81, no, 0800-211-382. all calls to these numbers are free, vote at the end of the program, we will sum up the results of this vote. i would like to introduce today's guest of our studio, this is volodymyr fesenko, political scientist, chairman of the board of the penta center for applied political research. mr. volodymyr, i congratulate you, thank you for being with us today. good evening, i greet you. and maksym rozumny, political expert, doctor of political sciences. mr. maksym, i congratulate you, thank you for joining us. ether, good evening, so gentlemen, since we are asking of our television viewers about whether they watched the televised debates, it is probably unnecessary to ask you, since you obviously followed these televised debates, and it is clear that from these televised debates it is clear with what positions and in what condition the candidates for the presidency of the united states of america enter the pre-election, in an active election campaign. how do you perceive these

tv debates, who won them, who lost them, whether it was a draw, whether you liked someone more, or someone you didn't like more, let's start with mr. maksym, thank you, i think that actually these these are two different, two different opinions can be, who liked more and who won this debate, as to who won? in the debate, i 'm still more inclined to be guided by the opinion of the american expert environment, the media environment, and if they say that camila harris won, then i guess that's the way it is, and i guess there are certain reasons behind it, eh , although in this case i was rather disappointed by donald trump. than

i liked it compared to previous performances, well, it can be seen that he has, so to speak, run out of stock of ideas, stock of techniques rhetorical as well, the energy has faded a little, well, in this sense, he is not very convincing, as he looked to me at these debates, and maybe that's why haris got the advantage, she didn't say anything either. extraordinary, in my opinion, she does not look like the leader of the nation, who leads the nation in some understandable and for everyone acceptable and desirable direction, but, well, like in a boxing match by points, she most likely won. thank you, mr. maksym, mr. volodymyr, it is clear that the next president will be chosen by the americans, and it is clear that it is obvious the sociology that is already there... is carried out

by television companies, in particular cnn says this in favor of kamala harris, but it must be admitted that she behaved decently in the debate with trump and looks, looked more prepared, trump may have wanted to play more skillfully and on the fact that he was once the president of the united states of america, and apparently he also did not expect these, such... questions, double questions, when she simply drove him into a corner. how do you assess the preparation, firstly, for televised debates, and secondly, the possibilities for further ones debate, even in absentia, between trump and harris. well, they will have to debate in absentia. there are still almost two months of the election campaign ahead, and the struggle is only approaching its climax. eh, but it is telling that already after

this debate, trump said that he did not see the point in further debate in the direct debate, but this indirectly shows that he himself admits, he lost this debate, although he said that he looked brilliant and so on, but in fact it is an admission that he has lost. that's what interests these debates, not even that political theses and programs, e, in particular. not the position on ukraine, because well, we saw and heard from both of them what we knew, nothing fundamentally new, in particular on ukraine, and they did not say on most other issues, but it was interesting to see who dominates, behind whom the initiative, the initiative was behind kamala harris, so you showed, yes, she was the first to approach trump, during the debate, offensive tactics, so you asked. about

the preparation, well, it is very noticeable that both kamala harris and her team were better prepared for this debate. i agree with my colleague that it is possible trump, you know how it is... happens often in sports, in particular, a more experienced participant, he, well, may think that he will win in class, but with experience, here the situation is different, that is, motivation, concentration, initiative, confidence, no self-confidence and arrogance, as is very often the case with trump, although now i also agree that trump may not have had enough energy, but in... and for me , in fact, kamala harris won not from the point of view of rational argumentation or her programmatic theses, because there are two camps here, who, let's say, support specific political positions, even personalities, but

the competition for those who waver takes place at these debates, and here kamala harist demonstrated, she is energetic, powerful. she knows how to attack, she knows how to corner an opponent like trump, an aggressive opponent. and also, you know, one of the immediate reactions on social media is the expressions on kamala harris's face when she hears trump when she 's speaking. that's the face language of kamala harris, let's say, won, kamala harris won in this her opponent, no wonder, from the point of view of emotions, from the point of view of offensive initiative, kamala harris played on trump's field and won on this field, the initiative is behind her, in particular, and in this debate, well,

today i consider successful for kamala harris not only from the point of view of the formal, the formal results of this debate, you quoted the data of the cnn poll, but in addition to this... one more news: taylor swift, currently the most popular singer in the united states, publicly supported kamala harris, this is another one of her victory, and that means that as in august, when the nomination of kamala harris took place, and now after this debate, and in fact it was such a turning point of the election campaign, a very important bridgehead that had to be overcome and captured, so here it is... the initiative for kamala harris, and this is at the moment , this is her advantage. let's see how it will affect the ratings already, actually the electoral ratings, in particular in those states that are swinging, here i think the fight will go on until the last day, but from the point of view of the logic of the campaign, today

