haris met with president zelensky a few days before the full-scale invasion. she attended the munich security conference in 2022 and met him there as well. they also had joint meetings later. i will say that this year's speech by garis at the munich security conference is worth re-reading. to me, it fits into the american tradition of supporting the free world, which, as president biden said, goes back to. harry truman and ronald reagan, all presidents except perhaps president trump, followed this strategy and i am sure she will adopt it as well. dear mr. ambassador frith, do you have the feeling that everything in the world is so serious that you can seriously wait for the outbreak of the third world war. how interested is iran in what is called the next site of the third world war. we understand that some

dictatorships, such as the russian one, do not have the opportunity to economically change the rules of the game, they tried to change the rules of the world chessboard with the help of weapons and aggression against ukraine, and they bogged down in war, and accordingly the appearance of fundamentally new additional format sites of death, when we talk about the middle east, it can be in the interest of those players who want to change ... in general the world decision-making system and here we are not talking about some possible new yalta, this is generally about changing the so-called post-yalta world, whether it is good or bad, but we live in it, yes, and when global disturbances begin in general, this can lead to consequences similar to those experienced by the european and world humanity in 1914-1918 during the first world war i do not think that iran

is capable of acquiring the status of a global player, because as long as iran remains within its current political system, a theocracy, the development of its economy will be inhibited, and its industrial and business relations with the outside world will be limited. so iran will limit itself to being in the opposition, supplying weapons and drones to russia, as well as helping russia and... avoiding sanctions. iran will not become a serious global player due to its economic limitations. you mentioned the new one yalta, that is, about the international system. so, the russians, the chinese, and i think the iranians would like to see a world in which there are spheres of dominance. russia would have its own sphere, china would have its own, iran would have its own, and countries like ukraine would fall into the sphere of influence of one or another great power. america, in its years

of wisdom, opposed such arrangements. roosevelt agreed in yalta with stalin, but almost immediately regretted his action. harry truman would not agree to the soviet sphere of domination in europe, nor over poland, not anywhere. therefore, i emphasize that the united states stands for a free and independent ukraine, capable of choosing its friends and its place in the world. russia wants it, and the ukrainians are fine with it. they know that ukraine should belong to russia, that is, to completely rule over it. so, we have a clash of two worldviews. the problem with the russian view of the sphere of domination is the complete lack of stability, because russian domination over poland and ukraine would mean poverty, slavery and subjugation for these countries. the poles would not accept this. ukrainians will not accept this either, and they have every right to do so. the world of empires. and

spheres of influence is not a stable world, it is not a fair world, it is not a prosperous world. the usa, starting with woodrow wilson, strives and not without mistakes, tries to promote the idea of ​​a free world system, a system of rules, a system in which smaller countries are protected from aggression by larger ones. we simply know how it ended for the whole world, that in the united states the constitution of the league was not ratified. nations, nor corresponding changes on the european continent, as a result american policy of isolationism. hitler came to europe 15 years later. well, now hitler in one or another incarnation came much earlier, so we in ukraine are trying to stop him. mr. ambassador frith, at the same time there are other stories about a possible second peace summit. some or other plans are heard, in particular. voiced by former secretary

mike pompeo and so on and so forth, that is , a certain process is underway in the russian federation, for example, they are waiting for the most, of course, the american elections for... which would win trump, and then they would start playing four -eyed, yes, vladimir vladimirovich with donald fridvikhovich and so on, and we are also extremely worried about this in ukraine, this is a negotiating moment, how do you assess it now? it's good that you mentioned mike pompeo's plan, because you've probably come to the conclusion that there are different views within what i would call trump world. trump himself often... advocates for the division of the world like yalta, for the distribution of spheres of influence, where he and putin will simply agree at the expense of such countries like ukraine. however, there are other personalities in trump's world who advocate a more reaganist, so to speak, policy and

greater support for ukraine. michael pompeo's article in the wall street journal, in my opinion, was an attempt to influence trump's world to support ukraine and move towards more. many things i disagree with, and yet let's ask ourselves, is his plan overall a useful and effective approach to ukraine? i will answer that it is quite possible, i repeat that i do not completely agree, but that is not the point, the fact is that mike pompeo is pushing back on supporting ukraine, which makes him closer to the biden administration than he himself would like to admit, but that's fine with me. in trump's world, there are debates about these issues. i think it would be very good if the representatives of the ukrainian government, the polish government and all the governments in europe would address the people in trump's world and try to convince them that ukraine's business is also our

