in the spotlight since congress approved the latest round of us aid to ukraine earlier this year. it's great that this issue is back in the public debate, especially when we're looking at two very different approaches offered by the candidates. donald trump's re-election as president would mean a very different future for ukraine than what kamela garis is proposing, so american voters should definitely take that into account on election day. thank you very much for the interview and we wish you success time for further rounds of pre-election debates. thanks, i hope the election season is quick. take care, it was nice talking to you.

incidents, events, 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, it is necessary to understand. antin borkovskii and invited experts soberly assess and analyze the events. 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. new week on espresso - a weekly summary information and analytical program, a clear understanding of the key events of the past week, analysis of the causes and consequences of these events from experts, forecasts of the development of the situation for the current week, the opportunity to ask your own questions and join the discussion.

spend the final monday evening with us and confidently step into the new week. the new week project with khrystyna yatskiv and andrii smoly every monday at 8:00 p.m. on espresso. glory to ukraine, dear tv viewers, on espresso tv channel, west studio program. we will analyze. more important events of this week, in particular, we will carefully analyze the peace plan of president zelensky and how it will be received in various diplomatic and power cabinets, overseas and european. at the same time, we will talk about how the west will adjust its concept of war , taking into account the fact that the armed forces of ukraine raised the level of escalation by destroying the strategic warehouses of the russian federation in the territory of the tver region, and we will talk, of course, about the influence of kursk. operations of the armed

forces of ukraine consciousness of ordinary muscovites. today's guests of zahid studio are matthew bryza and dmytro orishkin. bryza, ex-adviser of the secretary of state of the united states, former director of european and eurasian affairs at the national security council of the united states, is currently working on the espresso tv channel. glory to ukraine, dear mr. ambassador, i welcome you to the espresso studio. well, extremely important signals, i emphasize. signals come from us both from mass media and from various diplomatic sources. we understand that a very tough war is going on, our fighters are on the territory of the russian federation in the kursk region, an extremely bloody operation in the pokrovsk direction, when we talk about russian interventionists, and at the same time, yes, we regularly hear one or another reports about the so-called peace talks and some... or other possible

agreements, let these will not be direct direct agreements, but in any case they are talking about the so-called possible package visions, and what is most important, the president of ukraine will present to the leadership of the united states, in particular and to president joseph biden, the ukrainian peace plan in order to put pressure on russia, the aggressor state. how do you see the situation? yes, we know that president zelensky is going to ... his peace plan to president biden, and there are high expectations, at least outside of the white house, with keyer starmer visiting washington recently, and then secretary of state david lamy and secretary of state anthony blinken visited president zelenskyi, significant decisions were expected from the usa and great britain, it was assumed that the leaders could allow ukraine to use atakams and stormshadow missiles. on targets deep in

russian territory, but this has not yet been announced. the us president's national security advisor, jake sullivan, was recently asked about this clearance, and he is simple. answered: i cannot make any announcements at this time. this does not mean that permission has not been granted, or that it will not be granted. it simply means that the united states is not ready to openly discuss the issue. currently , the momentum in the biden and starmer administrations in london is similar is moving towards supporting president zelenskyi's peace plan, helping ukraine defend itself against russian attacks with cruise bombs and ballistic missiles. and i i believe that this is a positive impulse. dear mr. ambassador, we understand that this is not about political analysis, yes, because there are many components of this process that remain confidential or secret, and maybe even not worked out, but if we take a general

approach to such things , in your opinion, what parameters could be considered, what kind of plan could this potential peace plan be, taking into account the fact that the state is the aggressor against us... change and they want fixation on the ground, that is, they want to control our captured territories, so what to do with those that could be parameters of what is called this negotiated peace process? i will say that i do not have access to president zelensky's plan, since i live here in turkey, but it is obvious that a large part of it is that the russian armed forces should withdraw from the whole. ukrainian the territory they occupied, including crimea and donbas. undoubtedly, russia should recognize the sovereignty and territorial integrity of ukraine. unfortunately, i do not know what place in zelenskyi's peace plan will be allocated to ukraine's strategic orientation in the future. as early as march 22, there were

