of all these people who left the government, some of them can only think that they will start a political career, but as a rule, this never happens with former ministers in our conditions, on the contrary, even politicians after they become ministers, cease to be politicians, and after that their rating is zero, well, within the margin of error, and if it is a manager, well, will someone move to a state company or not. private will be consulted, someone will be there, maybe an ambassador somewhere, because we even have diplomatic work now the transformed bruise is real, someone else will be someone else, it does not matter, that is, these people, when they are in the ministerial offices, they think about everything, but not about their political future, and i repeat once again, think about the political future , it means thinking about people, not thinking about your political future. is to think about one

person, about volodymyr zelenskyi, which means that the citizens of ukraine should decide for themselves who their ministers should think about, about them or about zelenskyi, if i were now minister of any affairs, from interior to foreign, why should i think about the citizens who will not vote for me, i am not a politician, i was invited to work for the president, if i do something that he does not like, my job will be blocked , i may be removed from office, my department will suffer, so of course i have to... do everything possible and impossible to please this person, and that is why these people, they write, they speak, andriy sibiga clearly said, that working in the office of the president of ukraine is the best time of his life, for of a person who becomes the minister of foreign affairs of ukraine, these are very important and necessary words in order to continue a career in these circumstances, so it is possible soviet words, or when... andriy melnyk, former

german ambassador and current ambassador to brazil, calls zelenskyi the best diplomat almost there of the 21st century in a public interview. this is absolutely soviet behavior of officials. i saw this only at the congresses of the communist party, when all interviews began with the words, what a genius leonid brezhnev is. but again, i absolutely do not blame either sibiza, or melnyk, or any other ukrainian officials, because... they exist in a system where they depend solely on the approval of one person, they no longer depend on the ukrainian people at all , the ukrainian people have no influence on their further political career, but they are officials, they need to work along the line, they need to work in embassies, be ministers, implement some of their ideas about how the ministry or embassy should work, without the approval of one single person, the president. ukraine and those

managers who serve this person, as he himself says, it is impossible to do anything in the country, this is such a vertical of power, this is a super-presidential republic since 2019, which after 2022 got rid of another important regulator, which, after all, was there, which could at critical moments, to replace the absence of politics, this is public control, because people understand that it is not necessary to respond harshly to certain actions of the authorities, because it can be so. end in failure of the state and be on the hand of russia, well and and i apologize for parliamentary control, whatever it was, they also got rid of it, because at least they came and there was an hour of questions to the government, at least the ministers sometimes reported, that is also correct, but this was also a fiction, listen, if people voted for ministers whose surnames they learned at the time of voting, you say, they did not report, but in the 19th year they voted for the government, they are people, whose surnames no one knows. .. of the voters who

voted for them, i did not know, they voted for ministers whose names they didn't know at the time of the vote, ugh, why control those you don't know, i'm sorry if you marry someone you don't know and never see that person again, even if they are considered your wife, how will you control her and what report do you want to hear at the time of the divorce, andrei, if there was no connection between you, i, moreover, i think that some of the people's deputies do not even know the names of those whom they they also fired someone... not a reason, but a custom, yes, let's be frank, of course it sounds like that, but the main thing is that the president knows the surname, in this system it is important that the president knows the surname, because this is the instrument of power, well, unfortunately, we have what we have, and this is how the reshuffle took place we have , if you can call it, a reshuffle in the government, and we have a short break and...

we will come back to you directly in two minutes, don't switch. an unusual look. good health ladies and gentlemen, my name is mykola veresin, sharp presentation of facts and competent thoughts, for example, if mykola veresin had done so, he would have gone to prison, a special view on the events in ukraine, so it is not necessary to say that the fish rots from the head, no, not from the head, and beyond its borders, who then for china, my heart hurts, all this in the information marathon with mykola veresny, saturday 17:10, sunday 18:15 at espresso. events that are happening right now and affect our lives, of course, the news feed reports about them, but it is not enough to know what is happening, you need to understand it. antin borkovskyi and invited guests experts soberly evaluate events, analyze them, modeling our future, every saturday at

1:10 p.m., with a repeat on sunday at 10:10 a.m. studio zahid with anton borkovsky at espresso. saturday political club direct egter, we are back, and now we will talk about other topics that concern, in particular, our country, and of course, of course, europe, of course those political processes that are taking place. in europe and not only in europe, but we will talk about the situation with turkey, yes, with brics, with the possible entry of this countries to brics, well, i think we

will talk about rammstein, yes, about those conclusions, because we somehow did not manage to talk about it in the first part. when we had a security block, however, i think we need to return to this and also talk, because it is important for our country and it is important for us to understand what kind of help we will have for ukraine, what political processes were taking place and are happening there, let's probably start with romshteyn then, yes, mr. vitaly, another thing happened meeting, he arrived there... volodymyr zelensky was there in person, which is also interesting by the way, because as a rule he does not go there, not always the president, or rather not even always, and the president does not go there, this representation is much lower, or the minister of defense , or the minister of foreign affairs or others, or military