business. the success of ukraine will also mean the success of the united states. so i think you are very pompeo's plan was aptly mentioned. this is not the only one, and yet it is much better than the plan proposed by general keith kellogg, whose starting point is a ceasefire on the current front lines, plus a us promise that ukraine will never join nato. this is undoubtedly a much weaker position, so i think pompeo's starting point is much better. but these are just discussions: trump may or may not win the election, but it's good to see that in the world... some are still advocating, shall we say, a reaganite road map. of course, sanctions are not enough. key history is to force russia to sit down at the negotiating table and change some or other parameters that they constantly escalate, that is, all their

negotiations are reduced to their ultimatums, and this means that they are not ready, and they hope that during this winter they will inflict on our people just indescribable pain and indescribable suffering, and after that, of course, they hope that ukraine will become more compliant, and different signals are coming, when many politicians there say, well, everything depends on the ukrainian people, and when i i hear, i understand that this is to a certain extent pharisaism and cunning, so this history is the history of all civilized humanity, the repulsion of russian aggression with all available possible... resources, but we see that this is not completely successful, i cannot understand how to explain it, yes, because we, in ukraine, now the month of august has started, and we are already living and trying to understand what awaits us this winter. i agree that the democratic free

world should increase economic pressure on russia and increase military aid to ukraine by intensifying the provision of arms. and lifting restrictions on its use. in my opinion, ukraine should be limited in the use of weapons only by the laws of war, which are mandatory for all civilized countries. but there should be no additional restrictions other than that. we should help ukraine and put more pressure on russia. as you said, this could change putin's negotiating calculations. now he is also waiting for the elections in the usa. he can think for himself. that he will be able to negotiate with trump on a better deal for him. we can only assume, but no it is unlikely that he is counting on this. if we increase the pressure on russia, if ukraine continues to successfully defend its territory and inflict heavy losses on the russians, if

ukraine can continue strategic attacks on russian targets and, with the help of air defense, limit the impact of russian strategic attacks. on the ukrainian energy system, then the situation for ukraine may improve. ukraine has never refused negotiations. at the beginning of the summer, she spent quite in... a successful peace summit in switzerland. russia, as you say, is not interested in serious negotiations. it makes demands that are deliberately too categorical to be taken seriously. but everything can change. we in the free world must do what depends on us, and then we will see. i do not rule out any negotiations, but it is certainly not the americans who should tell the ukrainians what and when to do. there is a t-shirt offer. which we talked about with you, well, there was a phrase about a five hundred billion loan lease for ukraine, we

understand that it sounds very convincing, especially in ukraine, there is 500 billion dollars for weapons and so on and so forth, but there are also the realities of the united states, the way you see the situation with the biden lendlease and whatever the situation would be, for example, with... trump's or with some other lendlease, we understand that six months ago we were going through an extremely, extremely terrible situation, because we did not have resources and money for these resources, now the situation has improved, but this is war, war always eats up and burns money. pompeo proposed lendless, in part because that trump and some of his entourage said we should borrow. money, and not to finance its defense just like that. now i think that

supporting ukraine by giving it money for defense and giving it weapons for defense is in american interests. i support that position, but i'd also rather have a loan under the landless brand than have no help at all. so i think that's what mike pompeo is getting at. there is an additional source of support. this is about 300 billion frozen russian dollars assets many europeans oppose the transfer of these funds. therefore, they agreed to use the interest on this amount, which will accrue in 20 years. and this is almost 50 billion dollars to help ukraine, and it is quite solid. this is a really good move. and i think the details are being worked out right now. despite the fact that ukraine currently does not have one. access to the rest of these frozen finances, convinced that the pressure will gradually increase. in the end, i

believe that the support of ukraine from the us and europe will be continued, as it should be, because it's in the interest of freedom, it's in the american interest, and i think it's in the european interest as well. plan b, in any situation there should be a plan b and a plan c. i do not believe that, for example, the president. will become donald trump, but i cannot rule it out, and we understand that our friends on the european continent are also seriously preparing, but we understand that france or germany alone, their willingness to support ukraine will not be enough, because this is a story not even just about money, this is a story about human resources, and very much so wanted to make successful the project that 100 years ago... in 1920 put the bolsheviks literally on the verge of survival,