rumors about not-so-secret negotiations taking place in istanbul between representatives of ukraine and russia. as reported, they included. ukraine of political or geostrategic neutrality, which would mean that no one will put pressure on ukraine regarding its accession to nato, as well as a ceasefire, when russia withdraws all its troops that entered ukraine during the second invasion in february 22, the question of the legal status of donbass and crimea should go away for about 15 years. perhaps this is part of the plan, although i doubt it, certainly the core of the prospects. zelenskyi is a ceasefire and the complete withdrawal of russian troops, what he is willing to offer in return as an incentive for russia, i do not know. well, there are generally two definite approaches, right? on the one hand , we understand that in the administration of the president biden, perhaps in london, perhaps in

some other progressive western capitals, understand that it is possible to force russia only by destroying certain of its power, military, logistical and... and so on, that is, if russia were to weaken, it could go to these or other negotiations, yes, because what they put on the diplomatic table is, in simple language, called an ultimatum with further maintenance of the currently occupied territories. the russians would like to take at least 30% of our territories and make us a non-aligned state that would be under control of the russian federation. yes, this is one story. on the other hand, in washington they understand, if possible. will shake the russian economy and destroy the russian military machine, accordingly, this may force putin to revise one or another of his demands, but we understand that there are also large powerful players, china, brazil, india and the so

-called great global south, and they would like to achieve certain results at our ukrainian expense, yes, well, and accordingly, in my opinion, that is why the so -called... kurdish operation was launched, because the russians constantly talked about the realities on the ground, and the realities on the ground now are such that we keep part of the territory of the russian federation under military control, accordingly , the brazilian-chinese plan has experienced a certain actual fiasco, maybe i am wrong, well, accordingly, if we talk about zelenskyi’s plan there, we talked about, let's talk now about joseph biden's plan, how can we stop the russian bear if... that we lack long-range missile systems, aviation and the appropriate authorizations from the united states to use it to destruction of russian military facilities. first of all, i think that chinese or brazilian plans are of no importance, what matters is

whether the united states, great britain and other nato allies provide ukraine with the capabilities necessary to weaken the russian armed forces to such a level. so that russia simply could not continue its policy. as i already mentioned at the beginning of our interview, in my opinion, ukraine desperately needs to get permission to use long-range missiles, and yes. in the depths of russian territory. the recent attack in the western tver region in the city of toropets was a spectacular drone strike that caused huge explosions throughout the city. the destruction of warehouses of ballistic missiles, glider bombs and other ammunition clearly affected russia's ability to carry out attacks using these weapons on the territory of ukraine. will ukraine be able to achieve similar success with atakams and storm missiles? it remains to be seen: it seems logical that ukraine has been able to achieve significant results

using drones, which are much easier to knock down. it can do even more with atakam and stormshadow ballistic missiles, as well as cruise missiles, to potentially weaken russia's ability to continue the war. according to british military intelligence, citing the ukrainian general staff, russia is losing more than 1,100 soldiers every day. killed or wounded, and as of today it has suffered more than 610 thousand human losses. this level of casualties is unacceptable in the long term, although putin can continue to throw people into battle. these forces insufficiently qualified and insufficiently prepared. in eastern ukraine, the attack on pokrovsk is of great importance, and if pokrovsk is captured, it will be a serious blow to ukraine's operations in the region. however , it is unlikely that russia will be able to... take advantage of any breakthroughs in the east due to a lack of the necessary equipment and personnel,

and even if putin is showing confidence, it seems unlikely that russia is able to end the war on its own terms. yes, this is extremely important, but the key story is how to get putin to stop demanding peace from us at our expense, you see, this is the most dangerous situation: putin regularly fires at us, putin raises the level of aggression. they are trying to keep it at the current level only in order to tear us out of this bloody agreement on something, it will not happen, unless, of course, the united states, great britain, france and so on, very clear negotiation parameters are set, and we understand that at one time, when putin met with president joseph biden, he offered him to share the world, it was a few years ago, accordingly, we in ukraine understand that there is an ongoing attempt... to equip the world, there is an ongoing struggle for major geopolitical influences, yes,

