on the eve of the presidential election in the united states of america and after 2.5 years of a full-scale invasion. in particular , the war, which reached a dead end on the battlefield, has reached the stage of maturity that exists, which is the most dangerous. the future of ukraine and europe as a whole will be uncertain if its allies simply give in to the aggressor's blackmail. as in any peace negotiations, as zelensky knows, each side must be...will make concessions, but what cannot be given up is security and the preservation of free and of sovereign ukraine, writes el pais. here are two such theses, in particular, christina, i don't know if you watched the first part of our program, we talked about this chinese-brazilian plan, where they want to advance something, there is already... orban communicates with these countries,

goes there- here as part of its peace initiatives. switzerland allegedly joins the proposals for such negotiations. at the same time, we see that president zelensky travels to the united states of america, meets with trump, with harris, with the current president joe biden and presents a plan for victory. as i have already emphasized, we are talking about this plan of victory. they spoke many times and even some part of points 5 six nine was demonstrated in the western press, in particular the times newspaper published about it, but here we see yermak's statement when he says that some part will still be closed , well, frankly speaking, let this be my subjective opinion, i find it somehow strange that after

this plan was seen by a huge number of people, and when it was already published about it is in the press that there are some points of this plan, they should be closed, and in fact, so that the russian federation does not see them, well, unless it is some kind of appendices, unless it is something that concerns, let's say, some kind of military, some specific things, yes, but in general, if we talk about the general, general postulates of this victory plan, i think that, in principle, it should have been known to ukrainians for a long time that, first of all, people and ukrainian society are number one, who must know for what purpose, with what plans, with what vision is the government going somewhere, strategically, i mean, strategically, where are we going, and here we are... here we are

today, already on september 30, today is the end of the first decade of autumn, and we have not actually seen a detailed plan . what is your opinion, khrystyna, about this whole situation? there are many plans, and of course, we, as ukrainians, are guided by the plan declared by the president of ukraine, volodymyr zelenskyi, and he does it in his own. chat with those who are directly involved in making decisions about helping us, well, in general, in implementation of this plan, but the question always arises in my mind, to what extent different plans agree with each other, in which points to what extent they differ, and we understand that, well, these are very often fundamentally completely different things, in some plans we have already seen how they try

to highlight the interests of the russian federation, at least from those that it declared at the start of the large-scale invasion, and we saw how these plans try to save the resource potential of russia, because it is also being depleted, despite a rather large this potential, and on the other hand, we see that each of the plans that is proposed, or that is ready to be... supported by our allies, it is still about the fact that ukraine should remain a sovereign state, and that is already good, and although , in my opinion, this is somewhat insufficient, because, of course, the minimum plan, on the other hand, and the maximum of our victory in this war, is the preservation of the sovereignty of our country. another question,

unfortunately, i think it might sound a bit cynical, another question, within what limits, within what borders, on what terms, on what basically, the main thing is to survive. again, you know, decisively, everything else will already be strung on this basis, there are many plans, i personally was a little confused by yermamak's thesis on the topic that ukrainians will be ready to understand why some of the points of zelenskyi's plan are being hidden from them for now , the enemy hears everything, says the head of the president's office, the main thing is that we see the results of these points of the plan on the battlefield and... in the middle of the russian federation, hinting that it is precisely the military component that we are not ready for yet show, but already, we hope, show those on whom the decision-making depends, no matter how much we talked about the plans, i do not see

the main thing, the readiness of the russian federation, at least somehow in general, at least somehow to cast an eye on any proposals. well, ours, not ours, chinese-brazilian, well, i don’t hear from public figures of the russian federation that they are ready to consider something there, no, randomly, of course, they have some ideas, like lavov’s, at least two laws, we will talk about it , we will now talk about it separately, and we will actually give all these quotes, yes, yes, but, well, the russians do not see for themselves now no... the need for any plans, peace talks and so on, in principle, as i understand it, everything is going quite well for putin, they are pushing, they the minimum plan, in principle, as i understand it, they want to achieve is to capture the entire

donetsk-luhansk region, of course after that they will talk about the need to capture kherson and zaporizhzhia, well, because they wrote it into their constitution, it does not change the essence , how many... sir, don't produce, so many concepts, even don't even propose plans, concepts, something has to break in the spine of the russian regime so that they at least stick to something, and here it's really important for us to have at least some straw. i hope that the plan proposed by president zelensky will be the same normal one in our interests, first of all in order to break something in the backbone of russia. something has to change in the world community's vision of russia itself on the map of the world as a whole, and i have already repeatedly said that in order for something to change, something for russia to fundamentally change or disappear in that in the form in which it is now, for this

