the armed forces must withdraw from the entire ukrainian 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's announcement of a political or geostrategic one neutrality, which would mean no pressure on ukraine to join nato, and a ceasefire when russia withdraws all its troops that entered ukraine during the second invasion in february 22. the issue of the legal status of donbass and crimea should be postponed for about 15 years. maybe that's part of the plan, though i doubt it...certainly the core of

zelenskyi's perspective is a ceasefire and a complete withdrawal of russian troops, what he's willing to offer instead, as an incentive for russia, i don't know. well, generally there are two certain ones approaches, yes? on the one hand, we understand that president biden's administration, perhaps in london, perhaps in some other progressive western capitals, understands that it is possible to force russia only by destroying a certain one. its power, military, logistical and so on, that is, if russia were to weaken, it could go to one or another negotiation, yes, because what they put on the diplomatic table, in simple language, is called an ultimatum with further retention of the currently occupied territories . the russians would like to take at least 30% of our territories and to make us a non-aligned state under the control of the russian federation. yes, this is one story. on the other

hand, in washington they understand that if it is possible to shake up 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 the great global south, they too would like to achieve certain results at our ukrainian expense, yes, well... accordingly, in my opinion, this is why the so -called course operation was launched, because the russians constantly talked about the realities on the ground, and the realities on the ground are now such that we keep part of the territory of the russian federation under military control, accordingly , the brazilian-chinese plan has suffered a certain de facto fiasco , maybe i'm wrong, and accordingly, if we talk about zelensky's plan, we said, let's talk about joseph biden's plan now, how

can we stop the russian bear, if we lack long-range missile systems, aviation and appropriate authorizations from the united states to use it to destroy russian military facilities. first of all, i think that the chinese or brazilian plans are of no importance, what matters is whether the united states, the united kingdom and other nato allies provide ukraine with the necessary capabilities to ... weaken the russian armed forces to such a level , so that russia simply could not continue its policy. as i mentioned at the beginning of our interview, in my opinion, ukraine is extremely necessary get permission to use atakams and stormshadow long-range missiles deep in 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. destruction. of ballistic missiles, glider

bombs and other munitions clearly affected russia's ability to carry out attacks using these weapons on the territory of ukraine. whether ukraine will be able to achieve similar success with the atakans and stormshadow missiles remains to be seen. it seems logical that ukraine has been able to achieve significant results using drones, which are much easier to shoot down. it can do even more with ballistic missile attacks. as well as cruise missiles to potentially weaken russia's ability to continue the war. according to british military intelligence, with reference to the ukrainian general staff, russia loses more than 1,100 soldiers killed or wounded every day, and as of today it has suffered more than 610,000 casualties. this level of losses is unacceptable in the long term perspective, although putin may 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 . even if putin exudes confidence, it seems unlikely that russia can end the war on its own terms. yes, this is extremely important, but the key story is how to make putin stop demanding peace from us at our expense, you see, that is the most dangerous situation. he regularly fires at us, putin raises the level of aggression and they try to keep it at the current level only in order to tear us away from this bloody agreement on something, it will not be there, unless, of course, from the united states, great britain, france and so on , very clear negotiation parameters will be set,

and we understand that at one time, when putin met with president joseph biden, he offered him to divide the world, it was a few years ago, accordingly, we are in ukraine... we understand that now there is an attempt to transform the world, there is a struggle for major geopolitical influences, right? but the key task is that it is not at the expense of ukraine, so that it is not at the expense of our state and our territories, right? so, how do you think 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 the indian ocean, but not at the expense of ukraine and our 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 an approach to solving the problem. rather than a broad geopolitical strategy, as the russians might imagine. for washington absolutely needs the war to end 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. this cannot be done, he will simply postpone his aggression in the regions i mentioned by military means, whatever geopolitical ambitions exist in the global south, whether in president lula in brazil, or xi jinping in china, they have not changed the focus of the us

and its allies, the main priority is to stop putin and russia in ukraine and ultimately reach a peace agreement acceptable to ukrainians. a recent opinion poll...indicates that while about 50% of ukrainians may support a ceasefire, more than 75% reject any ceasefire that involves handing over ukrainian territory to russia, so western leaders, especially in the biden and garis administrations, are likely to will support the will of the ukrainian people. president trump, if re-elected, has said he intends to end the war before he takes office, but he may for... a deal that would require ukraine to cede 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 longer -range weapons deep into russian territory,

as this will make it more difficult for russia to launch attacks on ukrainian infrastructure and civilians. finally in august, there were speculations in zma about negotiations between and ukraine regarding the cessation of attacks on each other's energy infrastructure, probably with 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 go to... any sacrifices. dear mr. ambassador bryza, but ukraine also has the opportunity to raise the level of escalation. extremely important strikes on the military warehouses of the russian federation in the tver region demonstrated that we can use drones to deliver low-level blows to 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 rarely expected this, and we understand if the army of drones. the ukrainian army of drones will practice military targets on the territory the russian federation, russians, ordinary russians will also feel the burden of war, but putin does. on the other hand, putin is betting on the destruction of our energy industry during the winter, on enormous suffering, possibly mass deaths and the death of our people, on the exodus, on the departure of a large part of the citizens of ukraine from our territory, and after that in the spring he could offer those or other things, this is putin's plan, i am worried that in all western capitals this matter is understood and accordingly, but the pace of providing us with military aid... are not fast enough, are not satisfactory, and accordingly,

