long-range weapons, that is, there are 300,500 short-range missiles up to 100 km, but we don’t have enough of them, so these are specific goals, i hope they will be achieved, all speeches are public, you will hear, it will be, let’s say, no what the plan is, it will be some additional addition to the peace formula, and a statement that the ukrainian position is based on the same foundations. and then the conclusion that an invitation to nato is needed, so that now the invitation is political, and membership already after the end of the war, that is, in principle, nothing we will not see anything new, in the appendices to such theses there will indeed be specifics in three directions, but if we talk about meetings, well, they will be ordinary meetings, only now the wrapper is like this, it sounds beautiful, and it is right, probably that is why that, for example, the word victory plan in... there are

now all kinds of western media, not that russian, chinese or brazilian, westerners avoid, they are the word victory, they somehow get stuck, in english, in german, in french, etc. i am very surprised, somehow forgotten for these languages, so i hope that at least it will change, and we will speak some one, some one language at the end of this year, but here i emphasize once again, here are the phrases that october, december and we are there, well, the victory plan it's about victory. then this can give people the wrong orientation that that's it, october, december, we will decide everything here, it's just necessary that the partners of the usa do their job first of all, and if they don't do it, and they won't do it, because there a request, well, very ambitious, what then, and then what we were not given partners of help, then the logical conclusion, well, what will we do next, i'm afraid that there is no such technology here, you know, well, it's a conspiracy theory, but people... you can't be driven

into overestimating expectations, by the way, about about expectations and, in general, about a possible plan b in this case, if this victory plan is not accepted, or this victory plan is not fully accepted, or it will be partially accepted, zelensky was asked by a journalist about whether there is a plan b, zelensky answered that ukraine lives in plan b, and never will didn't have a plan a, and that too, to be honest, i didn't like this answer very much, because i perceive it this way, that plan a should have been before the big invasion of russia into ukraine, and the results of this plan there were kind of clear on the 24th, when the great war began, but this is already such a rhetorical question and reflections, but mr. serhiy, allow me, this is very important, the country's defense plan was, moreover,

unlike in the 90s or early 2000s, russia was written there, because the war began in the 14th year, and the plans are all, including, all they know very well, and in the 22nd there were all these plans, another matter is how they were implemented? yes, here, here is a big question for president zelenskyi's team, you mentioned the promises, or shall we say, statements regarding the accession of ukraine. to nato, lemond wrote that, apparently, referring to her sources, that one of the points of zelenskyi’s victory plan is an invitation to nato, the publication claims that the president of ukraine hopes to receive an invitation from biden to the presidential elections in the united states of america, me, honestly saying, these showers or these references to some sources that tell us in the columns of the western press about... the plan for the victory of ukraine

is confusing, because i, as a citizen of ukraine, know about this plan only from what zelensky says publicly, or about , what the western press writes, is it justified that this victory plan was not discussed or explained in the verkhovna rada, for example, ukraine could hold a closed meeting, ukrainians could somehow. to explain, because ukrainians are the main driving force of this victory plan and victory over russia, is there any expediency in this, any secrecy, maybe there are some applications there that cannot be made public, maybe some part could be shown to people and voiced, you are a crisis media manager now and the head of the ukrainian crisis media center , how do you rate this communication? why does it not work, well,

the explanation here can be as follows, in principle, such documents are generally about them... they are not disclosed, as a rule, something appears in the network, some kind of leaks, but yes, yes, to be public, it's something to me resembles an ad a big counteroffensive, unfortunately, which ended in failure for us, so on the one hand, it is understandable until a certain point, but if you have already shared all this with at least the us, i know for sure that in advance, by the way, it happens differently, sometimes situation. when it can and should not be done in advance, it is difficult for me to say here, how it is correct, in my practice there were cases when not, let’s say , not spreading in advance, even among partners, led to our success, yes,

