and we will talk about other things in the next 45 minutes. let me remind you that we work live on the tv channel, as well as on our youtube and facebook platforms. for those who are currently watching us live on youtube and facebook, please subscribe to our pages, take part in our survey. today we ask you about the following: should russia be invited to the second peace summit? yes, no, everything is quite simple on youtube, two options for answers, if your comments... go beyond this variability, please write them in the comments below video. if you are watching us on tv, pick up your smartphone or phone and vote on 0800 211 30081, if you think russia should be invited to the second peace summit, 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. and today we are on the air... viktor boberenko, expert of the bureau

of policy analysis. mr. viktor, i congratulate you, thank you for being with us today. good health to you. and volodymyr fesenko, political scientist, chairman of the board of the center for applied political science research of penta. mr. volodymyr, i also congratulate you and thank you for joining our conversation. i congratulate you. so, gentlemen, since we are asking our tv viewers whether russia should be invited to the second peace summit. i will also ask you whether russia should be invited to the second peace summit, let's start with mr. viktor. mr. viktor, well, everything depends on the format, but we understand that there cannot be peace without both opposing and conflicting sides, so if the format allows, then i think it is necessary, the only question is who will represent. if it will be a favorite

putin's horse lavrov, the question is whether or not zelensky will be able to shake his hand, for example, but in fact, if we still want peace, we must negotiate not with anyone, but with russia. thank you, mr. viktor, mr. volodymyr, well, they already invited, and russia refused. i have the third circumstance. we know where and when there will be a peace summit, a second peace summit, and the fourth circumstance - these are not peace negotiations, this is a big political gathering, and in principle, the meaning of inviting russia to this event, why russia refuses, is diplomatic pressure on russia to agree to conduct peace negotiations taking into account ukrainian conditions and ukrainian interests, that is why russia refused. from this, therefore, almost certainly,

russia will not be at the second peace summit, so all those who are against can be calm, but the negotiations on the end of the war with the participation of russia, they are not inevitable, but it is not known when and how they will be, and for under what conditions, well, judging by the reaction, under what conditions it is possible, here already, it is unlikely that we will agree to russian conditions, just as russia will not agree to ours. but yes, under what conditions and where they will be is still unknown, i think we won't know until the us elections are over. well, actually, we have two positions, putin's position is an ultimatum to ukraine, they say, leave us the territories we entered, you, let the ukrainian army leave, and this was announced by president putin in july of this year, our president spoke today at the un general assembly and insisted on fair. in ukraine,

according to his peace formula. let's listen to what zelensky said. unfortunately, the un does not perhaps, during such un meetings, only the problem of war can be solved. and, unfortunately, very , very much depends on the power of the veto, which exists in the security council, but the security formula, the peace formula, can stop the war. if it cannot be stopped by a vote in the security council, and so, this is exactly the possibility that we offer, we offer the possibility of peace, there of peace, which is supported by equal partners, some propose freezing the conflict, in fact, in fact, for this, putin will give you only more as a prize sufferings and disasters. mr. victor, or? it is clear that

for the world community, that the plan to win ukraine is actually a plan to defeat russia, because... so far our international partners have not put up the sign of equality, that is, they say, yes, ukraine must win, but at the same time they do not talk about that russia has to lose, yes, yes, yes, yes, and this leads to the idea that uh, peace, peace, well, will be achieved according to erdogan's formula, today there were also talks between erdogan and zelensky, and erdogan said: "i i know, i have my own formula for peace." and conditionally the main thing just stop shooting, yes, he called for a ceasefire as the first stage, but we understand that, at least i believe that this is exactly what will happen, that when both sides are exhausted, it will be

clear, mr. fesenko is absolutely right, that now there won't be any peace talks, and rather russia really won't come to the second summit, so... putin will scare us all winter with blackouts, they will try to destroy, break through the front, so that the front crumbles, or that we ourselves invite peace through capitulation, because fulfillment of conditions, putin's july conditions, yes, because we will have blackouts and it will be cold, and we will sit without light, but if putin, if we survive this winter, and putin understands, there conditionally at the end of february, yes, until the third anniversary of the war. and this is precisely the topic of the topic , if, well, or there at the beginning of march it becomes clear that ukraine has not fallen, the armed forces are standing firm, we survived the winter, good or bad, but we survived, and it will become

obvious even to putin that war is not an option, and then just then there will be many people promoting, i think, both erdogan and the chinese, maybe modi, who they also want to elect as a shuttler there, who will be there... to carry out shuttle diplomacy between moscow and kyiv, just as everyone will say, let's just stop shooting, and this will be the peace formula that will be offered to us, because they will say, well, yes, okay, let's stop shooting, then let's take it 30 km away from the front, there is heavy equipment, then we will demobilize it conditionally there... according to some number of soldiers, let there be half a million, yes, and in this simple way, the conflict will freeze, that is, the freezing of the conflict is the most a possible option, not only that, it is an option when both sides can claim their