kamala harris demonstrated that the initiative behind her, you mentioned taylor swift, i will explain to our viewers. that taylor swift is a popular american singer and she has always supported the democrats, just today she came out in support of kamala haris because it happened well literally a few hours after the televsion between kamala and donald took place taylor swift wrote on instagram. i believe we can achieve much more in this country if we are led. not chaos, the singer noted, she signed her post "childless cat lady". yes, the vice president trump's jail jaydee vance called out women who don't have children and who, he said, usually vote for democrats. well, that is , she trolled vance, but it must be said that

she has an audience of 283 million followers on instagram, of course it is not all americans, well , i mean followers from all over the world, but a lot. of americans subscribed to taylor swift, mr. maxim, do you think this public support of a popular american singer, can it influence the electoral behavior of americans and help kamala haris and add her to the election campaign? i think it will definitely help. because today the actual content of the debates and the content of the political discourse, american and not only american, shows that the political struggle, it is no longer so much between

some clear ideologies, clear programs, all of this is changing, all of this is mixed in different proportions and... so to speak, ratios, we remember that earlier the republicans were such hawks of american politics, they were the most. set against the enemies of america, against the axis of evil, so to speak, and today they actually play there in the person of trump , they play with russia, well, less with china, but they allow, so to speak, such coexistence with their traditional enemies, why i i say this because in fact today the main confrontation lies. in the plane of er worldview, culture, er,

lifestyle, if you like, and these are such criteria and indicators that are very important for people who will come to er come to vote, in to tell america that they will come to the polls, this metaphor will not be very accurate, so people vote, feeling who is theirs. then a stranger, and these public people are like taylor swift or others there, i saw, for example, very often use memes, uh, uh, there's ronaldo and messi, yes, who, who for who, who for israel , who is for palestine, who is for ukraine, who is for russia, er, that is, people vote, orient themselves in the political space on the basis of some... illogical from the point of view of political science, perhaps indicators and triggers

hooks, but it is clear that political technologists have to take this into account and most likely take very well into account, we remember the year 2016, this whole story with big data and cambridge analytics, when they calculated, so to speak, the preferences of voters. right down to the color of the cat's fur and so on, in order to accurately convey the message of a politician and appeal to his side of the voter, i think that taylor swift in this line is such a very strong argument. whoever wins the presidential election in the united states of america, obviously the winner will have to deal with a plan to win, that president zelenskyi is currently preparing, and... that the president of ukraine will meet with the president of the united states of america,

today, however, such double information appeared, well, a double reading of what antony blinken said while in kyiv, since the secretary of state of the united of america said that on friday, september 13 , our leaders will meet in washington, then, of course, the ukrainian truth, for example, submitted that on september 13, they will meet... biden and zelensky, and then it was clarified that we were talking about the british prime minister and the president of the united states of america, but there is a victory plan, and today volodymyr zelenskyi spoke about the victory plan on the crimean platform, and he said that this plan involves strengthening ukraine and will have a psychological and political influence on the decisions of russia end the war let's listen to what zelensky said. what is this plan for, it is a plan to strengthen, seriously strengthen ukraine, and in

my opinion, it will have, by the way, both psychological and political and different types of influence on decisions regarding the armed forces russia to end this war, this plan. must have been presented to the second peace summit in order to force russia to end the war diplomatically, if the partners support him, he will make it easier for ukraine, it will definitely make it easier for ukraine to force russia to end the war. mr. volodymyr, i do not know if you have seen the draft of this plan. victory, maybe, maybe you've been involved in the discussion of what

a victory plan should be, but is there a point in that victory plan about ranged weapons, the use of long-range weapons on the territory of the russian federation, because i understand that a russian, the russian federation has already crowed today that this decision was taken by the united states of america, great britain, and obviously, i do not rule it out that... september 13 is that the decision will be announced after the meeting between the presidents of the united states of america and great britain, how this decision will affect this victory plan, because... it is so fundamental and will have consequences not only for the russian-ukrainian war, but also the future of the russian federation, because we are talking about 300 km deep into the russian federation and about infrastructural facilities, which russia will, of course , lose. well, first of all, i would like to note that i have not

