greetings, this is svoboda live. the office of the ukrainian president said that the plan for winning the war, which zelensky presented in the united states, will be shown to the ukrainians, if not completely, then... at least partially, and until this happens, we will consider how realistic it is at the moment the strategic goal of ukraine in the war, which representatives of the ukrainian authorities repeatedly voiced in their statements and interviews. ukraine should be according to the borders of the 91st, exclusively in one way, this is the return of the borders in any form, but the borders of our sample of the 91st year. victory in the form of

the liberation of our territories within the borders of 1991, we should be talking only about the full restoration of ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty within the internationally recognized borders as of 1991. we believe, we believe, that the war can be ended only if we liberate our territory within the internationally recognized borders of 1991, that's all. so, the exit of the ukrainian armed forces to the borders of 1991 is the goal that representatives have repeatedly voiced ukrainian authorities in their statements. we don't know for sure, but we can assume that volodymyr zelensky's victory plan, which he brought to washington, was a series of requests and requests to allies that would help ukraine achieve this goal. and it seems that ukrainians are in solidarity with this goal. for example, the april poll of the razumko center. showed that almost half of

ukrainians would consider the exit to the borders of 1991 as a victory, but is this realistic? there is a growing gap between the desire of many ukrainians for complete victory and their willingness or ability to fight for this victory, says the economist publication, which provoked very heated discussions here in ukraine. the authors state that the war is going badly. ukraine and its allies need to change course. a war of attrition in the long run'. in the short term, this is unacceptable, and here's why: people are worn out by war, armies find it difficult to mobilize and train enough soldiers to hold positions, let alone retake territory. fatigue is beginning to be felt abroad. the extreme right wing in germany and france claims that supporting ukraine is a waste of money. donald trump can become the president of the united states again. he is capable of anything, but his words indicate that he wants to sell ukraine to the ruler of russia, vladimir putin. as. if zelensky

continues to deny reality and insist that the ukrainian army can liberate all the lands that russia has occupied since 2014, he will alienate ukraine's allies and further divide ukrainian society. as you have long claimed, putin attacked ukraine not for its territory, but to prevent its transformation into a prosperous, western-oriented democracy. ukraine's partners should help zelensky convince the ukrainian people that this remains the most important goal. war therefore, putin attacked ukraine not for its territory, but to prevent ukraine from becoming a prosperous western european democracy, states zaeconomist. the publication writes that zelensky has neither the people nor the weapons to liberate the occupied territories, so he must admit this bitter truth, in exchange for such a recognition allies have to undertake a number of obligations, for example, to supply kyiv with weapons and support ukraine in the production of its own. weapons, and also to invite ukraine to

nato, provided, for example, that the fifth article of the agreement will not apply to the territories occupied by russia, as was the case with germany after the second world war, when one part of the country joined nato and the other remained under soviet occupation. it must be said that the ukrainian authorities have not yet commented on this publication in zaekomist zaekonomist, we invited it to the air officials from the president's office, but they refused, citing lack of time, but nothing is stopping us. to discuss both this publication and the scenarios depicted there with other members of society, in particular with military personnel. ihor lutsenko, a serviceman of the armed forces of ukraine, joins our broadcast. igor, i congratulate you. good evening. i must say at the beginning that we mentioned you many times on these broadcasts, referred to your publications, quoted, discussed, but we did not have you yourself. so my first question is, what do you think? it's time to change the course of the war and the goals of the war, as... this is written by an influential weekly zaeconomist,

well, i'm generally not ready to accept such, let's say, the formulation of the question, due to the fact that... the course of the war marks so far the aggressor country, i.e. as russia attacks us, this is how we will fight back, it is possible to come up with more asymmetric solutions, but still everything depends more on russia, that is, if we talk about ending the war, well, i don’t see any desire or any hints at all that in of russia will be replaced by this one the account is an opinion, from yes, since, well, all the publications you mentioned are a fundamental... mistake, putin does not just want a wealthy ukraine to disappear, putin, the specific goal of putin and his, that is, the deep people who went to fight , who very enthusiastically went to war, precisely so that there would be no ukraine at all, and not just the enrichment of ukraine, that is, the actual