victory, putin will say, well, we have acquired new territories there, yes, and zelenskyi will say, ukraine resisted, so we won, there is ukraine, independent, sovereign and everything, and in fact this will be, well, if it were a peace plan, and this peace plan, everyone will push us to this peace plan, not only that, even our closest, closest allies will push us to this plan, if only because, well, that all societies will be tired of the war at that time, well, something like that. thank you sir viktor, mr. volodymyr, in zelenskyi's victory plan, there is at least one point that we know for sure that he is there, and that is the invitation of ukraine to the north atlantic alliance, yarmak said about this while already speaking in the united states of america, and this is probably the most the most difficult,

the most controversial point in this regard, because it is clear that there can be no victory and the future of ukraine without nato, because... this is a reliable umbrella that will protect us from attacks by the russians on our territory, but for our current western partners, membership ukraine's membership in nato is a big problem, a problem, in particular with regard to the fifth article of the charter of the north atlantic alliance. if this norm in the plan of victory is not accepted by biden and, accordingly, by us. partners, does this mean that this plan is a plan, as zelenskyi said, b, and behind it are s and d, where there will be no this formula and without this, without membership in nato, we will be able to defeat russia? well, first of all, i agree with mr. viktor that the situation is so

ambiguous, and there may be different options, in particular, the options offered to us by different countries. it is a termination fire, another thing that, i would add here, a lot depends on who wins the elections in the usa. because if trump, judging by the latest statements, well, then the situation may accelerate, and even then we have to prepare the same plans, it comes down to how to respond to trump's actions and not only us, but also ukraine's european partner, then what for them it will also be a challenge, and by the way, trump's victory can fundamentally change our attitude to nato membership, because... for today, yes, this is our interest, not only because that it is written in the constitution, there is a consensus here

and zelensky wants us to be in nato, and the majority of ukrainians wants us to be in nato, and most people and experts consider ukraine's membership in nato as a guarantee, a guarantee of our security for the period after the war, after the end of the war, this is the main meaning, not only because it will also be a sign of our victory, because putin did not want us to be in nato. and we will become members of nato, but if there is trump, then it is not yet known what will happen to nato, what condition nato will be in, whether nato will be able protect us under trump? yes, and then we may have to build new defense alliances, it will be a completely different strategy, completely different options, but simply, i am talking about this because it, well, let's say this, can fundamentally change the situation with nato, but i will also pay attention. on the fact that judging by the context, well, for example, from what zelensky said in an interview with farid zakaria,

that there are four basic points and one point for after the war. well, in my opinion, the point about after the war is precisely about nato. now obviously, while the current full-scale war with russia, there will not even be an invitation of ukraine to nato, because it means the risk of a direct war between nato and russia. they don't want that in washington. i think that in moscow as well, but what is the problem, in moscow they understand that they do not want this in washington and are scared by this, they are scared even not only there by the prospect of membership in nato and the application of the fifth article, even for missiles, for long-range they are afraid of long-range weapons, today's statement by putin is just evidence that he has already understood where the weak point is, it is such a point of pain and a point of concern, or a point... let's put it this way, trump's fears, not even trump's, but biden's, and that's why we need to press on

this point, and that's why there is such a statement that if a nuclear state helps a non-nuclear state, strikes on the territory of russia, it will be a declaration of war . i'm not sure that putin will take the appropriate steps, because he wants to live, a person who cares so much about his health, i think he also cares about his life, but nevertheless. he sensed such a weak spot in the biden administration, in the us president himself, and is trying to push there, that's it now the main problem, therefore, in terms of nato, i think one way or another the issue will not be resolved now, not under biden, biden can tell us, okay, we support the euro-atlantic prospects of ukraine, we are in favor, but not today, but tomorrow, yes, and therefore, it will be a deferred matter, depending on who will be the president of the united states, what will be the international situation next year, and accordingly, how will this war end? yes, so while this issue

is postponed, i think that we are not going to abandon nato, but here a lot depends on who will be the president of the united states and what will be the fate of nato after the us presidential elections, well actually, mr. volodymyr, you just took this question about the future of nato off my tongue, because it is not clear. what will be the configuration of this nato , taking into account trump's statements that each state that is part of the alliance must deduct and transfer funds there in the appropriate percentage, and those that do not will be 2%, at least 2%, yes, and if they do not pay, then we we will not defend them and so on, no, well, this is blasphemy to a certain extent, and i think that trump is not sincere, well, a simple simple example, again the situation with thanks to the help of ukraine in the congress hangs, in particular thanks to the republic. the us budget for the next year, there is no financial year, and at the same time trump accuses the europeans that they,

