barkhatnov's head will be treated in a ukrainian prison, where there is every chance to get rid of the obsessive thoughts that kherson is russia, that the bloody murderers are liberators. it was the program collaborators and i, olena kononenko. if you have information about the kremlin sellers, write to us at this e-mail address or simply on facebook, together we will send all the traitors on the trail of the russian ship. see you in a week on espresso.

donald trump's team proposes freezing the front and ukraine's refusal to join nato. how about such proposals will kyiv react, does ukraine have a plan b. meanwhile, volodymyr zelensky is in a hurry to hold the second peace summit already in november this year. he wants to invite russia there. why, what does it all mean? we are talking today at svoboda live. my name is vlasta lazur. freezing the front line of demilitarization. and kyiv's refusal to join nato. this is probably how the team of us presidential candidate donald trump sees the end of the war in ukraine. in particular, republican vice-presidential candidate jay devens on the sean ryan show podcast voiced a potential the trump administration's approach to ending the war. this approach, he said, could include the creation of a so-called demilitarized zone on ukrainian territory and ukraine's refusal to join nato. therefore wentz did not specify

who exactly should control this demilitarized zone, but said that the current demarcation line will remain, which already means that ukraine, according to this vision, will not return the occupied territories. so, once again, according to trump's partner, the so-called peaceful settlement will involve demarcation at the current front line, establishing this separation between ukraine and russia, and that line, as vance said, will be heavily fortified so that russia can't... be able to attack again, let's listen. russia wants this war to end. europe, which, by the way, did not finance this war while the american taxpayers were very generous to the ukrainians, so the europeans also want this war to end because it raises energy prices, so i think it looks yes. trump sits down and says to the russians, ukrainians, europeans: you guys have to figure out what a peaceful settlement looks like, and... it probably looks like something

like the current demarcation line between russia and ukraine, which is becoming more like a demilitarized zone. it is strongly fortified so that the russians do not invade again. ukraine retains its sovereignty, russia receives a guarantee of neutrality from ukraine. it does not join nato and does not join any allied institutions. and by the way, the germans and other countries have to finance a certain ukrainian reconstruction. here's what i think this one will end up looking like agreement. in fact, this is not the very first more or less such a detailed and public statement by donald trump's team regarding his vision of ending the war in ukraine. previously, trump repeatedly avoided a direct answer about how exactly he sees the end of the war and only repeated his thesis that he would end the war in 24 hours. on the part of the ukrainian authorities, there were no substantive comments on divens's statement, only the adviser to the head of the president's office, mykhailo podolyak, whom we called. on the air, but he

could not come, he called such statements pre-election hype and declared that the position of the candidates, they say, radically changes immediately after the elections. volodymyr joins our broadcast. director of the center for international studies, volodymyr, i am glad to welcome you, good evening, good evening, i greet you, should we consider divens' statement as meaning the vision of the end of the war in ukraine by donald trump and his entire team, his potential administration, if you like , well, on the one hand, they are capable of saying later that they were misheard, misunderstood, or simply one of proposals, one of the ideas, so they can change something there. it is easy and it is not the president who speaks, but the candidate for the position of vice president, we do not know how much it is agreed with trump, but on the other hand, in principle, it follows from the vision of this war and the situation regarding the russian invasion of ukraine by

trump and his entourage , because in principle a lot of things can be recognized here, the willingness to make concessions to russia, the willingness to put pressure on ukraine, misunderstanding even... who is right and who is guilty here, because in the same interview, jed vance also says that this is all not a black-and-white matter, that is, in principle , he refuses to say that russia is to blame, because it is the aggressor, and ukraine is waging a just war, because it defends itself from aggression, and other things, because in principle, why should we refuse nato membership , nato in any way will have the opportunity to decide whether ukraine. has such a right or not, whether to give such a chance to ukraine or not, and america, as one of the countries, the united states, as one of the nato member countries, will also have such an opportunity, if trump is the president and his vice-president is jedi uventz, then they can to block ukraine's chance for membership in