but the key task is to ensure that it is not at the expense of ukraine, that it is not at the expense of our state and our territories, yes, well and here, in your opinion, the leading players will play now, yes, because if putin even agrees to certain negotiations so that it is not at the expense of ukraine, maybe he is interested in something in africa, maybe something in the pacific basin or in india. to whom the ocean, but not at the expense of ukraine and ours internationally recognized borders. i don't think that we are talking about some big geopolitical agreement in which western leaders offer president putin concessions anywhere in the world. washington works to solve every problem, such as this war, as a separate issue. the us is taking a problem-solving approach, not a broad geopolitical strategy, as the russians might... imagine. for washington, it is absolutely necessary that the war ends on terms acceptable to ukraine.

otherwise, president putin will continue his aggression. moldova may be next, followed by georgia, and possibly both countries at the same time. if putin is not stopped in these countries, he may threaten eastern nato members such as latvia or estonia. it must be stopped now and that's it. if he doesn't do that, militarily he's just... postponing his aggression in the regions i mentioned, whatever geopolitical ambitions exist in the global south, whether it's president lula in brazil or xi jinping in china, they haven't changed their focus the usa and its allies. the main priority is to stop putin and russia in ukraine and eventually reach a peace agreement acceptable to ukrainians. recent opinion polls show that at least 50% of ukrainians can support a ceasefire, more than 75%

reject any ceasefire that involves the transfer of ukrainian territory to russia, so western leaders, especially in the biden and garis administrations, are more likely to they will support the will of the ukrainian people for everything. president trump, if re-elected, has said he intends to end the war before when he takes office, however, he may propose a deal that would require ukraine to give up. territory in exchange for peace. ultimately, ukraine itself must decide on its own course. this makes it more urgent than ever to allow the ukrainian government to use more weapons. range in the depths of russian territory, because this will make it difficult for russia to carry out attacks on ukrainian infrastructure and civilians. finally, in august, there were speculations in zmi about negotiations between russia and ukraine regarding the cessation of attacks on energy infrastructure, each other probably through the mediation of qatar. i think

these talks are still ongoing, although putin may not want to appear as if he is giving in to ukrainian pressure. after ukraine's invasion of kurdsk. the fact that these talks are ongoing suggests that putin is looking for ways to de-escalate, given the high price russia is paying. even if putin pretends that he is ready to make any sacrifices. dear mr. ambassador bryza, but ukraine also has the opportunity to raise the level escalation extremely important strikes on the military warehouses of the russian federation in the tver region demonstrated that we are in favor. with the help of drones, we can inflict low-level blows on our enemy, and we understand that the level of escalation can be raised not only by the kremlin, but also by ukraine, and the kremlin rather did not expect this, and we understand that if the drone army will train, the ukrainian drone army will train the military targets on the territory of the russian federation, russians, ordinary russians,

will also feel the burden of war, but putin bets on something else, putin bets on destruction. of our energy during the winter, to the enormous suffering, possibly mass deaths and the death of our people, to the exodus, to the exit of a large part of the citizens of ukraine from our territory, and after that in the spring he could offer one or other things, this is putin's plan, i am worried that all western capitals understand this matter, and accordingly, but the pace of providing us with military assistance is not fast enough, is not satisfactory.' and by extension the biden administration understands that putin wants to destroy our energy industry, so that the winter will be tragic, the kremlin is doing it, they understand it in delhi, berlin and london also understand it and paris, but at the moment we see this putin's plan, from the ukrainian side there is only that, well to maintain and possibly even exceed