they say, do not help, but only the states help in ukraine, so the europeans have already announced the continuation of macro-financial assistance to ukraine, but the states have not yet stated, so that's why there is insincerity here and , unfortunately, just manipulation, plus one more problem, what worries me now is that trump was clearly tricked into... they were against ukraine, not even against zelensky, but of ukraine. and it is dangerous. yes, and here is the problem, this is a challenge for all of us, and what is supposedly there... zelensky supports kamala garis, although this is not true, and now, unfortunately, the challenges associated with trump are growing for us, and i think that it is necessary to prepare for it. thank you, mr. volodymyr, mr. viktor, well, it is possible that the next one will not take place by february 24, 2022, and therefore it is clear that something

new will have to be created, but obviously on the model of the same north atlantic alliance. well, new alliances are possible, but ukraine's leadership is necessary speak with a view to the fact that yes, we probably have the most experienced army in the world right now, yes, an army that fights, there are many experienced soldiers, and you know how ours go to the training grounds there, to those instructors, i think that we have there are fighters who could become instructors for instructors, but... let's look at the fact that the ukrainian army is an army without style. because, well, as napoleon once said, war requires three things: money, money and money. uh, that's the first, and the second is that we need weapons that we don't produce. yes, they give us allies, that is

let's imagine that the budget of the 25th year is growing now, and four are expected there. hryvnias in the budget, that is, our entire budget, the expenditure part is 100 billion dollars, well, roughly, yes, but of them we earn only 1.7 trillion, that is, a country that conditionally needs 2.5 trillion of money from allies, that is more than she earns herself, it is difficult to talk about leadership, and we are only talking about... living money that flows into our economy, yes, our, well, economic, social sector, but still same we receive no less weapons, and in fact these weapons are not of the lend-lease type, but simply as a grant, yes weapons, they were taken, used, forgotten, and, therefore, yes, we

can talk about the professionalism of the armed forces of ukraine and. .. according to this, there is a certain leadership, but we are dependent, absolutely dependent on our allies, and this must be taken into account, and by the way, and this and zelensky must behave accordingly, not allocate, as they are used to, it was a spanish shame , as he behaved with sikorsky, but still treat allies with extraordinary with respect and thank you, thank you, thank you, it is clear that in the current situation and... zelenskyi and the whole of ukraine are waiting for the decision of our western partners regarding possible strikes on the territory of russia, with western weapons, and putin, holding the radb of the russian federation today, spoke about that , that if this happens, if rockets and drones fly, if it is recorded, then we will certainly give a response and a nuclear response, because

today they changed the nuclear concept, the concept of nuclear defense, as they say. the washington post writes about what is happening in the united states americans have not heard a convincing argument from ukraine for the authorization of strikes against the russian federation with western weapons, the publication says that the russian federation has already moved 90% of the aircraft that launched the bombs beyond the atakams range, so the authorization of long-range strikes will not have a significant impact on hostilities, well, i think the washington post reporters are being a little sneaky here, because after all, what happened during the last two. weeks in the warehouses of grau's large warehouses around moscow there in these large warehouses missiles clearly showed how it all works, but german foreign minister anna lena berbock outlined the key points for

possible peace talks to end russian aggression against ukraine at a meeting of the un security council. let's listen to anna lena. peace means that the existence of ukraine as a free and independent country is guaranteed. this means security guarantees. on the one hand, we are very grateful that more and more of our partners in the world are thinking about how to end this war. we need it, we we need an end to this war. i would like to hear that... for the last phrase she says, we need the end of putin's regime, about what we started, started this conversation, but everyone is talking about peace, we are all for peace, let's sit down at the table . negotiations, well, it seems that schoolchildren got into a fight at recess, and then the class teacher brings them together, says: well, you had a fight there, let's make peace, don't do it again. at a time when

the un security council and the un general assembly are being held, putin launches rockets at residential buildings, kills ukrainians and destroys cities. and, anna lena burbok says, well, listen, it's already there, you quarreled over there, there 's a war going on, but you need to negotiate peace, well, how can you negotiate peace with people who believe that peace is war, as orl wrote. please, mr. volodymyr, but i will remind you here, mr. viktor mentioned sikorsky, yes, we must remember, and we also had a lot of criticism of sikorsky in connection with his, let's say yes, a purely hypothetical assumption, and not... ukraine, which actively supports us, supports us, in particular

continuing to provide us with financial military aid. for the greens, the party was always a pacifist before the current war, but in the current coalition, the rulers, the greens, are the most consistent, well... so supporters of ukraine, and in principle, mrs. burbok always advocates a peace that is fair, that takes into account position, interest of ukraine, so it is not just a pacifist position on its part, another thing is that now the topic of peace, well, it is in the discourse and international discourse, and in the discourse of certain european countries, in particular in germany, they cannot do it to ignore, they have to talk about it... and for us this topic is already a challenge in one way or another, you see, i think we need to be really realistic here, and now, maybe not now, but