seen any draft of this document, the degree of my proximity to the bank has significantly decreased. yes, sometimes they turn to me, of course, but this is not the situation, i think that a group of people worked on this plan, on these proposals, i think that there are from the national security and defense council, from the special services, law enforcement agencies, definitely from the office of the president, and well, this plan definitely now in secret, but some points of this plan... it is possible to predict, well, at any rate , certain directions, certain specific proposals, because the plan will be, i think, our proposals , it is not our plan of military actions, it is our proposal, what should be done to our partners, first of all the united states, in order to help us force russia to negotiate, the goal is precisely this, not just

how to liberate all the occupied territories, i think that now, unfortunately, the situation is a little different. namely, what must be done in order to force russia to sit down at the table negotiations, without ultimatums, without any demands on us, and to gradually force the end of the war against ukraine, although the question is under what conditions, this will be the biggest drama in the future, so here is the clause on allowing or lifting restrictions on the use of western long-range weapons . for strikes on russian territory, on military facilities on that territory, infrastructure facilities, i think one of the key ones, certainly not only that, i think there are other proposals, in particular, on economic pressure on russia, and it not only about sanctions, it is also about i think, there are specific proposals regarding the russian tanker fleet, the price tanker fleet,

in general, how to act in such a way as to reduce russia's income from oil, this is one of the key points in nuclear energy, also an old topic, of course coordination of diplomatic actions, pressure on russia to force it to negotiate, and i think that tactics and possible specific proposals for interaction with those countries that are at least partially russia's partners, in particular, are important here. there will already be a summit in october brics and it is very noticeable now that some of the participating members of brics, in particular india, to some extent china, have stepped up their peacekeeping plan, let's see what happens next, so i think that this plan, well, it should not be

perceived, you know, as something so magical that it will allow us to end the war quickly, i... i fully suppose that some ideas may be accepted, some may not, but what is the point of these proposals, it is connected primarily with the fact that today in the usa a very spicy situation, in the law on military aid to ukraine, which was adopted in april, there was a clause, which was included by congressmen-republicans, that biden should present a strategy, a strategy for the victory of ukraine over russia, for. with what help, and there is no such strategy yet, but the other day there was information that supposedly the white house did present some proposals, we don't know what exactly, but one way or another, i think that this topic itself, it will now be the subject, in particular, of the pre-election struggle between democrats and republicans, and ukraine, presenting its proposals, its

vision of what the usa can do for ukraine, we, we... indirectly and sufficiently, let's say so, delicately, evenly, try to influence these american debates, and accordingly, the question of how the further strategy of helping ukraine will be decided , i believe that this is the right step, we should not expect any concrete results right away, but after the removal of restrictions on long-range weapons, i think that it is possible that there will be a result in the near future, but... it may be step-by-step, in particular, well, if the meeting with the british prime minister, then i do not i rule out that at first there may be permission to use british weapons, british missiles for attacks on russian. territories, but the issue of attacks may be resolved already when our president meets the president of the united states, this is already the second half, the second half of september, so

it will be done step by step, and it may not be used in full, but also with certain restrictions , but the main thing is that certain red lines will, if not canceled, move significantly and ukraine will have more opportunities to attack. military facilities on territory of russia. thank you, mr. volodymyr, president zelensky, during the presentation of the new head of the ministry of foreign affairs of ukraine, andriy sebig, said that ukraine needs a second peace summit this year. let's listen to what zelensky said. this means the maximum involvement of the world in the implementation of the peace formula and the maximum strengthening of our positions to make the process of peace restoration real and just. team. the ministry of foreign affairs of ukraine, the entire government team, the team of the president's office, our parliamentary diplomats,

everyone who is involved in this work on at the public level, everyone should understand that peace for ukraine and a just end to the war is not just a historical mission, but a daily and very painstaking work. mr. maksym, in... the last year , zelenskyi's team created two plans: there was a peace plan and a victory plan, that is, the peace plan is 10 points out of three of the 10 that were considered in switzerland at the first peace summit, seven points were left out, maybe they will move on to the second peace summit, but now there is a plan for victory, in what the cardinal difference in your opinion can be between the peace plan. and a plan of victory. yes, this is just a very interesting question, and i also paid attention to the fact that such, you know, a certain juggling is taking place,