the level of escalation in some respects, that's how it is. we've touched on these issues before, i... i completely agree with the premise of your question, the fear of escalation has really prevented the biden administration from authorizing the use of weapons in depth of russian territory. the absence of such permission only allows and encourages putin to continue destroying ukraine's energy infrastructure. it is obvious that london wants to convince washington to grant ukraine permission for more effective protection. while attacks on ukraine's energy infrastructure continue, it appears that discussions are underway that could lead to an agreement whereby ukraine and russia would stop attacking each other's energy infrastructure. this could be a constructive step towards changing the momentum and direction of the conflict. except moreover, ukraine's success in advancing into russian-held territory to protect its northern regions, especially around sumy, has changed the psychology of the conflict, from an imaginary

stalemate, to one where ukraine is perceived as capable and innovative. state, the recent drone strike in western tver oblast, which targeted russian ammunition, missile and cluster bomb depots, demonstrates ukraine's effectiveness in reducing russia's ability to strike ukraine with these devastating weapons, even with with the help of much less powerful drones compared to atakam and storm shadow missiles. certainly expect that washington and london will eventually grant permission and how. only ukraine will start using this more effective weapon, i am convinced that we will see a change in the momentum of the war in favor of ukraine. here's what might make putin more willing to negotiate in good faith. dear mr. ambassador bryce, look at the president of the united states, joseph biden, he does not have much time left in

office. fortunately, he is not in person now going through an election campaign. he doesn't go to pennsylvania. and does not assure that he has a peace plan. the key task of president joseph biden is to go down in history, as, i don't know, winston churchill went down at one time when winston churchill said: "no, we will destroy hitler." i do not idealize churchill, but joseph biden now has a few months to make a decision at the level of an outstanding, great political and military figure of the world, that is, he can grant ukraine certain permissions and ... increase the nomenclature weapons, long-range weapons and aviation, that is, joseph biden can play until the end, whether he will go for something like this, or he will be a hostage. election campaign of the democrats. president biden is deeply convinced that ukraine should not lose this war. i would like him to state more clearly that ukraine must

win this war and define what that means. if pressed on him, i think he would say that ukraine's victory in the war means the cessation of hostilities on the terms determined by ukraine. biden will retain all power until the inauguration of a new one president, january 20, 2020. at 25 years old, he not only has the right to make the decisions he thinks is right, but there is no problem with the fact that his political career will soon come to an end. so his main consideration is how any action he takes to help ukraine could affect us domestic politics and the outcome of the 2024 election. although biden is definitely thinking about how his decisions can affect the chances of the presidential candidate hala. against president trump, because americans, when when it comes to electing a president are usually more focused on other issues, so now biden has a relatively free hand

to do what he thinks is right, he is understandably concerned about the possibility of russia escalating to the use of nuclear weapons, but last year , when it became clear that president putin may be planning to use nuclear weapons on the battlefield, biden sent the director of the cia to moscow. werns to warn that in such a scenario the us would intervene militarily and destroy russian forces on territory of ukraine. obviously, such a threat deterred putin. in my opinion, president biden remains as committed to helping ukraine as before. his hands are much looser now than when he was running for president, and while russia's invasion of ukraine probably won't be the deciding factor in the us election, it could be. on the result by a narrow margin as this election is expected to be very tight. and returning, for example, to the beginning of our conversation, when we we are talking about one or another negotiations, there, i don't

know, behind the scenes, semi-public and even public, well, we understand that, in general, similar things, they are included in what are called some informal agreements, but we understand that informal agreements with putin, well, it can't be, yes, because he made a mockery of all international agreements. in which russia participated, that is, either not fulfilling them, or simply leaving them, yes, well, we will not mention the so- called budapest memorandum, but if everything anyway, somewhere in a couple of months, maybe up to six months, we will see a certain freezing of the situation, a weakening of the intensity of fighting on the front line, so we will understand that something is most likely happening, but someone must be the guarantor of those agreements that may not be under... written on paper, and if even they signed on paper, how could it look? at the moment, it is too early to talk about a potential guarantor, because putin has not yet