a little later, zelenskyi will face the same dilemma as poroshenko once faced, peace or war, but then again, there is some kind of agreement even on a ceasefire there or something else, but again, with a ceasefire, this does not mean... permanent peace, unfortunately, yes, yes, when such an aggressive neighbor is nearby, well, it does not guarantee anything, z on the other hand, well, yes, we all would like russia to be destroyed there, there was no putin, but unfortunately, so far this option is, well, let's say, not quite that realistic in the near term, i think that sooner or later it will happen, but... for now we will have to deal with putin, and this is the closest, biggest problem both for us and for our western partners, and

therefore, in principle, the position that zelensky is currently proposing in the states, and to our other western partners, not only to americans who yes, it may be necessary to enter into negotiations, but it is necessary to enter from a position of strength, by the way, this is also said by american ... politicians, including from the republican camp, for example, mike pompeo, and many european politicians are talking about this, yes , yes, if we enter into peace negotiations, then from a position of strength, and although there is a little bit like that, you know, superficially, piskov says, russia cannot be forced to peace, listen, they have already repeatedly gone to negotiations, repeatedly, and here the question is, under what conditions do they start negotiations, and if putin, here mr. victor is the process. said that if putin will see that it will not be possible to defeat ukraine, and the problems in russia, let's say, will increase, by the way, budanov said about this

that the 25th year will be problematic for russia, and that's why we need everything and to maintain resilience and the ability to resist ourselves, and at the same time constantly remind our partners: you have to help us effectively enough to force putin to negotiate. without ultimatums, because there will be real negotiations only when there are no ultimatums from russia, therefore the situation is really ambiguous, they will talk about negotiations one way or another and about peace , on what terms, and in such a way as to force putin to negotiate, but without ultimatums and without demands for unilateral concessions on the part of ukraine. thank you, mr. volodymyr, mr. viktor, well, obviously, the answers to all the questions i ask. today in the program, we will obviously receive it in the next few days, because there will be a meeting ahead of zelenskyi with biden, there will be a meeting with trump with haris, it is still

unclear. because today ip reported about the fact that there will not be such a meeting will not happen after all, it is not planned, well, trump perceives it as the fact that zelensky is participating in the election campaign of kamala garis, and therefore it is obvious that this happened even before that, and maybe trump wants to play along with putin, and in in this situation , he praised the russians, their victories in history, mentioned hitler and napoleon, which frankly... offended the american audience, i think, those, those, descendants who fought against germany on the second front, but, can we hope, that upon completion of the american tour, we will clearly hear the answer to the question: do they support the plan of victory in the united states of america, in what form,

and... what will be the next steps of biden, who is already considered a lame duck, perhaps a lame duck will bring ukraine much more than a swan that will start working in the white house already in january of the 25th year, a lion or a winch, or a winch, i'm sorry, a winch, but i think that, well, we, we all understand. the following situation, which, on the one hand, seems to be a lame duck, and on the other hand, there was such an old soviet dot, that like grandpa threw some sort of slogan there, i don't remember that there, like grandpa threw a grenade through the window, the district committee is meant, but grandpa is old, it doesn't matter, here grandpa biden can just be taken and used, but

after five ... he will already be there in november, if he does not decide much, and on the other hand, he can sign something for us, give permission to kill us, i am sure that this will not happen before november 5, but why not do it there on the sixth or seventh, seventh it's better, because on november 7, the russians will still congratulate, but they do november 7 is a red day on the calendar, well , at least they don't have a ban on the communist party, lenins are standing around, so even biden would say that on november 7, we... don't mind ukraine hitting every lenin anywhere, if this is the first thing, and to sign something else, for example, to make a statement, what is in zelensky's plan, to make a statement there that we are waiting for ukraine, and the country will be in nato, that would also be very, very not bad, in fact, we understand that now zelensky is unlikely to bring anything, but he is can bring a promise to talk about... it's

about after november 5 and there really on the one hand the lame duck can get a window of opportunity for well well at least for very loud statements and decisive signatures. thank you, mr. viktor, but i would like to remind our tv viewers that we are conducting a survey during this broadcast, asking them whether russia should be invited to the second peace summit? yes, no, everything is on youtube and facebook. just like that, no, or if you have your own version, please write in the comments below this video if you watch us on tv, pick up your smartphone or phone and vote if you think russia should be invited to the second peace summit (0800-211-381, not 0.800 211 382). another topic, gentlemen, is the detention of people's deputy artem dmytruk in great britain,