leaders, but still, president zelenskyi arrived there, he made a statement, made harsh words about putin, he... actually talked about missiles, about weapons that putin receives from of the world's worst regimes to kill children, and here i am i totally agree and i can't deny it, because it's absolutely true, about ramstein, what are the first results we're seeing now, and anyway, what do you think we can expect after that, will we get more help or... will we finally get enough the number of air defenses, will our international partners, who very often nevertheless slow down in many issues of aid to our country, hear, at least after that, and one more very important thing, after ramstein, the president flew to italy, and

today, if i'm not mistaken, participates there in one of the forums, the economic forum, and we know that italy also has its own position regarding missiles. regarding strikes on the territory of russia. mr. vitaly, please. well, i think the most important thing is why the president even participated in this summit. the fact that this is the first rapstein after the kurdish operation. and in his speech at this meeting, zelenskyy emphasized the kurdish operation. this is in principle an absolutely correct approach. why? because it was the kurdish operation that changed the political character of the war. there are many of us we are talking about how it changed the very security nature of war. we say that in reality it is russia that occupies 27% of the territory of ukraine, and ukraine has taken control of several districts in the kursk region, it cannot be measured territorially, russia's gains, ukraine's gains. and you can agree with this,

but at the same time it is necessary to understand another thing, that ukraine transferred the war to the sovereign territory of the russian federation, that before this kurdish operation, the war could be considered as such. which takes place exclusively on the territory of ukraine, that is, a special military operation russians on our territory. and this is a real war, the russian-ukrainian war, not in words, but in reality. and it was very important to see. how our allies perceive it, and it turned out that they perceive it calmly, because, well, a few months ago, if you and i discussed the possibility of how the invasion of ukrainian troops into the sovereign territory of ukraine would be perceived by the west, we discussed, probably will not like it very much, they will condemn at the word of the judge, they will say that it is absolutely unacceptable, that the war has take place exclusively on the territory of ukraine, that it cannot be spread in... on the territory of russia, in order to fear escalation from the word of the judge, but all this did not

happen, on the contrary, all the leading western leaders said that the war could take place on the territory of russia, because this is exactly the territory from which the aggression against ukraine is carried out, well, maybe with the exception of donald trump, who began to scare with the third world war, but we know that the former american president has a specific position when it comes to russia, and i it seems that we are also in this... we could be convinced more than once, this is one point that is so very important, another point, no less important, is that the western countries calmly accepted the fact that western weapons are used during this operation, they are not began to say that ukraine has its own weapons to be used in this war. no, no, they said, well, yes, it's normal, it's their business, when our weapons go into their service, then they can do whatever they want with... with it, and here, of course, there is a logical the question is why

you can do whatever you want with your military vehicles, but you can’t with missiles, why you can do whatever you want with your military vehicles on the territory of russia, not ukraine, but you can’t do this with missiles, that is a beautiful question, in my opinion, and it seems to me that this is exactly the question heard by everyone who attended ramshtein's meeting, even if it was not clearly expressed. and the fact that there was a meeting between the president of ukraine and the secretary of defense of the united states, lloyd mosciano, is also an important thing, because you see, we're talking about the short -range now, that short-range, it's about september 2024 to march 2025, that's what this administration can do at this time, and i think that president biden once dreamed that... by the end of this term of his can at least be a suspension of wars in ukraine in the middle east. now

it’s not too much to hope for it, maybe, although on the other hand, if we put ourselves in putin’s place, then maybe it would be better for him to agree on an end to the war right now, when there is expected biden in a clear course, and he does not know what to really expect either from trump or from khairis, ugh, but again, in the head of putin, you and i live, fortunately, and in this ... plan, it can be something like this short-term arrangement, what else can this administration allow to force russia into peace, will it allow the use of its long-range weapons? of course, now the americans say no, but i have no doubt that the situation can change, and most importantly, it can change not publicly. of course, it is necessary that the nato allies agree. because the fact that zelenskyi is in italy, talking with prime minister giorgia meleni, with other italian

politicians, it is also important from this point of view that italy is categorically against the use of its weapons for strikes on the territory of russia, and thus there is no unity among leading nato member countries. well, in any case, we can clearly say that the situation is what it is, and what could be seen in ramstein. about the simple fact that the west has in principle agreed to the possibility the use of their weapons on the territory of the russian federation, that all subsequent packages of weapons are discussed taking into account this trend, this is a trend, and no one said that the way the kurdish operation took place, another bryansk or bilhorodsk cannot happen tomorrow, at least the russians are aware of this think, should think, that their borders can be broken through with the help of the present'. their own western equipment, which they very often have nothing to oppose, and accumulate forces on the border

