huge number of such examples from the world history, this is how it generally looks, you understand , this is what a marriage of like-minded people looks like, what we are talking about, we are talking about different things, because marriage in politics and marriage in ordinary life are different unions, ugh, you can ... it's one thing when you're waiting for a person, from anywhere, from the front, from a business trip,

from some dangerous expedition, you're waiting for him, it's another thing when you introduce him, and what, we have a lot of soldier's widows and mothers , how later they become public activists, save other children, other people who find their vocation in this, after such grief, it might seem to us that they have to... somehow close themselves off in this grief, no, these people very often become real heroines, and by the way, even in authoritarian countries, i am not there i'm talking about ukraine now, it also happened very often that people who lost their children or husbands, who had nothing to lose, tried to save at least someone else's, if they couldn't save their own, well , people's reactions are different, it's accepted, it's absolutely accepted , eh, we started this program from avdiivka, and many people said that to fly... putin's goal before the elections is to capture her, to present this victory on a platter to the russian leps, but again

, has the story with navalny not overshadowed the capture of avdiivka in the minds of russians, well, again, what russians, ugh, russians who are watching television or russians, let’s say, who live in another world, in a world of other news, and russians who watch television. avdiyivka is undoubtedly more important than navalny, although... there is no truth, children even reported on russian television about navalny’s death, this by the way, it is very strange that they are all the same, let it be brief, let it be in a few words, but they informed that navalny died, prigozhin was also not honored in my opinion, if i am not mistaken, no, there was also something said about the catastrophe, but just in soviet times, when he died there some opposition figure was dying, some dissident, as you understand, no television reported about it, right here... a real message on all propaganda channels, yes from this federal correctional service, but

the very fact that they understood, what is it for people a significant figure, but in any case for most people, of course, the ukrainian theme may remain important, i do not know how important avdiyivka is for russians, maybe it is important for them, as well as those, i mean russians who suffer from chauvinism virus, maybe it is important for them that the russian army is advancing, i can't say that. to be honest, it's a huge question for me too, uh, as far as it can be understood, but in any case, it's absolutely obvious that the situation is related to what we are now we observe in this russian desire to show that they are advancing, they will try to continue to do this, but again, do they have the strength, do they have the resources, what do they really want to achieve, well... if we are talking about avdiivka, this is a war for 10 years, and the latest assaults, they are also there for,

let’s say, there, well, for months, if they will spend so much energy on each populated place of ukraine, then what do they want to achieve as a result, how long will they they want to fight for every village in donbas, that's it a question that putin should have asked himself. ugh , actually, the departure from avdiyivka fell on... the first week of the presidency of the ukrainian army of colonel-general oleksandr syrskyi, i do not envy him, to be honest, it is extremely difficult work and extremely difficult decisions that were finally made, and by the way, as it turns out, syrsky appeared in the ratings and enjoys the trust of 40% of ukrainian citizens as the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of ukraine. i was a little surprised that we even had the opportunity to observe some... numbers this week. ratings and so on, and to discuss this for ukrainian society, it is extremely

important, and that is why i would like to devote at least 5 minutes of our conversation to this, you have seen these numbers, i have seen these numbers, i keep saying the same thing, that i am absolutely not interested in wartime trust figures, why, why was this sociology made public now and is there a negative point in this? i think that this sociology was promulgated for one simple purpose. to see how the public mood changed after the resignation of the commander-in-chief by the armed forces of ukraine valery zaluzhny, because it was a socially significant, politically significant, any significant moment, we will not be in that. to doubt, and it was important to understand how the ratings of trust in military leaders, in political leaders change, well, we saw it, but it could be predicted without any ratings, you needed sociology to understand what we will say there, at the moment the rating of trust in zaluzhnogo will grow, huh, and the rating

of trust in the president of ukraine will be either stable or declining, and the trust rating for the new commander-in-chief will be extrapolated with confidence. to the armed forces as such, because if we say that the confidence in the armed forces as such has almost 90% in ukrainian society, if not more, then any commander of the armed forces of ukraine will have a high rating of trust, any a high-ranking public military man like budanov will have a high trust rating, but not as high as a former commander of the armed forces, simply because the former commander-in-chief of the armed forces became a mythologized figure. this is not a question of the position, it is a question of the personality of the employee, it seems to me that this is something that many people cannot realize, this is generally what distinguishes such a society as the ukrainian one, the mythologisation of images, we are not very different from the russians in this regard, but i can to tell how we differ from russians, russians mythologize a character, very often completely

random and incomprehensible, who appears out of nowhere, like lenin or stalin or putin. who are these people anyway, where did they come from? one came to the station, the other was found there among the partapartmen, yeltsin took this one, it is not clear from where, and they fall in love, and they love until lenin's death, even after. but a person dies, and they suddenly start to despise him, to say that they loved him too much, to drag him out of the mausoleum, like stalin, i think that is what is waiting for putin. the very moment, but after his physical death , the debunking will begin, the cries, oh, we didn't know, we didn't think, oh, he killed navalny, my god, what oh, he attacked ukraine, who would have thought, my god, we lived here, we didn’t know , pickled cucumbers, ate cabbage, and you can imagine how terrible agrippino was,