nato in any way, but simply for ukraine to independently undertake such a commitment not to join, this is too much and it is not entirely clear what is being said when it comes to this. allied institutions, other allied institutions, whether it is about the european union, this is probably already too much, not to mention other such details, why exactly germany should restore the ukrainian economy, and why, let's say, not america, by the way, and it is repeated again, people have said it many times, that it is not true that america is bigger supports ukraine than europe, because in principle, if you take it as a whole, then... help from the european union and the countries of the european union, it is greater than from america, so there are simply many lies, many such narratives, you know, simply pro-russian, which pushes me to the point of view of the opinion that i confirm the opinion that i have had for a long time, that unfortunately, the only peace plan that trump

and his entourage have in their heads so far is to put pressure on ukraine so that ukraine agrees to the russian ultimatum, that is, if i understood you correctly, not for you sounds great. on the left, for example , the statement of the representative of the ukrainian office of the president , mykhailo podoliak, he said that, as they say, the words of jeddy divens are only jay divens, it is only pre-election hype, and that if suddenly trump becomes president, and jay divens becomes vice president, then the rhetoric will be completely different , you don't think so, well, i think that politicization is possible, and the reversals are different, in different directions, maybe different sides, because they can change something in their position, and i don't think that... a radical change, ah , it is quite possible that they will refuse something in this plan, there is no plan, so far there is a person who was pushed against the wall and told, come on , tell me what your plan is, because your president is not ready and not able, probably trump will even talk about it, here he will probably

force the public , and here's probably the most important question right now for us and for our audience, did jd vance voice his point of view, did he voice his... did he voice her point of view, did he voice the point of view of donald trump and his entire potential administration, right ? we, we cannot know that he just voiced, he voiced what was in his head at that particular moment, but the fact that he has it in his head, probably all the time, and that he somehow agreed or disagreed with trump in some way, that's sentiment , who exist in this segment of the layer of the republican party, these are people who have long been saying that they are not understood. why should we support ukraine at all, and perhaps russia has the right to defend itself, and that too much money and weapons have been given, that ukraine is corrupt and so on, that ukraine persecutes christians there and so on, this group is political inside

of the republican party led by president trump, which has long been conducting anti-ukrainian hysteria, hysteria, and propaganda, which, in principle, sometimes simply reaches the level of the kremlin, but with mine. ukraine is treated worse than the kremlin. and we also, by the way, jd vance, in this interview he criticized corruption in ukraine, and we will talk about corruption on the air today. scandals, because, unfortunately , this is also the case, but you mentioned the kremlin, do you think you were happy about such a statement by a top republican in the kremlin? i think that in the kremlin is well aware of such sentiments in trump, in his entourage, and therefore they are eagerly waiting for him to come to power, for me the argument is that trump is completely unpredictable, impulsive, he can change his point of view at any time. what a moment, she is not convincing because what we are hearing now from jeddy vance. and the fact that trump refused to tell abc reporters at the debate that he in principle supports

the victory of ukraine, this reflects their view of this war, which they have been holding for all these 2.5 years, even so, and you can to say and recall since 15-16, in principle, a constantly negative situation, trump's attitude or attitude towards ukraine and so on. let's then talk about... about volodymyr zelenskyi's visit to the united states, he has already announced a meeting with joe biden this month, and zelenskyi plans to present his own victory plan at that meeting, on how to end the war with russia. moreover, zelensky said that he wants to present this plan not only to biden, but also to donald trump and kamala harris. is there then is that the point? moreover, does it make sense to do it before the elections? well, why not, i don't know what's in it, but neither do we. we also do not know, we need to show, we need to announce, because the americans and our partners,

there is a point in this, we need to show the vision of ukraine, what should happen next, how we see the nearest stage of the war, what are our greatest needs now in terms of weapons or financial help, and what are our priorities here , what do we have, what are our biggest fears and so on, what exactly do we need help with, because as blinkin said, when came to kyiv that we want to talk. with the ukrainians in order to find out what ukraine wants to do now, what the greatest needs are, and to somehow agree on our strategy, our vision for the further conduct of the war, because lately there have been disagreements from the point of view of how it is seen in kyiv, how in washington sees this, so the main thing here is just to be on the same page and sing from the same note, and in this sense, yes, why not, why not, why not present to zelensky what we need, what we expect from america, the americans will already say then whether it is relevant or not, what they can help with, what they cannot help with, maybe there will be some adjustments. and by the way, just the day before