a little bit of a nose twist there that how so it was always different, i will tell you more, to be honest, everything that is translated is not... in a closed office not by the authors themselves in english, everything becomes property, well , let's say it like this, it's good that our partners, this definitely confirms, so , if it's people writing in english themselves, and it's not beyond the scope of a few people who know the language themselves, then it can be kept somehow er secret until he already offers a plan, so it's not a plan, it's not a plan at all, it's ... just a vision now with certain directions that are there the needs, what needs are there in order to, well, this is normal work, it has always been, it’s just that it is packed before the visit in such a package, as usually theses are for discussion with the president of the united states, that is, now it is drawn up in

a certain non-paper, the so-called that is, more of a document, now should we discuss it in ukraine, if, well, first of all, he said that the best forces and experts of ukraine participated in this preparation of the plan, well, who else should be sounded, the best participated, that’s all, but it turned out that way, that the americans talked about what they already received, they had to somehow replace this situation there, tell the spokesman that they saw the elements of the plan, but no, of course they already said, otherwise there is no need to fool everyone, that is , they received, they received, and in this situation the president is uncomfortable, so what? yes, i went to another... country and well, its citizens don't know anything at all, that's why you rightly said, it would be logical, in such conditions, even in the parliament, you can't keep a lot of secrets there, even among those who are potential transmitters of information, because it has already fallen into others

directions, that is why they are also divided there, they are exactly so divided, that is why it was possible to talk in the parliament, really, but in general terms, not without talking about the applications, there are details of the request for... armaments and so on, but they did not do that, they replaced it meeting, as far as i understand , the head of the office with a group of people, it was closed, when there was a meeting there yesterday, and they talked like that, there it was somehow interesting, people were really, i understand, there were satisfied faces, that’s all, but you know, i i was in this club at the time of discussions, it is interesting will talk, exchange. but it ’s too late now, how to propose something, it will be too late, so i think that if this was a serious plan for victory, its preparation and discussion would have been completely different, because if they contained elements that required decisions of the parliament, corresponding decisions of the government, well, then

there would be all these meetings, and this is rather the form of registration of certain public... initiatives, which we will hear very quickly, it will all be announced publicly, simply as a rule, why so? well, we see that the president of ukraine loves, volodymyr zelensky, unlike his predecessors, likes to be the first to give exclusives to foreign media, well, for some reason it is more comfortable, i don't know why he is so comfortable, and foreigners, by the way, there are nuances, because certain interview conditions are also agreed with foreigners. which... ukrainian journalists don't always accept, because they are also part of this, this process here in ukraine, we have our own rules, so, that's why it's only because of using the un platform, the meeting in washington for the first such message , you remember, for example, the formula

peace, it was also voiced, well, in this form in the 20s, not in ukraine, yes, well, that is, by and large, there is nothing catastrophic here. er, it is more important that all this is carried out, that these things come to fruition, and not so that later, when they rushed to look for money for the second half of the year for the army, and there is none, because... for some reason, everyone was waiting for peace in the summer, such things should not be in the plans, and the last thing, i already talked about it, i don't want to repeat myself, but i will say, so briefly, if you don't have a strategy, and we don't have a vision of one, there is asymmetric strategy, strategy of balances, balancing with russia, there are, waiting for changes in russia, different strategies, if you don't know which strategy is the main one, then you can't write realistic plans, i say. you can't write out scenarios, that's why the strategy

must be adopted, well, the correction must be made in today's conditions, taking into account forces, resources, means, external factors, the presence of the same ukrainian missiles, their number, what we receive from partners, availability of european financing in the conditions difficulties in the usa, all this, i am concerned about the mood. many believe that somehow putin will agree to end the war, i don’t understand where they got these arguments from, i don’t have a single signal yet that russia will leave us alone at least in the winter, no, it won’t, and it will continue unfortunately you have already mentioned, mr. valery, the situation with these 6 billion dollars of remaining funds for military support of ukraine. pentagon spokeswoman sabrina singh said that the united states department of defense is working with