destruction of ukraine, the idea of ​​ukraine, the embodiment of the idea of ​​ukraine, this is the goal of this war, and it will not stop, even if to give them the crimea there, and we want to give it back. crimea and war continued with new fervor, the more we give them, the more war there will be in the future, so i don't see the prerequisites for such an approach now. yes, but for example, in the same publication , such a proposal is voiced that now, conditionally speaking, stop or freeze the war where it is, but not just freeze, but not allow russia to advance in the future, both on the territory of ukraine and somewhere there yes... to the west, that is, to strengthen ukraine as much as possible, including inviting it to nato. well, it's not possible, it's just, well, it's, well, fantastic, to stop, but if russia stops, then yes, maybe something will stop with us, but

russia will not stop, so who is it addressed to, i don’t know, that is, well, russia is not going to stop now, russia now feels their energy, er, inspiration, er, now they are taking village after village, planting after planting, soon they will take the ugledar to the encirclement and so on, that is, everything is fine with them, they are not going to stop, so why offer us to stop, we need to defend ourselves, this is the only way out in this situation, and what do you think, then why did such a publication appear just now, you know, sometimes a number of experts come on our air and say that this is so... before the publication, these are russian dogs, there is no need to comment on them at all, i will say that i almost never agree with this, but nevertheless, why do you think this publication appeared now, and it is not only aimed at ukraine, it is also aimed at the west, the authors force the west to see on the side, in

what role of allies were the western states and what they now need to do to strengthen ukraine, why now? well, the us election campaign. very big stakes, and ukraine is one of the stakes in this game, one of the fields in this game, to be more precise, on which relevant stakes are made, so there really is a very serious stance on measures, in fact, it was held by both the democrats and the republicans , and the trumpists, republicans, that it is not worth helping ukraine there, that it will somehow soon collapse under the blows of russia, and one of the... forms of this misunderstanding itself, that this is ukraine, what will be the consequences if even a part of our territory falls under the blows of recessions, this is a manifestation of such publications, supposedly intellectual, which completely deny the will to fight, which ukrainians really have, that is, these people simply do not

understand what the will is to victory in the war, they are very far from it, fortunately for them, maybe yes, but we see it all differently here since... 14th year, let me remind you, we are at war with russia here in the 14th year, well, we have serious successes, i will remind you that in a cascade manner, i.e. radically quickly, we were immediately released a large number of territories, it happened more than once, that is, this slow advance of the russians, this is not an axiom, it does not mean that the russians will always and everywhere be able to advance in this way, and they are doing it now, the ukrainians will be able to counterattack and destroy the eyes, if ... the attempts of the russians to eliminate such a slow strategy of siege, at the expense of the kurdish operation, this is the most recent example, and there were several such operations, that is, kyiv was released from the siege at one time, the russians were forced to withdraw, although they fought very hard forward, very heavy losses were inflicted on us,

the losses themselves were borne, uh, in the vicinity of kyiv, nevertheless, after some time they retreated, i'm just not going to delve into some military science, i'll just point out. these are two well-known examples, kust and kyiv, how did it happen, this is how it happened, i think that many things can happen in the future, and if i understand correctly, you think that the goal of reaching the borders in 9 years is realistic i think that setting such a goal is even possible to limit oneself in some ways, we understand especially all these recent kurdish operations about the fact that it is necessary to deal with russia fundamentally, it is necessary to protect ourselves from its attacks in the future, and as soon as we stop somewhere, after a while russia will again begin to slowly push us away. speed and radicalism in, let's say, in planning and

unexpectedness, that's why what was said 35 times, there or 135 times the borders of 91, let it be, but we definitely can't stop there, we understand , that there is still a lot to do in russia, you know that very loudly, of course, these statements that you make public sound, but does ukraine have? resources for this, look, i, i, i don't want to look like a maximalist here, i'm talking about the fact that the difference between stopping and not stopping and further advancing at the border since 91 is practically non-existent, that is, if we get to the border in 1991, we, well, it will be absolutely easy to go further there, uh, you think it is necessary, well, i think that it is still necessary to end the war with russia once and for all, but... now, after all, ukraine is not maybe he doesn't have the resources and strength to get there