it is about the polish-ukrainian security alliance, in simple terms, the pact between petliura and pilsutsky, so unfortunately, it was not brought to end, and we understand that it is not even only the political elites who are to blame for this, it was a great fatigue after the first world war, everyone wanted to end the wars as soon as possible, and the polish national democracy also actively implemented its other plan. i believe that polish-ukrainian friendship and union are of crucial importance for the security of both countries, and for europe as a whole. we can go back to the 17th century, when the inability of poland and the zaporizhian sich to cooperate ultimately worked in moscow's favor. poland was and is a faithful and... consistent friend of ukraine. the poles are persistently pushing the american government and the biden administration to provide

aid to ukraine. they do this both publicly and privately. special ambassador of poland to ukraine pavel kowal is a long-time supporter of polish-ukrainian friendship. he has been friends with ukraine for many, many years. and there are many such poles across the political spectrum. there are historical relations between poland and ukraine. question, but you are absolutely right that pilsutski and petliura understood the need for close cooperation between poland and ukraine. this need remains relevant to this day, not only in the name of our own national interests, but also in the interests of european security and the entire free world. that is why i think that this tradition should be remembered and followed. and one last question, dear sir ambassador, do you generally see the light at the end of the tunnel, as they say in ukraine? how

this war will end is unknown, but there is a reasonable prospect of a relative end. of ukraine. if ukraine can hold its territory, limit russian gains to a minimum, and achieve very high losses for russia, this will indicate the potential for success. if ukraine can continue and intensify its strategic attacks on russian military targets, and if it can limit the effectiveness of russian strategic attacks on ukrainian targets, it will also indicate potential. for success ukraine manages to practice successful attacks, especially on russian facilities in crimea. if it can maintain this momentum and if the west gives it the support it needs, there is a reasonable prospect that russia will not be able to continue its war in ukraine. the minister of foreign affairs of poland stated that

in two years russia's potential may decrease, although this is a long time and a difficult prospect. and that's it. that's a potential outcome too, you're asking about the light at the end of the tunnel, yes, it's not an easy road, but it is are there other options? yes, there is. we in the west, the united states and europe, have the opportunity to influence the outcome if we do our job and support ukraine as much as possible. if we put pressure on russia and give ukraine the weapons it needs, it might force it. putin either doesn't want to, or doesn't have the ability to continue the war, it's not for me, as an american, to dictate what ukraine should do, instead, it is the ukrainians who will have to make these decisions. by the way, i believe that the future ukraine should be in nato to prevent russia from agreeing on a ceasefire, and then regrouping its troops and attacking

ukraine again. it is quite possible that ukraine will emerge from this war free and independent. a country, part of greater europe and a member of nato. could russia be defeated in its attempt to conquer ukraine, which could have a profound and beneficial effect on russia itself? so you ask, is there light at the end of the tunnel? i answer: yes, but there is a thorny path ahead. the tunnel is long and difficult, and you, without any experts about it is known however, i see a reasonable prospect of success. thank you very much, mr. ambassador fried, for this extremely important conversation for all of us, i would like to remind our tv viewers that ambassador daniel frith, ex-coordinator of the united states department of state for sanctions policy, an iconic american diplomat, was currently working on espresso. vasyl

zima's big broadcast. my name is vasyl zima, this is a big broadcast on the spresso tv channel, two hours of broadcast. it's time to talk about what was happening outside of ukraine, yuriy dobrecher, two hours to to be aware of economic news, time to talk about money during the war, oleksandr morchivka next to me and sports news, i invite yevhen pastukhov to talk for two hours in the company of favorite presenters, cultural news. our artogladochka is ready to say good evening to the presenters, who to many have already become like children next to me, is ready to talk about the weather for this weekend, as well as distinguished guests of the studio. mustafa dzhemilov, the leader of the crimean tatar people, is in touch with us, mr. mustafa, i congratulate you. good day events of the day in two hours. big ether vasyl zyma, a project for smart and caring people. espresso in the evening. a new