, the wall street journal wrote that ukraine is being demanded, the partners are demanding a realistic vision of the end of the war, and it is possible that antony blinken, whom you mentioned , and other officials came to kyiv, wanted to find out what the expectations are, and you think that more precisely, you see the mood in washington, the mood is such that... it seems that ukraine now has unrealistic plans for the end of the war? well, i didn't say that, i said that they will see zelensky's victory plan, and then they will look and talk to our team when they come to america and will decide what is realistic here and what is not. i think that from the point of view of the mood in our political leadership, there is also now a lot of realism and an awareness of what is possible and what is impossible, because if, say, zelenskyy just says now, we want... to liberate all the occupied territories of russia by the end of the year , then

everyone will understand both in ukraine and america, that it is hardly possible in principle, unfortunately, that is why i say about this realism, that it is necessary to set some real tasks for the near future, medium-term, long-term, what america can do here to join, and the powerful, well, the current administration, the current administration, maybe the next administration, although of course everything depends on the elections, as you say, because... ukraine can be supported or not supported in a different way if there is a change of power. we are now, we also do not know what the plan is the victory of volodymyr zelenskyi, how it differs from the previous plans there, how it correlates with his peace formula and so on, but we can now assume that this plan will probably include the prospect of using american long-range missiles on targets in russia, what is being said about it now in washington, what about this... still the press, is there a consensus to agree to these missiles to ukraine, because as far as i can see, biden

is not ready for this yet, or at least he is not talking about it publicly, well he is not saying, maybe soon they will say, because they are the last these days there are such hints and such rumors, very established or rumors, that in regard to the fact that after all the decision has been made that the americans will allow the use of their western weapons for such strikes, but can it be such an interim, an interim authorization, that is, a little more, than they... did not allow at the end of spring, whether it will already be such an absolute solid permission to hit anywhere, using any american weapon, as long as there are enough and yes, the radius of action. let's see for this in principle came now, in particular blinkin from lamia to ukraine, and for this we will communicate, in particular, about this today starmer , prime minister of great britain, with president biden, and maybe we will hear some changes in the position officially, or simply they will take place, there will not be, there will be no official statements, but we will just see from the news from

the front line that such permission has been received, but the air welcomes the expectation that washington will be able to. his position on this issue. and why do you think washington has delayed until now? i understand that after all, there were such expectations in ukraine that they would receive this permission earlier, while the armed forces hold territories in the kursk region, just this week counterattacks began there, so it seems that there were hopes of getting this permission earlier. do you understand why washington has delayed until now? well, the reason is the same as before, they are afraid of escalation, that's the main thing, that's the main thing. the fact that they say that these missiles are not enough in the arsenal, that they are not enough, and the fact that they say that it is possible in principle, we will not reach the targets that we need, all of them are strategic, these are also their arguments, but in principle, the main argument, i think that it is the fear of escalation on the part of russia, ugh, and this is not an invented reason, they are really afraid of escalation, yes, absolutely, absolutely

unprofitable, i am, i wonder how it looks to the ukrainian audience, that.. . fear of escalation or something, you know, to a psychiatrist, because maybe to a psychiatrist, but it is and it will be, and trump is playing on it and trump is earning millions of american votes by saying that america is approaching disaster, to a direct confrontation with russia, which will be the third world war, a nuclear war, i i have to prevent this from happening, there is no need to further help the ukrainians and get involved in all this, and every day, probably millions of new americans are getting this opinion in this election. and this should be kept in mind, and the biden presidential administration is now responsible for america, american national interests, so they are making sure that there is no escalation, there is no direct confrontation, so that someone in the kremlin is not really cursed there and no no no a retaliatory strike against targets on nato territory, and then the americans really need something react, then this is not an unpublished, not a far-fetched