to the borders of 1991, and i understand that this publication is about the fact that this goal is unrealistic for ukraine, and given the fact that there are no weapons and given the fact that there are no people, and maybe in some distant perspective it would look real, but the question is whether ukraine has the strength to wage this positional war many years ahead, because there are objectively fewer people in ukraine than in the same... russia , and precisely because of this, allegedly, the ukrainian authorities and western partners should think about changing the goals in war well, we have to understand that actually, potentially, uh, ukraine has enough forces. if you take a walk on friday evening through the hem, the cross, or, well, i don't know, i haven't been there in lviv, i think that the situation is roughly the same in lviv. well, just go to ukrainian cities, you will see a huge number. such sufficiently strong men who have absolutely no relation to the front, that is, what about human

capital, in the same way, if you look at how our defense-industrial complex works, you will see that it is practically, i i believe that i did not start working, so there is simply a question that the rear is not organized, the mobilization of society did not take place after the 22nd year, that is, after the 22nd year, what happens after the spring is the demobilization of society, and of course ... in such a mood, well, who will go to fight? there are no willing ones, but potentially those who can fight, there is a very large number of them today , it would simply be necessary to mobilize, but this is a completely different issue in the professional political plane, and what then is the challenge in connection with what you said, exists before ukrainian authorities, before the ukrainian authorities, it is necessary to take care of it by providing its own power with its own example in this society, in which way it is necessary to mobilize. how, in other words , the elite have to take it and go to war with the children, themselves, and

so on, because this was demonstrably not done, but they admit that, you know, in all the supposed wars, the elite does not fight, that's how they are, they say frankly, and this is not true, it is completely the opposite in normal countries , for the most part, the elite went first and suffered losses first, so let them do it, then well will society treat it differently? how do you do it, i apologize, and how do you see it, that the ministers will go, take weapons and sit in the trenches, no, the ministers do not, the deputies can, the british deputies went, and nothing happened to britain, she won the war, i am about i wrote this many times so that there were examples of how countries involved their own, for example, parliamentarians, well, we have a list of 50 forces, but i would ask everyone from the top 50 100 forces to go to war, even in america... namsk war was sent billionaire stars for the war, why don't we do it, why do we ostentatiously protect our

billionaires, i don't know why i need akhmetav, i don't know, he has a prime age, it seems that it will literally end in a few days, you offer rich wealthy people, politicians and deputies, to send them to war, to invite them to blame, to invite them is specifically aimed at war, but their number is not so critical, you know, i once spoke about it and maybe i even quoted you with people's deputy... oleksandr kornienko, if i am not mistaken, and he says: well, who will be saved by 200 deputies there if they go to war, because take away, conditionally , women there, those with many children, will it change the situation, well, really, because from the outside, you know. will say that this is a very populist idea, it will not change anything, well, the british were probably such terrible populists during the first war that they had several dozen dead even parliamentarians, such was their populism, i want to see the same populism, but without the dead by our desks, because the most important thing is an example, the elite must lead he must lead people, on the contrary

, push people forward, but this can be of great benefit from them, this is the first, and the second, in fact, i am sure, these people are good organizers, good specialists in state processes, and they can do a lot here what should be changed, there is a lot in the army that needs to be changed, but they don’t even know about it, i will say it here for our audience, suddenly someone doesn’t know or has forgotten ihor lutsenko , he was also a people’s deputy in the past, but okay, then please tell me , am i correct you i understood that these publications that appear in the western press about the inability, about the lack of prospects, about the lack of weapons, about the lack of forces, are ukrainians. the authorities, the ukrainian society should not take into account the way things stand, the goal, the exit to the borders of 1991, that is how it should remain, i understood you correctly, it is necessary to fight and show again and again that, well, all the forecasts regarding those of us who were previously in such a spirit, they were mistaken, regarding the spring of 22, regarding

the kurdish operation and intermediate things like kherson, there sumy region, kharkiv region and so on, need. these are all the examples of these experts just to be rinsed in big reports, how they were all wrong, how it happened, this will be a mistake once again, why repeat other people's mistakes, and what do you think about volodymyr zelensky's victory plan, andriy yermak said today, that soon the president's office or volodymyr zelensky himself should publicize this plan to his own population, perhaps partially without any classified elements, but is it likely? you have high hopes for him, and that it can somehow radically change the situation at the front? i don't know what's in that plan, but i support zelensky's victory plan, that is, from what my intuition tells me, it must be a good plan, but in any case, we need our own, that is, not for export,