in order to prevent such breakthrough, i believe that this is a very important result of this kurdish operation, which you and i must always remember, is that the russians will now be forced to keep significant forces on the border with ukraine, which they did not keep, who was there in course of the region, what are the soldiers, and now it will be necessary to have a strong army, which should prepare for the next breakthrough, this is an important thing, so in this ... plan, i think that ramstein showed it, showed it, and from the point of view of this in kurdish , showed that ukraine needs new help to stop... the enemy's offensive on in the pokrovsk direction, it is not by chance that just now reports began to appear that the russian advance is slowing down and that they may not capture pokrovsk, but they would very much like to capture pokrovsk, we understand this, and not only from the strategic point of view, but from the point of view economic, because they believe that in this way they will destroy all our metallurgy, if they capture pokrovsk, with

its coking coal, so everything is very simple, if we talk about ... about zelensky's visit to italy, that is, ramstein, then italy, economic forum, meeting, of course with prime minister giorgia meluni, what is ukraine's interest in italy at the moment, and we also see the position of italy, which differs from the position of other states, they say that... no, we do not allow strikes with our weapons on the territory of russia, as far as i understand, in general, that is, we are not even talking about deep strikes, we are talking about the fact that italy generally prohibits the use of its weapons outside the constitutional territory of ukraine. what is the interest of our state there, why is zelenskyi

in italy today, and how can we convince can't we convince italy to change theirs. i think we cannot convince the italians to change their decision, one way or another we have to influence them, influence public opinion. after all, this government will not be around forever. well, george meleni does support ukraine, but her coalition consists of three parties, two of which are known for their long-standing ties to the kremlin. yes, now they have somewhat, i would say, changed their attitude, but we remember very well the story when mazio salvini, giorgi melani's current partner in the coalition, and silvi berlusconi, who to his. headed the party that was led by, and is currently led by, the minister of foreign affairs of italy, alberto tajani, that they were constantly in moscow, they met with putin, with other russian politicians, berlusconi did not hide his good relations with putin even after the beginning of the great russian-ukrainian war, this such a coalition, i would say that we georgi melena is still lucky that she plays the main violin in this coalition, because she won

the election with a much more obvious result than her coalition partners and... therefore, her position of supporting ukraine is absolutely accepted for them, they cannot oppose anything, not even to this position, but to the weight of the party of italian brothers in italian politics, but again, this is italy, where everything can change, where the right can be replaced by the left, and there will be a completely different situation, because as you understand, if the democratic party of italy is ready to support ukraine and no further, then... the movement, five stars, or how many stars there were, or seven stars, i am in favor, i think , that five, yes, because it takes a position on the left spectrum, very similar to the position of the far-right italians, also from the same league, and if

a democratic center-left government is formed, then we will again have a coalition in which... part of the coalition will be for supporting ukraine, and part against , so we need to talk to italian politicians, if we understand that the war is for a long time, and we will need support for a long time, maybe it will be ten years, then one way or another we have to be there and influence this situation, well, that's all, well in any case italy, we must understand that an important partner of ukraine, i.e. with italy , we need to talk and, of course, what to convince, to convince. and demonstrate that we are in no way, despite the position of the italians, so to speak, in opposition to this country and understand, i think, that allowing the use of italian weapons on the territory of ukraine is already a big post, yes, be that as it may, we need more weapons here as well, considering

that the main hostilities are going on here, so that is an absolutely obvious thing. and if we are still talking about italy, then we are included we can also, i think, then talk about france, yes, if we are talking about what is happening, about coalition perpetuations, then these coalition perpetuations are also taking place in france, and these coalition perpetuations are not in favor of the winners, yes, although the winners in principle , as such is not the case... there are no clear winners in the aftermath of the french parliamentary elections, and in the end we are witnessing a stolen victory, or so it claims. why did this happen? but because

french president emmanuel macron appointed a new prime minister of the country and headed it 70 years old 73-year-old michel barnier, the oldest, the oldest prime minister in history. michel barnier himself is a former european commissioner, minister, senator, republican, a supporter of a liberal economy and a strong and influential european union, and mr. michel cannot be called such a leftist, so to speak, of course, he is a supporter of the party, you cannot call it, and therefore, of course , the situation turns out that after... the elections, the early parliamentary elections, in which the rightists from the marie le pen party could have won, the leftists won, and the de facto winner was the state

for now you can call macron. well, again, it's a very risky game. look at what macron is doing. the far-right wins the elections to the european parliament. they occupy an absolutely unprecedented number of french seats in the european parliament. macron. dissolves the national assembly of france, appoints early parliamentary elections, there is no need for this, the parliament could continue to work quietly, and he is holding these elections with the slogan of stopping the far-right, and people who want to stop the far-right in the second round of parliamentary voting vote for the candidates of macron's party and for the left, for the socialists and for the representatives of the recalcitrant france party, which simply remove their candidates. from the second round of elections, which won one anti-ultra-right candidate, an anti-ultra-right candidate, such solidarity, and thanks to this