week on espresso, a weekly summary information and analytical program. clear understanding of the key events of the past week, analysis of the causes and consequences of these events from experts, forecasts of the development of the situation for the current week, the opportunity to ask your own questions and join the discussion, spend the final monday evening with us and confidently step into the new week, the new week project with khrystyna yatskiv and andrii smoly every monday at 20:00 at espresso. now the tv channel will be on the air. a member of the russian opposition to emigration, a well-known video blogger, ex-detat of the state duma. glory to ukraine. mark, nice to see you. glory to the heroes, i am happy to welcome all the viewers. congratulations anton. attempt on ilya ponomaryuva. so we understand that the enemy used shakhet this time, well, accordingly, this immediately raises many questions, and perhaps hints at many answers when we talk about the so-called

strange arrivals, and of course, this can apply not only to the current situation, to the near future , well, but in the kremlin in in any case, they added a note of water and do not say anything about it. as for the attempt on ilya ponomarov, that was it. it is quite predictable that among the people whom the kremlin would like to destroy, with the help of russian emigrants, oppositionists, ilya ponomarov occupies an honorable place, and he is not the only one, there are several others, and there is operational information provided by the services that provide the project, which actively are looking for ways to destroy some effective part of russian oppositionists abroad, in relation to a certain number of people, this is known, this it's not a secret, especially since drones have already flown into ilya ponomarov's house in the kyiv region, it's difficult for me that... to say something about the technical side, maybe kyiv region is more difficult to cover with air defense means, kyiv itself is like that, and to prevent strikes on kyiv region, the resources may not be enough, and

the danger is higher there, but ponomarov's address was not a secret, drones, shaheds or gran-2, as they are called, had already flown there, so this is not news, there is something else, as far as i understand, he arrived in kyiv spent the night at home, they could to inform some agency that he is in the house, i know that he was in... in america, and the drone is sent when they want to kill a specific person, and not destroy the building. so, they get some information quickly from some agency, maybe in kyiv. ilya ponomaryov is writing to me just now, so i think that, most likely, such attempts will continue in the future, where possible, at a distance, with the help of drones, and somewhere there will be assassination attempts, some people will be sent. what is important here, it would seem, is why you want to kill him, what is his danger or such themselves? this is a completely wrong assessment, they do not assess from the point of view of concrete dangers arising from a political leader, they need to demonstrate to everyone that this is not what you will do, support ukraine,

promote russian connections, oppose putin as his enemies, spread information about what moscow is producing in ukraine and not only, it needs to be demonstrated, this is the main goal, not a specific danger from an individual, as well as from navalny, as... dangers, especially when he was in prison, was not but he had to be killed, there it was connected with the exchange, there you still need to demonstrate to everyone what will happen to you if you join any activity at any level against the moscow regime, well ukraine is the enemy, ukraine they simply kill, and the russian opposition is the same enemies and the same targets, very important conclusions need to be drawn from this, therefore the defense of ukraine, as i often say among my colleagues. dewy oppositionists, this is the redoubt before your death. it is necessary to defend ukraine, apart from one's ideological attitudes against the war against putin, also due to the fact that

you will be the next, it is very important to understand, that is why the country for the russian opposition, for all those who are against putin, the possibility of its protection is an opportunity to postpone one's death. failure to understand this leads to very sad attempts by some of the russian opposition to play the game imposed by the kremlin that... it is possible to support the military resistance of the russians on the side of ukraine, because it is vlasivshchyna, treason to the motherland, this is a very deceptive, very criminal reference, and people who perceive it early whether they recruit late, it is very important to understand. the parameters of the list, mark and who specifically do you think wanted to demonstrate something with this attempt, yes, because strange murders happen in ukraine, the strange murder of iryna farion, so no one is responsible... the suspect is responsible, but the question of motives is the key story , and when these or other assassinations, political attempts happen, someone has to take this

responsibility, or the second option, maybe, really, if it is the work of the kremlin, then they can simply prepare some kind of wider scenario, i.e. cascading deaths and, accordingly , then an attempt to reformat the same, i don’t know, public discourse, but... or simply adjust it in this way, they have always been engaged in this, adjusting the consequences of the physical elimination of some public elements that interfere and create problems for discourse, yes, it is part of this program, this work, ipso and the rest. many do not understand the connection between these things, for example, the discourse that opposes the negotiation process as such in ukraine, because they have their own considerations. this is the right discus mostly, but not only. it consists in the fact that one cannot stop at the binding conditions of the agreements, at the ultimatums that moscow puts forward. it is now necessary to create the most comfortable situation so that it does not become