not for americans, not for the british, their own plan of victory for themselves, in what way? we will fight as much as necessary to achieve victories. but, please tell me, what should ukraine do, if now, once again, a publication has appeared in the western press, the publications appeared on like that the victory plan has no strategic purpose, that the victory plan is nothing more than a plea for more weapons. do you have such a fear that at some point the partners will really get tired of the war in europe, although there is literally no war there... but they also write about it, they will get tired and ukraine will find itself one on one, will it be able to act one on one alone with russia, will she be able to resist at least as much as she is doing now? well, potentially, if instead of running after allies, we would ask all the time weapons, were engaged in developing our

military-industrial complex, then we would already have, well, i wouldn't say a hundred percent margin of autonomy. but this is a very good, you know, this safety cushion in order to hold on in case there is a pause in the supply of one or another weapon, by the way, well, that pause, which, let's assume, on the part of the americans, was recently, do you remember there they allegedly accused the republicans of blocking this aid, then we passed it thanks, in particular, to internal resources, in particular to the fact that, now revealing much more er... with such a cheap and effective weapon, drones, compared even with the same leopard or abrams tanks there, which cost three orders of magnitude more, but we passed this pause and somehow held on, of course we lost a little territory, but we did not lose everything, so it's, if we just keep developing modern weapons, we're going to become

less and less dependent on american aid and any other aid, and so... well, i think the more power we have, the we will have more help, it is necessary as well to understand that the more internal strength we have, the internal capacity to produce weapons, the more external help will be. thank you very much, ihor lutsenko, a serviceman of the armed forces of ukraine, we talked about the publication in zaeconomiz, where, among other things, ukraine is asked to change its goals in the war. igor says that nothing needs to be changed. thank you very much. and so, after the ukrainian president presented his plan for victory in the usa. the office of the president, as i have already said, declared, declared, in particular, andriy yermak stated that the ukrainian delegation returned from the feeling that the support from partners is at a very high level, this is literally yermak's quote. yermak says that zelenskyi will soon make the victory plan public in ukraine. however, as i have already said, the american press writes that this plan is nothing more than a reworked request to give more weapons.

i will remind you once again that the influential zaeconomist weekly wrote that ukraine should set more realistic goals in the war. what are the realistic goals, how do you personally see the end of the war, what to do if the resources to go on the borders of 1991 are not enough. write in the comments, but we also asked people about it. who live not far from the front in zaporizhzhia and a little further from the front in rivne, listen: i want it to end very quickly, and i believe that it can be, i do not know where this victory will come from and how it will happen, if crimea itself wants to return, and if it does not want to, how will you return it, well, the people must want it, the victory must be complete, so that the territory is liberated by 1991, so that the border guards are, well, but not everything depends on... on ukraine, the world wants it differently, they say the world is tired, well, people already have us, oh my god, there is no end to this war, ukraine has certainly never fought for so long, as

it is now, unfortunately, we have to return all the territories that were captured before the border in 1991, and then reparations, compensation for the damage they caused to ukraine, the ideal plan is the one, the one that lays on... . the president is going to the borders of 1991, how real it is, that's another question, i think reparations will be in any case, well, for us, victory is, for sure, to return our borders, our home, and for everything to end as soon as possible, and many people were alive, well, will it end somehow? i don't even know, i don't know, unequivocally, the victory of ukraine, the collapse of the russian empire, the payment

of reparations, the release of all prisoners, well, these are ambitious goals, but i really want to believe that they are achievable, for example, if we went to the borders of 91- th year, but at the same time the prisoners would not have been released, then this is not a complete victory, not final. if reparations are not paid, not established justice, how should it end, of course, the victory of ukraine, what for you is a victory, a victory is the end of all events, tragedies, just to the borders that were before, of course with the return of crimea, do you think it is possible at the moment, not at the moment , because right now it is very difficult at the front and even our direction in zaporozhye is very difficult, well, i am generally silent about donetsk, so very... yes. and serhiy garmash, journalist and editor-in-chief of the ostro internet publication, a former member of the tripartite contact group in minsk, has already joined our broadcast. i