reason, this is really a serious fear of escalation, whether it is justified or not, and whether we see from... enough examples that russia, on the contrary, retreats when it has such a tough and decisive position against itself. we see a lot of this, yes, that is why we say that, in principle, our experience shows that there will be no escalation, that on the contrary, russia will retreat, if we show weakness and do not give ukraine permission, then, by the way, they escalate, as they did last week, they hit our cities with their rockets and drones, we are trying to convince the american administration, not only us, american experts. the american congress, that they are making a mistake, that they do not give such permission, but they have their own considerations, and it is not only there in sullivan or in biden, that there is an administration that really, as an absolute imperative, must not allow for any - the price of a direct military conflict between america and russia. i will only say that indeed in ukraine, when there are talks about escalation, when

these theses are voiced, it causes many there is laughter, jokes, memes, and... they rather perceive this reason as far-fetched, and not serious, you say that there is a serious fear of escalation, absolutely, escalation is a serious concept, and which, well, you can even say that, it may sound elitist, but it is a very complex concept, and not even all my colleagues , international experts, understand it perfectly , not to mention such a broad public opinion, i have one last question, we started with you from the fact that... they commented on jadi divens' statement, and so on after he voiced these narratives about freezing the front, about ukraine refusing to join, from joining nato, do you think there is anything else kyiv can do and change the republicans' point of view, if such a point of view really took root in in their

circles, well, if it has already taken root, then harm, that you can do something, although you can work with them like this, you can convey to... they have the idea that if this war is lost for them, russia will win, then it will be the problem for them is reputational, after all, in the future, and they will always go down in history as people who attacked a willingly large pro-american country and an american ally, and then what biden did and what they accuse him of when he left afghanistan will be a small thing compared to what they are going to do with ukraine, we can talk about it, we can talk about the fact that if some such agreement is signed and so-called and... there will be pressure on ukraine, then trump will be written down not as a great outstanding diplomat, but rather , again, as a person , which showed america's weakness in the world and america will cease to be counted, in principle in world affairs, that is, you can... talk about different things here and try to communicate with them, find some arguments, i understand that our leadership politically does this, builds such bridges and channels of communication with

representatives of the trump camp, but still they have such well-established anti-ukrainian positions or, in the best case, simply ignore the future of ukraine. thank you very much, volodymyr dubovyk, director of the international center research, we talked about that. to what extent various political forces in the united states are ready to continue to support ukraine and, in particular , discussed the statements of donald trump's closest ally. thank you very much. so, donald trump's ally, jace divens outlined his vision of ending the war in ukraine, freezing hostilities, let me remind you, and refusing to join nato. how can kyiv respond to this? well, let's imagine, for now very theoretically, that donald trump really becomes president and voices the same vision. which then. plan b is in ukraine, given that it is now extremely dependent on partners, especially the united states. and here is the second point, as volodymyr zelenskyi said today, ukraine is actively preparing for

the next peace summit, which, according to the president, should take place already in november this year, and according to him, russia will be invited to the summit. now we will talk about what it all means . yelyzaveta yasko, a people's deputy from the servant of the people faction and a representative of the verkhovna rada committee on foreign policy, joins the broadcast. i congratulate you, good evening, good evening, what would you say to trump's partner now in response to his proposal to freeze the front and abandon nato, to be honest, you have to answer very harshly and say that we hope that soon it will finally be in america there will be elections, they will end, and we will finally not hear speculations on the topic of ukraine, when people die in ukraine every day, i don't want to hear what... or a democrat telling what, where, how to freeze, without talking at all about that the price of life we ​​pay every day i am convinced, in fact, that vance

does not reflect the opinion of the majority of republicans, he tries to play on populism, on such radical rhetoric, because it brings him popularity, and it is no secret that he has expressed his views and his statements several times... changed, i do not believe that if it suddenly happens that trump becomes president, that vance's position will form the basis of the american position on ukraine. why are you so, why are you sure of this, why do you not admit that this is possible and is the vision of trump, which was simply voiced by vance. trump more than once already, especially in recent days, including at debates. directly or indirectly said that he did not discuss all issues with vance and that this was vance's position, that he had a different position, but that he would work. trump also