the biden administration understands that putin wants to destroy our energy, so that the winter will be tragic, the kremlin is doing it, delhi understands it, berlin and london also understand it and paris , but at the moment we see this putin's plan, from the ukrainian side it remains only to support and possibly even exceed the level of escalation in some ways, that's how it is. we have already touched on these issues and i completely agree with the premise of your question. fear of escalation really prevented the biden administration from granting permission to use weapons deep in 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 the 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. it could happen a constructive step towards changing the momentum and direction of the conflict. in addition, 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 u... is perceived as a capable and innovative state. a 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 much less powerful drones compared to the atakams and storm shadow missiles. i certainly expect that... london will eventually give the go-ahead, and once ukraine starts using these more

effective weapons, i'm sure we'll see a shift in the momentum of the war in ukraine's favor. here's what might make putin more willing to negotiate in good faith. dear mr. ambassador bryce, look, the president of the united states, joseph biden, does not have much time left to work for position fortunately, he did not personally experience it now. has an election campaign, he does not go to pennsylvania and assures that he has a plan for peace. the key task of president joseph biden to go down in history, i don't know, at one time was winston churchill, 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 give ukraine certain permissions and maybe to increase the nomenclature of weapons, long-range

weapons and aviation, that is, joseph biden can play to the end, whether he will go for something similar, or he will be a hostage of the democratic campaign. 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 keep all integrity authorities until the inauguration of the new president on january 20, 2025. not only does he have the right to make the decisions he thinks are 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 actions he takes to help ukraine might affect

us domestic politics and the outcome of the 2024 election, although biden is definitely thinking about how his decisions might affect the odds presidential candidate garis against the president trump, because americans tend to be more focused on other issues when it comes to electing a president, so now biden has a relatively free hand to do what he thinks is right. for good reason he is concerned about the possibility of russia escalating to the use of nuclear weapons, however , last year when it emerged that president putin may be planning to use nuclear weapons on the battlefield. biden sent cia director bill burns to moscow to warn that in such a scenario the us would military intervention and destroy russian troops on the 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 although russia's invasion of ukraine probably won't solve it. factor in the us election, it could affect the outcome by a small margin as this election is expected to be very tight. and turning around for example, at the beginning of our conversation, when we talk about certain 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 there can be no informal agreements with putin, yes, because... he made a mockery of all international treaties in which russia took participation, that is, either not fulfilling them, or simply leaving them, yes, well, we will not mention that the so-called budapest memorandum, but, if in a couple of months, maybe in six months, we will see a certain freezing of the situation, a weakening of the intensity of the fighting on the front line, then we

will understand that something is probably happening, but someone has to be a guarantor... of those agreements that may not be signed on paper, and if even they were signed on paper, what would it look like. 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 stop ukrainian bullets and bombs. however, the time will come if the united states, great britain and their allies will allow the use of long-range missiles. deep into russian territory, when putin does 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

was no longer able to continue this war against ukraine. as we know from the 1930s, the crème de la crème of secret agreements between nazi germany and the soviet union, that leaders in moscow used to break agreements when it was convenient for them, for example, despite previous 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 verification of any agreement. verification may include... a set of states, guarantors or other formal mechanisms. we successfully developed methods to verify 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, or does he have something in his head? chaos, that is, it gives there are a lot of different signals about how he sees the talks with putin. i don't think his default position is to tell the truth. trump is always manipulative and says whatever comes to his mind and whatever he thinks will help him at that moment. he considers himself a great politician and thinks that he can somehow convince or force ukraine and russia to stop the war. however, 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 had a concept of a plan, that is, despite the attacks on kamalus for not having an economic policy of his own, he essentially admitted that he had no concrete plan, only concepts, the same goes for his approach to russia's invasion of ukraine, he has

a concept of the plan and considers himself an experienced negotiator capable of finding a way to complete... analysis on the air of the tv channel i want to remind our viewers that matthew bryza was working for them now, former adviser to the united states secretary of state, former director of european and eurasian affairs at the us national security council. events, events that are happening right now and affect our lives. of course, the news feed reports about them, but not enough. to know what is happening, you need to understand. antin borkovskii and invited experts soberly assess events, analyze 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. clear understanding of key events last week, analysis of 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. it's on tv now. dmitry areshkin, political scientist, professor at the free 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, with 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 an earthquake occurred, reaching three points on the rig teranau scale, and accordingly we understand that the war entered the territory of the russian federation not only in the form of coffins or sacks with two hundred, yes, that is, a new phase of the war begins, well, and accordingly i would ask you characterize, outline its parameters, how do you feel it? i wouldn't say that everything is clear-cut with the transition of the war to some new quality, it seems to me that all this is predictable, just unexpected for