and it is difficult to understand, in different contexts, where is the plan for peace, and where is the plan for victory. if we talk, perhaps, about some such pragmatics of the process, then i would draw attention to the fact that... the peace plan, which provided for 10 steps and was the basis of the first peace summit, obviously did not satisfy the russian side, which is not ready was at all to participate in its discussion, and since very persistently there is a thesis that the russian side should be represented at the second summit, then it is obvious that there should be... some other plan, or an agenda, regarding which there would be no russian side, well, such a categorical objection, but it is difficult

to assume that such a basis can be the plan of ukrainian victory, er, therefore, from this, so to speak, difficult situation, it seems to me that there are two ways out: first, well, two guesses, i would rather say so, we are still they did not see what this plan consisted of, whether it was peace or something victory, but you can imagine the following two hypotheses, two versions: the first version is what the ukrainian side has developed, well, let's call it that, a more realistic, or the most realistic way to end the war. which will be presented to our western partners as a testimony, so to speak, of such a constructive configuration of ukraine, and we

understand that coercion for peace now goes both ways, that is, they coerce russia and coerce ukraine by different methods, different sides, but they are trying to certain ones, so to speak a concession, if it is about such a plan that would look realistic enough. thing, which included certain steps, certain decision options and so on, this is one way, another way that can be guessed or predicted by this formula, this is the plan for the victory of ukraine, that is, the plan according to which russia will be finally defeated, and putin's regime will be overthrown and so on. and in the event that such a plan exists, if it is sufficiently realistic , then the russian side will see this plan,

understand that it is necessary to surrender, well, you know how grandmasters, when they sit down and count each other's steps, each other's moves, and one of them understands that one way or another, but he doesn't care, and then he gives up and already, so to speak, agrees to the terms that are offered to him, well, i understand, we don't have long to wait, the second summit is coming soon, not even faster, even closer in time, this meeting of representatives of ukraine with ours. partners who have to present this plan, and we will find out which version is closer to the truth. well, today the crimean platform took place, zelenskyy called on the crimean platform participants to work more actively on the implementation of the peace formula, the victory plan, and this is the peace formula, in order to prevent the freezing of the war in ukraine. let's listen to what the president of ukraine said: thousands of crimean tatars were forcibly

evicted from their homes. homes, thousands died somewhere on this terrible long road, somewhere in foreign lands, and they were uprooted from their native land, but this root grew in the hearts of their descendants, in each of us, and we stand here today to emphasize to the world, crimea is ukraine, crimea is our home, and we are we have to move forward until... the foreigners do not leave our house, we need your votes very much, in particular, to oppose the evil that russia is committing against the crimean tatar people, and we call on the countries that are working on the implementation of the peace formula, and it is close hundreds of countries from all parts of the world, convince your partners who have so far refrained from

working with us, convince... them that real peace must have no alternatives, no frozen occupations, no people left in captivity, no forgotten and because of that supposedly forgiven by the world repressions mr. volodymyr, volodymyr zelenskyy spoke to our western partners, and it is clear that what he said was perceived in the audience, correctly and obviously. in terms of content, it was also close to our partners, but we are constantly talking, and the head of state says that obviously the russians, representatives of the russian federation should come to the second peace summit and take part in the second peace summit, and this is also what our western partners want and not only western partners, considering what

putin and shoigu... and lavrov are saying ultimatum that they are not ready for any options other than putin's capitulation plan, because this putin's capitulation plan actually is, it was voiced by him in july 2024, under which conditions russia can sit at the table of transitions or at the table of meetings regarding the future of russian. well, i will start by saying that i will react to what my colleague said, i am far from sure that the peace summit will take place already this year, yes, president zelensky wants and sets such a task, in particular, to the new ministry of foreign affairs, so that the peace summit happened already in the near future, but it seems the tasks were in the preparation of the first peace summit, it was planned for last fall. then

until the end of the year, in the end it was only held in june of this year, we still don't even know the country where this summit will take place, it's firstly, secondly, the summit is not peace talks, i just can't imagine what kind of negotiations are there, when there are dozens of world leaders speaking publicly, these are not negotiations, at best a peace summit, if it takes place, a second peace summit, this is pressure, diplomatic pressure on russia, pressure a significant part of the international notes, and perhaps a public meeting before the negotiations, i have little faith, in general i consider it extremely unlikely that russia will take part in this summit, the invitation may be and it sounds publicly, but for russia this is an unacceptable format, by the way, peace formulas are not the plan is a set of principles, i believe it is our strategic position, it is not about negotiations with russia, there are

half of the points... absolutely unacceptable for russia and