congress to ensure that the president's authority to allocate these $6 billion is extended beyond the end of the fiscal year. let's hear what she said. we have every intention of using every dollar and every cent within that authority, but the problem with that... is that we can't provide aid packages without having the necessary weapons in our warehouses, that's something we're also working on, and i will remind you that for six months we had no extra funding, we couldn't replenish our stockpiles, that's why we need congress to extend that authority so that we can continue to provide arms packages, mr. valerius, in light of... the fact that the united states of america has entered the presidential campaign, and understandably so , that now each of

the candidates will play the way that is more convenient for him and the way that is more profitable for him in the current situation, can we expect that the congress will expand these powers, which sabrina sink says, regarding the use of these remaining 6 billion dollars. mrs. singh was giving the answer to the question. ostap yarysh, a journalist of the voice of america in washington, who asked a very direct and precise question, even with a proposal, how to solve it, without congress at all, that is, the answer was, she did not convince me of this answer at all, well, i will start with the fact that zabrinag does not know these nuances due to the nature of her activity, she is still engaged in another profession. so when they wrote her thesis, she said: in fact, the truth is that despite all the nuances there with

the availability of weapons, the approach was that the 6 billion was not used until october 1, the congress is here nothing to do, all this could have been done by the executive branch, moreover, now you can inform the congress and move it all there further, but it is not about the difficulties, they are, they always are, the work of the congress with the executive branch, with the white at home, the state department always continues, they always discuss the nuances, but they will not convince me that these 6 billion could not be used until october 1, it was possible and necessary, why is this happening, the usa is dragging, well, first of all, during the campaign, they did not really want to to emphasize, further they pull, they do not they want them to have no resources left, and to support ukraine, by the way, yes, but... look, i said that for next year there are only all the leftovers, that is, we have no

new solutions, and in these conditions , i will remind you of last year, how it went, they pulled out on these balances at the end, even there the accounting department counted, serious people, auditors, accountants sat down and counted a few billion more, that is, i think that their strategy is wrong now, it may have been basic, right at first, now it's wrong. they understand that it can be, can be other directions, we will have to spend money, we will have to have weapons, they are pulling so that if they wear out putin, yes, him, he still has to show him every time that there are still resources, but resources are now the key word that is actually being discussed, still next year, somehow everyone understands, but what he is doing in the 26th year, no one understands, and putin does not understand what he is doing in the 26th year, that is the paradox that it is possible simply at the stage, when ukraine will get chances, just give up,

give up ukraine, to be honest, here in this one situation, therefore... well, i think it is good that journalists ask direct questions, but i would really like it not to be the president who asked these direct questions to partners, not to pretend, regardless of his surname, the president of ukraine, there is no need to pretend, there is other ways of working, these tasks, such difficult and not very pleasant issues, are solved by the national security adviser, the adviser, well, in our case it is the foreign policy adviser, that is... i don't know why all this, and what in the first we talked about the part, all the applause is there, or the attention is there, and that's all all this current such a working, complex mechanism, everything depends only on the first person, it must be rolled out and told to our partners, i have a very simple solution, well listen, don’t feed us these stories

about your complex mechanism, i will tell you how it's all complicated for us, so what, we chose a solution. they said that the package was allocated, yes, by the way, and ukraine also took part in it, involved its friends, and the congress took part, what right does a person have now to come out and speak, but we did not use it in our country this money, yes, and the congress, everyone, is this your joint decision, this is what i want to ask, that is, now i think that the congress should press and here without names, why did this happen, why there, where in that decision, where was the plan victories, allocation of funds. why there was no corresponding, even public report, why these funds are being used in this way, why ukraine was not given concentrated weapons this year, logistics are difficult, there are not always weapons in warehouses, i understand that, but it’s all the same, i know that our partners, the united states, are doing at most, i have those when are tasked, when they are tasked, they are

the american military, the american national guard, they will pull it all, i know, people who are doing a great job, but they need political decisions, money and political direction, and then the pentagon, intelligence and jdev will do everything, and the americans in this regard, they are very efficient, professional, therefore these are purely political decisions related to the strategy of the united states, no more, no less, i affirm this and can provide arguments. thank you, mr. valery, i would like to remind our viewers that throughout our broadcast we conduct. we we ask you about this, do you take the kremlin's nuclear threats seriously? yes, no, everything is quite simple on youtube, either yes or no, write your own thoughts and comments under the video on youtube, if you watch us on tv, pick up your smartphone or phone and vote for the numbers. if you take the kremlin's nuclear threats seriously, 0800 211