decided to end the war, he continues to throw as many people as possible to the front lines so that they stopped ukrainian bullets and bombs. however, there will come a time, if the united states, great britain and their allies authorize the use of long-range missiles deep into russian territory, when putin will ... have to take such a step, as you suggest, mr. borkovsky, everything that is written on paper like the budapest memorandum is of no importance to putin, he understands only one language - the language of the overwhelming power, so his armed forces must be degraded to such an extent that he is no longer able to continue this war against ukraine. as we know from the 30s of the last century, in particular from the secret agreements between nazi germany and... the union, that the leaders in moscow used to violate agreements when it was beneficial to them. for example, despite prior agreements, stalin's plans to invade

poland led to world war ii. the same applies to putin, he does not care what is written on paper. thus, first it is necessary to reduce the military potential of russia, and only after that one should think about the methods of verification of any agreement. verification can include a set of states, guarantors or other formal. mechanisms, we successfully developed methods for verifying nuclear arsenals during the cold war, so it is quite possible to develop a similar approach, and yet, before considering a peace agreement and ways to guarantee it, the main focus should be on reducing russia's military potential. and the last question, i will formulate it briefly, and trump, is he telling the truth, is there some kind of election chaos going on in his head, that is, he is giving a lot of different signals. on the subject of how he sees the talks with putin. i don't think his default position is to tell the truth. trump always manipulates and says what comes to his mind and what he thinks.

will help him at this moment, he considers himself a great politician and thinks that he can somehow convince or force ukraine and russia to stop the war, but he hardly has a clear idea of ​​how to achieve this. during a recent debate with kamela harris, he was asked if he had an economic plan for the country, to which he replied that he did the concept of a plan, that is, despite attacking kamalugar for not having an economic policy of his own, he essentially admitted that he had... no concrete plan, only concepts. the same applies to his approach to russia's invasion of ukraine. he has a concept of a plan and sees himself as an experienced negotiator capable of finding a way to end the war. however, it seems that he himself does not quite understand what he really wants. the word chaos, you lived here, is very appropriate. thank you very much, dear mr. ambassador bryce. for this one brilliant analysis on the air of the tv channel, i want to remind our tv viewers that

it worked for them now. matthew bryza, former adviser to the secretary of state of the united states, former director of european and eurasian affairs at the us national security council.

now dmitriy areshkin, political scientist, professor of vilnoy, will be working on the espresso tv channel. university in riga. i welcome you, dear dmytro borisovych, to the broadcast of the tv channel. good day, hello. well, we understand that our armed forces have demonstrated that escalation can be played, in two hands, on two scores. we understand that a military depot has arrived in the tver region of the russian federation. the story is extremely serious, taking into account the fact that there was an explosion of such power that it hit

the ground. the tremor reached three points on the richter scale, and accordingly we understand that the war entered the territory of the russian federation not only in forms, in the form of coffins or bags with two hundred, yes, that is, a new phase of the war is beginning, well, and accordingly i would like to ask you to describe it, outline its parameters, how do you feel it? war into some new quality, it seems to me that all this is predictable, just unexpected for the russian way of thinking. they also used to say that if a country is bigger, it is more powerful. in the 21st century, the picture has changed somewhat, this was not noticed in moscow. it is about the fact that a large territory must be protected if you are at war, and it turns out that russia has too many facilities for which there is simply not enough air defense. including.

a very large and seemingly modern production base, this is the tver province, which should still be protected, because there are missiles and projectiles and whatever else did not work out, flew in and exploded. what this means is that russia lacks the means of modern air defense to cover key points on its own territory, because putin did not have in his head when he began his aggression against ukraine that he would be able to get a response, he did. i don't see this... big news, because everything happened, for example, in april and may of the 22nd year, when he did not expect an answer on the way to kyiv or gostomel, and met, received this answer, and in kharkiv and so on, the same applies to kursk. so, war has its own logic, the problem is that it is very difficult for the russian mentality to accept this modern...