the russian way of thinking, they are already used to the fact 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 in russia there are too many objects for which... including a very large and apparently a modern base in production, this is the tver province, which should still be protected, because there are rockets, shells and whatever else, it didn't work, it 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 ... the answer, he got it . i don't see any big news in this, because exactly everything happened, for example, in april and may of the 22nd year, when he did not expect an answer to

on the way to kyiv or gostomel, and met and 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 understand this modern logic. it's very simple, if it's... the logic was that when you live in a glass house, you don't have to throw stones at your neighbors, it might come in response, and putin and his entourage thought that nothing would come in response , and secondly, the most headless of them believed that it was ours the house, glass or not, it is ours, the west will be afraid and will not participate, ukraine will be afraid, zelensky will run away and in three days there will be a victory parade in kyiv, it did not work out that way, and now the world has gone. a process that is difficult to stop, it is terrible, it is bloody, it is destroying ukraine, it is a victim of aggression, there are no questions here, but it is also destroying russia. the

only question is that russian public opinion has not yet substantiated, realized and is not ready to realize this, and in this sense, ukraine is engaged in what it presents time and time again very visual, simple lessons for russian public opinion. the question is how soon this public opinion will be able to gather. courage, to admit that putin committed not only a crime by starting this war, but also a mistake, and now he will have to pay for this mistake for a long time and in extremely unfavorable ways, but that is another conversation, in general, it seems to me that the war went from a stupid mind, in the 21st century, in the modern world, wars do not solve problems, but putin stayed in the 18th or 19th century or in the... century, he settled in, i i don't know whether the spirit of nicholas i, or someone else, or some, i don't know, projections

of stalin were incarnated, but he thinks so, and here. the key story is how much this cotton wool with ammonia can hollow it out, well, here the question is about the amount of blood, the amount of destruction and, accordingly, in principle, the unshakable position of the west. we understand that in ukraine there is nowhere to flee under the threat of existential destruction. putin and the kremlin offer only an ultimatum: give us your territory, give us your sovereignty, give us yours identity, otherwise... the war will continue, that is, it is not a negotiating position, it is only an ultimatum under the threat of destroying the people, the state, and so on, that is, de facto putin does not offer anything, but maybe just one or the other wool with ammonia blood , i'm not afraid to say this, will he be able to change the option in his head a little, i don't know? if i understood you correctly, my answer will be

as follows: the thing is... that russia is two-layered, on the one hand it is european, and on the other, let's say, golden horde. at least ivan vasilyevich the terrible consciously used the practices of the golden horde territorial management, which he borrowed from safa gerei. he ruled the kazan khanate quite strictly three times. all the time there is opposition to the european intention, where russia was the same empire as, for example, austria-hungary, under the leadership of quite a few europeans. romanovs, but since 1917, especially after comrade stalin came to power, conventional asian ideas about the organization of power began to openly dominate, a kind of sultanate, an eastern way production, as karl marx wrote, talking about the fact that there is no private property, property belongs to the state, etc., and this is already an empire not of the european type, but

of the golden horde, when the ehan. which is not limited by anything, there are no political institutions that would restrain it. there is a military-political or military-nomadic pseudo-democracy, which is called a delegative democracy, that is, once the powers of the khan are delegated, and after that he is not limited by anything. comrade stalin built one, from whom he protects the russians, from who are the people of bandera? earlier. there were those who seized power in ukraine, and now it is all of ukraine. it turned out that the very russian people, which he proclaimed to be part of the great russian people, consists of traitors themselves, and this is a purely stalinist approach. the people are traitors, and this is a purely horde approach, when the khan could deprive the uluz of their subjectivity, resettle them from one part of their territory to another part. here, even putin's logic seems to have turned

upside down. or from the fact that ukraine does not have subjectivity, and the ukrainian people do not exist, and to the point, in just a little more than two years, that this nation should be destroyed, because it does not obey us, even the logical external contradiction is obscured and closed, and you just need to understand, putin is a collective putin, let it be impersonal, but that collective putin in the person of simonyan, solovyov, shuigu, medvedev, anyone, this system. it is twisted, contradicts the natural logic of the development of events. the natural logic is that ukrainians want to be in europe, so they could not overcome this natural urge to sovereignty by peaceful means, could not buy yanukovych with 17 billion dollars, which he put on it, ukraine did not agree to this and

yanukovych was expelled. and he cannot forgive ukraine for this and tries to prove that he is such a figure by military methods, and he also does not succeed and will not succeed. the question is what a terrible price for this natural experiment , the outcome is known in advance. well , what does known in advance mean? some understand, some don't. it seems to me that this result is known in advance. it's a deep depression anyway, not to to say a disaster for... russia. i am not talking about ukraine at all, because it is a victim of aggression. here it is clear that the loss of the population, the destruction of the economy. it wasn't ukraine who started it, collective putin started it. answering your question, as i understood it correctly, putin is trying to oppose the natural course of european history with armed force, and of course, he is not succeeding. this is roughly what miloshev was doing in his time.