381, not 0800 211 382. all calls to these numbers are available. vote for free, at the end of the program we will sum up the results of this vote. mr. valery, the statement of the minister of foreign affairs was made yesterday of poland radislaw sikorski about crimea, and our closest neighbor says that crimea is symbolic, important for russia and for putin, and for ukraine in... it is important strategically, so he does not see how the two countries can come to an agreement without demilitarizing the peninsula , and he proposes to transfer crimea under a un mandate for 20 years, which sikorsky says: we could transfer crimea under a un mandate to prepare an honest referendum after checking who are legal residents and so on. and we could

put it off for 20 years. in response the ministry of foreign affairs of ukraine stated. on the inadmissibility of compromises regarding the status of crimea and the territorial integrity of ukraine. crimea is the center of gravity of the european security architecture. its full restoration is possible only after the complete de-occupation of the entire territory of ukraine, including the ukrainian peninsula. mr. valery, how do you assess sikorsky's statement, considering that the un is not a powerful organization now, whose mandate will be taken into account. the same russia. let me answer another question that they asked. in fact, you will not find such a statement from the minister of legal affairs of poland in any. public resource, except the media, right? and why? and because it was said at an evening meeting within the framework of one of the forums there. and how to discuss different options. i simply do not

want to make radyslav sekorsky an enemy of the ukrainian people, but i can say that in such discussions, even such respectable people can be wrong. i know, at least, with all his achievements and consistency. i know a case when i was part of this process there, and rosslav sikorsky was wrong, in short, this is his 14th year, the maidan council, he came to press for us to sign an agreement with not us, the people agreed to sign an agreement with yanukovych, and he then convinced that this was the only way out of the crisis, nothing like that, everything did not go as radoslav sykorskyi said, but as we said, it went, so that such people are also wrong, they do not really understand. in our internal subtleties, despite the fact that i have great respect for both him and his wife, that is, i have known them for many years, so do not make him an enemy,

this is the first part, the second, since it has already become a discussion of the essence of the issue after the media, and there is a referendum and everything else, then this is the answer given by the ministry of foreign affairs, well, let's put it this way, russia is also there in its own way, well, this issue does not take off. in no way with any referendums there, you and i know that in principle this is a match for russian positions rather than the ukrainian return of crimea, so there is no need, i think that it should be inflated, why it turned out like that, i will tell you what was it, at first the downpour went, that the president of ukraine volodymyr zelenskyi behaves harshly with the poles, it appears in the polish press, and then suddenly appears, and the representative of poland also thinks the same. at such meetings of ours, that's all, i think, as it arose, this is an emotional information duel, it will end as it is, there will be nothing further, but if

suddenly we hear such a position once again officially from anyone, from radislav syukorsky, from the government of poland, if it is confirmed that they are calling for such a line, then yes, i would answer correctly, diplomatically . it an unacceptable position, it does not lead to anything good, because it is now only grist to the mill of the russians in this situation. well, just as i am talking about the fact that, in fact, crimea remained russian, this is also their position regarding this statement by sikorsky. they also reflected and said that there is no need for us to hold any more referendums there, so... well, so far we have this reaction, another important decision that awaits ukraine, this is the decision to allow our western

partners to strike with long-range weapons on the territory of the russian federation, the past last week, the president of the united states of america , joseph biden, met with the prime minister of great britain, kyrgyz starmer, and before that, the secretary of state of the united states of america and the minister of foreign affairs of great britain were overthrown in ukraine, they participated in the forum, in at several forums that took place in ukraine, there was an expectation that after the meeting between the president of the united states of america and the prime minister of great britain , the position of these two countries would somehow be articulated, regarding the decision or regarding the decision of only stormshedov, that these missiles can fly over the territory of the russian federation. and even gardian wrote about the fact that