how cruel he was, my god, and this is what we hear every 50 years old, and this is russian. love, but there is another love, ukrainian love, which lasts two years, in the south everything grows quickly, quickly, goes down, this is a known fact, ukrainians fall in love, and it is strange to me that every person who becomes the center of this love, she does not can understand that it will end, but i always wait for the moment when someone is there for me says, oh, you know, we, we like what you say, we like what you do, i know that in two years this person can... write to me: i am very disappointed, you did not live up to my hope, it turns out that you are the same as everyone else, and i'm ready for it at the moment when this person says that he likes what i do, always psychologically, and for some reason people in politics do not want to see that, they don't understand what they have, well , it's just that i'm engaged in journalism, i can have more distance, in politics - it's very

a short period of infatuation, and then you are left with some small sect that loves you. as a rule, and they move on to a new love, and everyone expects this, because this is the ukrainian political character, if i had my way, i would elect presidents for two years, just as they are at the center of their popularity, because they went to resignation and were considered the fathers of the nation, well, or how in switzerland it changes every year, and every time you could love them, here a person comes out, that means he appears in it... rating of love, trust , this happens even with prime ministers, then a year later everything is who he is, we voted for him, we like him, where did you get that from, you what, you look at me, but i'm from this i love, i don't love this, such an amazing moment, but it was always in ukrainian history, the hetmanship, dear, we didn't have time to choose

a hetman, already the cossacks don't like him, and you chose love affairs, what a wonderful uncle, that's all.. . will do to us, and now, now is such a moment, and i, not even about valery zaluzhnyi, i say, he has become a symbol of the armed forces of ukraine, and when they saw him as a living person, but he as a symbol met expectations, well, that's what happens when a person matches the expectations of an institution, well , it can be a long period, a long period of waiting, let's say, expectations. if you imagine some further political processes there, that someday valery zaluzhnyi will want to be involved in politics there, in some future there, and he will still be elected president of ukraine, in two years, a large number. people will say no, well, after all, it is necessary that the president is not a military man, but someone economist, so what, well, that’s how the political process develops, but i’m not talking about that , i’m saying, i don’t understand why it’s necessary

to compete here, uh, why is it necessary in such a situation, we’ve been discussing ratings with you for a long time, for what is the need for competition between the political and military leadership of the country and to understand what the slinkies will be, when everything is already clear, i don't write all the ratings for 10 years ahead, i don't need to go. by people, i can just sit down for you and write all the ratings, what they will be, this is any person who even understands in which country it exists, you can fold it, you can dissolve all the sociological centers, save money, well, because it is clear how people in our country think, if they thought differently, we would be in a different situation, so this struggle is such a struggle with windmills, to be honest , and that's all, that is, you can, again, you can overcome your opponent in an authoritarian one. state, as putin does, if you live in a relatively democratic state, then you are somehow a hostage of the political process and the process of public thinking, and even if you

you will somehow overcome your opponent through some kind of propaganda company there, removal from office, the fact that he will not be shown there in some media there, another will appear, they will love another, a heart, a ukrainian heart that wants to love, that longs for love.. . which lives exclusively in the hope that someone will appear, whom it will be possible to love, and he will do everything and save, it will definitely find all this for itself, this is written by great leaders in all ukrainian novels, operas, poems, and so on the heart beats, v there is nothing wrong with russian culture, there is nothing like that, and that's all, that's why the tsar knows whom we love, he will tell us who to love, we will... go, and the previous tsar will tell us to love the next tsar. at the time of putin's election, yeltsin had a 5% popularity rating, and

he said: "i want this, not the one you want, but the one i want, well, if tsar baichushka wants this, then what can we do, we will go , let's choose, ugh, the royal will, the law, they spat at us and crushed it, well , how, by the way, it was when we leonid danilovich kuchma tried to say something that he wanted." well, you want to, these are different worlds, as if close, but so different, look, mr. vitaly, while ukraine is waiting and also looking for something with which we can oppose the russian federation and what to shoot at her, we have a situation when the head of the association of defense enterprises, exnardep serhiy pashynskyi, actually finds himself under investigation for the case as far back as 2014, yes, in the 14th year, we are talking about the confiscation of fuel for the benefit of the state, in particular there for the armed forces of ukraine, this is an old case , which, which we discussed, it seems to me, 10 years ago, that’s right, and in the end, according to