decisive for ukraine. thesis in public opinion, that is, if you, for example, put a lot of pressure on the radicals, let's tentatively call them that, from the side of moscow, then this public opinion can be swayed in the right direction. moscow needs negotiations, it needs a cease-fire, a truce, etc., because there are conditions, both external and internal, internal we are not up to we understand, maybe moscow's reserves for the continuation of the war are running out, and it is increasingly difficult to continue fighting, for many reasons, and the number of people who want to go to war has decreased. industry, defense, it is not known how it works, all this is a secret, but what nabibulina, the head of the central security service, says already gives grounds to say that there is a lack of money for the war, there are also external factors, they consist in the fact that moscow cannot for too long to be under increasing sanctions and pressure. in addition, moscow, obeying these factors, strives quick negotiations. and who is against negotiations in ukraine? this is important. in ukraine, these are the right, these are nationally oriented forces, that is,

a majority is needed. some effect, so that the influence of these forces, their radical position has less influence on public opinion. i also believe that negotiations now on the terms put forward by moscow are absolutely unacceptable for ukraine, because they will not end the war, at best they will postpone it, at worst they will prolong it. this is all in my opinion, because if we agree to moscow's conditions, we can talk about this in more detail, then this means not just a concession, but programming and tempting the aggressor to take new actions to occupy the territory. a signal that it is possible, that it works, and from this point of view it is necessary, of course, that people like farion, although i do not think that she was too influential, probably had detractors inside ukraine as well, she scolded the army, especially the russian-speaking part, should shut up, she is not the only one like that, right, how big can this potential black-list be, yes, well, i think,

mark, that... you are also in it taking into account sentence, is there a charge drawn for you, so to speak, how many years are you seven or eight years old, or 13, i was given 11, uh, 11 years for for attorney feigin, yes, i have already been convicted in the first instance, it has been a few weeks , they still don't issue the motivational part of the sentence to my lawyer, it will be very interesting to read it, there are three episodes, it seems, and three interviews where i said that there was genocide in buchi. the russian military killed ukrainians, and i was convicted for that. yes, i am on this list, but i am protected by the french police and my security is as such secured i don't know if a drone can fly to france, i don't know, but from a security point of view, yes, i am on this list, but there are many people on it, i am not the only one. it would be too presumptuous to think that they chose me as their only target. again, i repeat, they do not rate efficiency by the degree of significance,

how much influence a person has. to the russian audience or not, although i have a large channel, i have been known in russia for many years, no, this still requires a demonstration, even a blow to ponomarov's house is also demonstration for the rest, get scared, kneel and do not disturb, let us do what we want, and disappear from the political field altogether. yes, this blacklist contains people in ukraine, it is more difficult to do in ukraine, it is possible only remotely, at the level of drones, although contract killings are also possible. there are specifics here, this is a question for the ukrainian special services, how they work with this, they probably have secrets about this. if this is really the case, then it means that there is a revitalization, that is , the activation of such things indicates something other parallel processes, and you very correctly said that the key story is the kremlin's interest in getting what it wants, yes, in particular in a diplomatic way, but if we talk about

the parameters, the first parameters, yes... the kremlin immediately voiced the story that he does not want and will not communicate with our government, which he considers illegitimate, well whose cow mooed, so to speak, and it is clearly not the kremlin's, but this is one moment, another moment, the situation in the states, we understand, it will be hot in the states and the kremlin hoped that trump would take it power with biden, and after november, accordingly, the kremlin scenario can work in one direction, that is, with the ultimate imposition... on the country of what they say, so to speak, they will want in the kremlin and agree on this matter, perhaps with the trump administration, well i am oversimplifying, but the situation is getting more complicated for the kremlin, and so to speak, the autumn scenario can be put in a certain so-called long drawer, and that is why they are counting on what, for the spring, that is, the energy scenario, shahedis, missiles and a set of measures, so and after...