great britain has almost already made such a decision. is everything, everything is clear in this story, or is it possible, this decision can be, but it can be articulated publicly already after these missiles fly over the territory of the russian federation. well, i would like to emphasize. still sorry for the fact that we are talking about long-range missiles, in fact these are short-range missiles, such missiles, maybe a little less distance, we had, we simply already used them, such missiles, well, i mean point v, there, the same missiles that were still produced there in small quantities. to a large-scale invasion, that is, these are not new, not new missiles for ukraine, we have the right to use them, moreover, i

think that we really hope ... that we will see in the near future a wider application of ukrainian-made missiles, such a range , i.e. this is a range of 300, 500 and up to 1000 km, this is a short range, i i think that we have lost information, i read all our journalists, even missiles, well, the long-range is correct, it is a comparison, yes, with what we have today, but it is no yes... missiles, long-range missiles, i would think these are long-range missiles, yes, there are more than 5,500 km, medium-range missiles, this is 1005, in this interval, that is, what we are talking about with our partners, about the missiles that we have, we simply do not have enough of them, we are talking with our partners, it is wrong completely formulated informational this submission, we constantly emphasized when i say, we,

of course, i did not... i emphasized this, but i say, we, the ukrainians, the presidents, others emphasized, give us more missiles to hit, and not more missiles, but give us accurate humane missile weapons, rockets are humanitarian weapons, because they, as it were, in this, tarabets, in my opinion, yes, in this tarabets, warehouses, they definitely hit, well, they said drones there, well, i think, something seems to me that ... there was a rocket there, so they definitely hit there, this is only my conclusion, i do not claim to be there that it was some sort of position, so that they wouldn't say that i read it somewhere, no, i just saw a video, i saw an explosion similar to that from a rocket, so that 500 are already being used there for 30 km, that is, we have our own, so nothing new, just the number is less, and the russians use iskanders, they hit odesa,

they kill people in... they hit humanely, exactly in warehouses, they don't kill residents, and what are we talking about next, and what are we begging for, what are we begging for from whom, that is, we should not beg, but just rush and everything will be thrown into production these types of missiles, and then no one would, well, it’s already been done, well, time has passed, and now , you know, what difference does it make, which missile will fly there to russia, one or another, just the quantity is needed, and now the quantity, is this an escalation? no, because the russians got iranian ballistic missiles, the russians got korean ballistic missiles, what are we talking about, that is, this is, i think this is the moment where we can talk tough in private, because tough why, because when was the real moment , that some arguments worked there, i can't understand, but now what are the arguments, no arguments, and what are the red lines, he kursk, the kursk region,

entered russian territory. what other arguments can you have, there are no arguments, only in public it is not necessary to blow it all up a lot, to stir it up, and not to just show the situation publicly, i think that it will be resolved in reality, well, because there are no real arguments that the americans had earlier and our partners, they are gone now, all those that were closed due to unreasonable actions of russia, increase of escalation from the side. now, why i say that i emphasize once again, it is a humane, it is a high-precision sniper missile weapon, ukraine should be armed with exactly these types of weapons, so that it is not a contact battle with a kalashnikov, or there even a javelin, but a non-contact battle at a distance with uavs, with such missiles , with the same hymers, that is

, this is something that can somehow... at least a little balance be established with the russians, and in principle, well, i know, we have been talking about it for a long time, of course, i will not reveal the secret here that it is not what i invented there, our negotiators there do not say, they do, but for some reason, i do i believe that in this matter we could act creatively, well, more creatively, in order to circumvent this inflexible political position. well, now, i think it will be difficult to see it before the election day, and i think that even before the election day in the united states in november, well, i think that from the first days of november there after the fifth, we just saw the application of this type of e partner rockets, now the question is how many, right away not only the quality, the range, but the quantity, and by the way, germany, taurus, well, what are the arguments for...