solidarity, the left and macron's party become the winners of this election, in first place is the left front, popular front, in second place is macron's party, in third place only marin le pen, that's right, even in third place, that's why the left obviously thinks that they now have... the position of prime minister, but the prime minister in france is appointed by the president, the only thing that parliament can do is express to michel barnier , there is no confidence in his government, but now the question arises: of course, the left would like to do this because they feel cheated, but if marine le pen's party, which is far-right and barnier, he is a moderate conservative, expresses no confidence in barnier's government, then obviously on... the next prime minister of france will be a left-wing politician, this does not need to be explained, then macron will be forced to appoint a left-wing politician, and no marine le pen will be able

to express a vote of no confidence in his government, because the left and macronists will support him in the parliament of this government, which means that marine le pen is much better off being neutral towards of this government in order to prevent the left from coming to power, i.e. initially with the left against the far-right, and... now with the support of the far-right against the left. ugh. but here a new question arises. how justified are such actions in general prime minister president macron? for the reason that, as you remember, in macron's political program after the elections to the european parliament, it was to stop the far-right. message, and they were thus demonized in the eyes of public opinion, french, and if the president is going to rely on them now to

keep his government that he appointed stable, then maybe not so terrible marine lippin, who paint, that is, i say again, that this is a big game with a risky sum, because on the one hand macron will really succeed it is more or less comfortable to run the state until the end of its life. you see, the previous prime ministers of france owed their political careers to the president, he appointed people who without him would never have become what they became, in the case of michel barney, the situation is completely different, his political car the era is in no way related to emmanuel macron, even more so. believed that he could even become the next president of france, if the republicans, say, voted for him, and not for, say, those candidates who ran for office at the time

from... their party for the presidency of france after francois hollande's term ended, ugh, ugh, not for fillon, not for sorkazi, but for a figure like barnier. barnier could have been elected president of the french republic, of course, this will never happen, although again , in politics, such a thing can never be said, now barnier is called the french biden, because that is how biden can become president at the age of 77, as we know, jokes jokingly, but this is definitely a person who will not be dependent on the president. which can consider the president as its own political son, not his political mentor, because compared to the premier, macron is a young man, and in this situation we also do not know how it will happen, but in any case it is clear that it will be a government that will continue macron's policy, at least in terms of the situation with the help of ukraine, and here is the fact that , by the way, before the reinstein summit we talked about, macron talked with

zelensky. this was also such an eloquent signal of the continuity of this policy. and in general, if we talk about this appointment politically. we understand that the left, well, if not lost, at least tactically lost now, because they expected their candidate to be prime minister. the right obviously lost because they lost. but it is clear that it opens a new one. political struggle in france, there will be protests, there will be, there is no need here, there is no need to doubt, but i am told that they have already started today, and these protests, well , that is normal, but macron lives with these protests, how long, for france it is is normal and alive, this is not only macron, all his predecessors and all his successors will be to live, but after all, who can ultimately

emerge... the winner after such a curtsy, after such a development of events, the right or the left? the winner so far is macron, who will be the winner, it will already be clear after the results of the presidential elections, when the presidential elections will be held in france after this term of macron, and we will know the names of the winners, that's when we will say whether it was correct macron's policy, if... the result of this policy is the election of a centrist candidate as the new president of france, then we will say that macron all this he carried out the balancing act absolutely appropriately, that is how he succeeded through difficult, i would say, techniques, and very often at the cost of losing some even political reputation, in doing everything possible in order to keep his

legacy and bring him to office. the president of france a person who is his political heir. if a person of left or right political orientation is chosen as the candidate behind the president of france, we will say that it is either ultra-right. it is also possible that macron paved the way to the presidential palace of mélenchon or marine le pen or some another person and one thing must be understood here, there may not be any spanish, no ultra-left. and no far-right candidate can be a completely different turn of events, that is, is the heir whose legacy is macron himself, nobody’s, because he is a centrist, he is a centrist, but by and large those republicans whose representative was michel barnier were also considered centrists before macron , there was simply no such political force that was, let's say, more moderate than the republicans in the fifth republic, and socialists, who were also considered

center-left, they actually... the term of office of françois hollande has shrunk to imperceptible proportions. we must remember that macron's predecessor as president of france was a socialist president, and before him there was a republican president, a golist, one and the other. and only these two forces replaced each other, at the head of the fifth republic, either the republicans or the party that was before the republicans, the golists. michel barnier still remembers the days when the republicans were the main political force in france, now they have several seats in parliament, moreover, they are divided because part of their party decided to support marine le pen. the main force on the right wing is the non-republican national association of marine lipen, on the left a socialist.