i congratulate you, serhiy. and elizaveta yasko, people's deputy, servant of the people and representative of the committee on foreign policy, elizaveta, also joined our broadcast. i congratulate you. good day. we are talking about the publication of zaekonmist, which says that if ukraine and its allies want to win, then they first. they must have the courage to admit that they will lose, and zaekonomiz writes that the war is going badly, that ukraine and its allies need to change course, and it is obvious that the goal of reaching the borders of 1991 is no longer visible as realistic as it could ever be. i have the same question for you: do you think it is time for a change in this course? elizaveta, let's start with you. well, first of all, not every article should be taken as absolutely true, it is only the position of those who wrote them, moreover, it may be related to certain political interests that are currently

raging in various countries, the united states, the west, i just spent a few days in brussels, where i was surprised by several things, how the composition of forces actually changes after the elections, now i am in the council. of europe you can also talk about a lot of things that are changing here, but regarding your question, is it time to change something, of course not , because we must not forget about ourselves, the problem of ukraine has always been that we went to concessions, we made concessions because some big brothers somewhere told us that this is how it should be, and we often forgot about ourselves, now we finally have a historic opportunity. resolve something that is very important for all generations of ukrainians, if we don't do it, we all know that russia will attack again, you say you don't need to change anything.

to leave everything as it is and fight on, and you also questioned the purpose of such a publication, if i understand correctly, sergius, what do you say, is it time to change the course of the war? well, given what's happening on the front, i think it's time for a change, because we see that things are not going well, and i don't see the prerequisites that should go primarily from the west to improve these... the circumstances of these conditions , yes, that is, we see the sunset, and this article also testifies to this, but it really gets tired, there is indeed a redistribution of political forces in the european elites and perhaps in the american elite it will happen, and we really have to rely more on ourselves than on them, and today we are completely dependent on them, completely, and today we have an

arms race imposed on ... russia, which we cannot withstand without the west, and the west does not give us the flexibility, the opportunity to win it, yes, and does not even give us the opportunity to create parity in this race in order to strike at the russian federation, what if zelensky returned today or yesterday, yes, the united states with permission to strike the russian federation, and we saw this, and this is what putin is really afraid of, that is, the strategy of transferring the war to russian territory, it ... works, and this is evidenced even by the change putin's nuclear tact, because it is precisely this change, the reaction to the possibility of the west giving permission to strike on its territory, but we do not see this, first, second, ah, it makes us race for resources, first of all, excuse the words, but m 'yasa, well, meat assaults, which we also cannot win, because we have

people are very, well, much... less than in the russian federation, and therefore we have to take into account the reality here, which today, if it changes for the better, for the better, then maybe nothing needs to be changed, but today we see that we are losing territory, ah, we are losing the possibility, along with time, of full-fledged, compromise negotiations with the russian federation, as long as we control part of the kurt region and the donetsk region, we have the opportunity to... compromise on agreements, if they take donetsk region and push us out of kurdistan oblast, it will no longer be a compromise, it will actually be their capitulation and dictation, we already went through this in minsk, at the minsk negotiations, so it seems to me that right now is the time to really change course and look more realistically at what we can , considering the situation that our western partners have created for us. elizaveta, what do you

say to that, well... he states that a lot depends on western partners, what ukraine hoped to get from them, it did not get, and it is more and more difficult to count on itself, but really, but as for under such circumstances, to lead resistance and achieve the goal of reaching the borders in 1991, it is also desirable in some short-term perspective, because if it will be for a long time, then there will simply not be enough people, several things that i would like to respond to, well, first of all, to say that we do not have aid, and it is not enough, this is not true, we do have aid, and it is constantly coming, including the visit of volodymyr zelenskyi, which brought us a lot of important military aid, which is purchased, but did not bring the main thing, did not bring the main permission to beat in russian territory, so there are serious problems with it, i

relate it including from the inside'. political, again, american affairs, where perhaps, if we even gave us that permission now, it might be, it wouldn't be beneficial to certain political forces within america for their domestic rhetoric, but i hope that when soon elections in the united states and finally one of the candidates will become president, we will have more clarity, but i am convinced that there will still be such a permission, i would like... i would also like to react to the fact that serhii said, now is a good time for negotiations, because we may still lose something, well, we must not forget that putin does not take the negotiations seriously and he wants to take 100% of everything for himself, kursk really gives us the opportunity to make certain additional arguments in the negotiations in the future.