reflects american interests, er, the ideas of america, a strong america, including from the foreign policy of the political side. and i am convinced that simply giving ukraine something to freeze will not help. here's a trump victory map that someone can for him to imagine that this will be his scenario, i believe that the support of the united states of ukraine will continue, both with the option of trump's victory and with the victory of haris. elizabeth, what is your belief based on, is it your personal feelings, is it possible that at the level of parliamentary diplomacy you will receive some signals from the united states that will allow you. draw such conclusions, i do have a number of contacts with republicans and with democrats, including with various people

who represent the team of the two candidates in presidents, i see that both of them are interested in maximum contacts with ukraine, they talk about the need to support ukraine militarily, well, in fact , there are only a few left now. such people as vance, who continue their populist, such populist rhetoric, well, unfortunately, i have not communicated with people like him, because they are not communicating with ukraine now, they are trying to avoid such contacts, but we we are doing everything possible so that ukraine's position is presented on various platforms, including those that we are not very comfortable where such people as wentz will be present. donald trump's inner circle avoids, if i understand correctly, contacts with ukraine now? no, this is not true, on the contrary, and now, for example,

he is in ukraine,... in the past trump's closest ally pompeo, in the past, in the past, yes, in the past, nevertheless, this is his position, he convinces that and trump has already openly said that if he were the president now, he would not allow such a war in ukraine, that he would do everything to ensure that this war to complete, and that he knows what needs to be done for this, that he supports ukraine, he says so, he wants to... it was not just words, a plan of action. but it seems to me that over the past year, i remember very well how i and my colleagues personally raised this issue at the munich security conference in february to the republican team, and then they sometimes did not tell us the answers. now it is already very open, they say that no, we will support ukraine, then we must continue this and not until and not to do any

conflicts, i hope that... vance will change his mind, because it will be politically beneficial for him. it's interesting, so far vance is openly declaring that ukraine should abandon nato and freeze the war. elizaveta, the president intends to go to washington soon, to present the victory plan there to top officials. please tell me, do you know the details of this plan? the details are not known because the president says that he... promised that this information will remain between him and president biden for the time being, and therefore he cannot present all the details, but we know very well that a peace summit is being planned, the second one, and that we expect that there will be possible mediators, that there will be an international coalition in support of ukraine, and that we hope that maybe russia under this

pressure on... the rest will be ready to speak about something that will be in our ukrainian interests, and you said that you are not aware of this victory plan, that the president is keeping it a secret, it is known only to him and will be known to biden, and don’t you think that’s strange, don’t you think to you, that the president should have first announce this plan to the ukrainian people, or at least to the representatives of the ukrainian people in the parliament, and then go with it to the partners, well then it won't be... it won't be then it's a private plan, you can't talk about it all , no, we know, this is not president volodymyr zelensky's private war? of course not, but certain things that we need from our partners in the form of various aid, military, financial, these things should be discussed with partners, we do not want to make any populist statements especially in front of our ukrainian people, where we all constantly expect that tomorrow...

it will be better, that tomorrow there will be a result, i believe that now, i sincerely hope for this, as a ukrainian woman, now we will not finally promise the ukrainian people, and we will first agree with our partners about specific things, specific assistance and form everything so that we have success at the front, in diplomacy and not only, and finally and finally we will not promise, but now volodymyr zelenskyi said, that ukraine, you already... about it mentioned, is very actively preparing for the peace summit, and according to the president, it should take place already in november of this year. please clarify, how do you understand it, is it to be held before or after the united states election, and is the election on november 5th? i can give my personal opinion, i think it will be, i think it will be after the election, but very soon after the election, when

the results are already known. and how can we plan, we don't even know who will be the president, and that makes no difference, the main thing is that there will already be certainty in the united states and already from understanding what the course will be, you can talk very seriously about very serious things, knowing who will be the president of the united states for years to come. well, in any case, if the elections are held on november 5, then the inauguration will already take place at the beginning of next year, then... the united states will be critically represented by a representative of the democrats, but if it is trump, president zelenskyi will talk openly says that he will meet with trump, and with biden and work with the others, because at the moment it is very important for of ukraine, you can't divide who to work with now, you have to work with two, yes, but according to

him, he... carries this plan not only to joe biden, but also to kamala ha.