pashinsky himself, at the end of the summer of 2023 , the russian federation organized a special operation to block the supply of ammunition to ukraine, and we understand that one way or another, about it wrote, by the way, in the foreign press, the new york times, now, when we talk about the role of pashinsky, we can finally refer to the new york times, and... to our own sources, and this is an important thing, what is happening around this person and whether there are no certain ones under threat important very important points for us, i think we are not talking about the person of pashinsky as such, but we are talking about the fact that we cannot understand what we need, linguistically speaking, checkers or to go, what we need, control over defense enterprises , or for us to have our own weapons, we do not have so many effective managers, effective enterprises that produce their own weapons without their own. weapons, that we did not talk about aid, about money, about foreign weapons, but if we do not establish the production of our own weapons, well, if we cannot create

effective tools of our own confrontation with russia, we will have big problems in the future, this is the first moment, the second moment, any acquisition of weapons from at such moments, these are always delicate situations, and this must also be understood, here i am in the new york times read this story about how in the first months of the war with bulgaria, it seems that pashynskyi and his associates got all these shells, which were so and all the other weapons that we needed so much to survive in the most difficult weeks and months of the existence of the ukrainian state in 2022. i will not deal with these cases, because i am not an investigator, but i am absolutely sure that if you want to do everything exactly this way at this moment, check all the contracts so that everything is written there letter by letter so that no one can undermine you. so that nothing like this happens, then in the end, you are all white, all the laws are fulfilled, everything is done correctly, all the contracts are checked, only the country is gone, the russian federation is here, you

are all so honest in emigration. but it is not about that at all, if they were engaged if only with all these new cases our law enforcement officers, we could analyze it , say: maybe something was not done there, but really, when a person is approached for a case, for a case ten years old, then we can say that a political process is being launched, true, because the question arises, what has happened to this case since 10 years, how will it all look, why it was just now started to be investigated, when now... society is interested in the fact that our law, let's say so, corrupts the corrupt investigation structures dealt with current supply corruption necessary things for the armed forces, so that they dispel these stereotypes that exist in society about the total corruption of the system, this may not be true, then let them say, let them bring an investigation and say about it, this is a very important thing, and i think that myself

the fact that we are talking about... not what happened now, but about what happened in 2014, different explanations have been given on this matter a million times, it reminds me of history, this whole eternal scandal with yanukovych's money, remember you see, pashinsky was also in the center of this whole story, and everyone said, well, how is it possible to illegally take yanukovych's money, well, how is it possible to illegally take yanukovych's money, and there was also all this hysteria all the time, and we all the time understood who needed it, and i, even you i will honestly say, well , of course, for the russians it would be... we need to have as few people as possible who could oppose them in this situation. for me, this is an obvious thing, and for me, an obvious thing is the infiltration of ukrainian structures by any people who feel this way, because we must remember that the russians have been actively working here for years, if not decades, next to us, many people who were here next to us, literally, in the parliament, in various ministries, wherever , took their bags one fine

day. first in the 14th year, and then in the 24th, 22nd, i apologize, and everyone went somewhere, not somewhere, in a known direction, and the question arises, these went once, these went, who, they all went, exactly , no one left, you know this is also a huge question that i always ask myself, what is the number of undercover agents of the russian special services, specially created in order to reveal themselves at a certain critical moment, which exists next to us, this. not a conspiracy, this is just the usual work of professionals, ugh, so this should be taken seriously so that we are not left, you know, without anything, well, a little near east, where would we go without it, literally today, no, it happened yesterday. emmanuel macron said that the recognition of a palestinian state is not a taboo for paris. he noted that france can make unilateral decisions if efforts are aimed at solving the problem by the two-state principle will not advance

through. opposition to israel, that 's the kind of publication that a politician is making now, and in general, it would seem that emmanuel macron did not say anything special, because the creation of a palestinian state is something that was agreed upon back in the middle of the 20th century, since the year 48, so only the format somehow never got formatted, excuse the taftology, and the palestinian state remained to exist solely on paper. the whole point is that now many have. western politicians, not only macron, first of all the president of the united states, joseph biden, have serious complaints about israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu 's war in the middle east at all, they think he should be more careful, they think he should think more about releasing hostages, about the end of the war, netanyahu has an absolutely clear view that israel must destroy hamas, that they can no longer coexist with hamas, and these are

contradictions not only between them. biden, netanyahu and macron, or we can say between israeli society and the west, it exists objectively, this is a contradiction, and by the way, it reminds us to a certain extent, because we want to achieve a maximalist result, we want to reach the border of 1991, we consider it a victory, i consider it a victory, you you consider it a victory, everyone considers it a victory, as far as it can be achieved easily exactly like this and what will happen next, we will end the war, russia will collapse, but... this is our wish, we do not know what will happen next if our army will go to the border in 1991, however, we just talked with mr. chal, it doesn't look that simple, from the point of view of our participation in security organizations and so on, and now the next question, and israel knows israel, what will happen, if, then, what kind of forces are needed to actually destroy hamas, while because hamas has a huge electoral base, well, in the gas sector, it is a support base for terrorist organizations.