it is necessary to revise in principle the concept of the approach to what the world sees russia as, to be honest... i was not so pleasantly surprised in some aspects by the article on economy, which today, by the way , are being discussed, and it seems to say that ukraine really needs to be supported, that the west really needs to change its approach, but again, some aspects of this article, as we see it now on the screens, are so russian. .. centrist or russophile, for example, there is a quote about growth, nationalist views in ukraine, or, for example, there is a quote there, which, again, is absolutely manipulative, when it comes to

russian speakers, that is, the problem is that the world still looks at russia as a full-fledged subject, at ukraine very often... as if such a subject, but to some extent an object, like a country that is still somewhere in the sphere of influence of russia, i really, really don't like that such a position, it still remains valid , and i don't like the fact that the world is still not ready to completely abolish russian, russian culture, russian in principle. vision of our world, russian centers that exist all over the world, they do exist. the problem here is something else, the problem is that we did not offer the ukrainian point of view to the world. by the way, i was just

talking about this right now, i mentioned a small article written by oleksiy holobutsky, a political scientist, and he... said that, i will quote, the essence remained russia-centric, because we failed to move the west to ukrainian centricity or? though equidistant distancing from russia and the rest, because our elites for decades, instead of implementing the ukrainian agenda at the cultural, informational, economic, and political levels, simply considered ukraine a feeding territory and acted accordingly. and here in fact, when i was driving in front of our ether and read it, it is straight to the point, it is straight to the point... that on the one hand there is a world that has not canceled russian, and on the other hand there is

ukraine, the state, the government , authorities, i would say , various authorities that were in ukraine, which also did not cancel russian in ukraine, and who also, let's talk about the present, did not advance an adequate, full-fledged, er... pro-ukrainian agenda to the world community, when i spoke about the fact that, i'm sorry, foreign language freedom, maybe to some extent it is necessary, but where, for example, is our english-language television broadcasting, where is our spanish, spanish-language television broadcasting, yes, where will we present our position, where are our full-fledged cultural centers in the world in... the country, in every big city, i’m sorry, christina, there are russian centers in every city, that's when i visited

the border, wherever i went, there were russian cultural centers everywhere, russians had somewhere to go, everywhere there were russian concerts, russian, russian ballet, russian events there, they influenced their people abroad. and they influenced the opinions of the population abroad, that look, the great russian culture, here it is, here it exists, it is great, and unfortunately, even in such powerful democracies as, for example, great britain, in london, how many in london is actually russian, that is cultural, cultural, informational, political centers who demonstrate to the british that this is russian culture, it cannot be canceled,

there is putin, what theory do they have now, there is, there is putin, well, putin, well, well, putin is not russia, but there is a great russia with a great history, only that it is a story of blood, bloody slaughter, that it is a story of enslavement, destruction of peoples, that it is a story of the joining of a country on someone else's mountain and, in principle, on... on everything foreign, on someone else's history, on foreign artists, on foreign historians, foreign thinkers, on foreign scientists, about this well, no one wants to talk, and we, as a state, in my opinion, at the very beginning of 1991 , we did not build this policy, and we are not even building it until now, and i will say one last thing about why we, maybe you , why... why not, maybe our viewers were so affected by what they are telling us, we will not

show this plan in full, and it affected us because we remember the istanbul, possible istanbul agreements, but no one told us about that , what are the plans, and then in six months, a year, two, even today with every month there are new details of what a disaster could have been in the event... that if ukraine, let's say, would have agreed to the istanbul agreements, because there, there was everything, there was also about our army , there was also about our language, there was also about denazification, there was actually everything that russia demanded, so of course we have a certain mistrust, so once again we do not see adequate, normal communication with society, when we are proven that such is... victory before it is introduced, even if there is no need to show something, but

it is necessary to talk with us, that in this plan there are victories point by point, completely point by point, after he was presented and after everyone is already talking about him the press of the whole world, i think that this is the key, the key is actually mistrust after we received a very negative and painful lesson from these, which... these are the istanbul negotiations, which in fact the absolute majority of our society, the absolute majority of the media mass information, the absolute majority in general, people were not known and found out. about these, well, in my opinion, just terrible points that were even discussed after many, many, many months. regarding the article the economist is so programmatic, very, well, let's say yes, with aplomb of realism, the article, the material that was rolled out, the main thing, the main

message there, both ukraine and the allies should be more realistic. and in the end to understand what is meant when we talk about victory, for a yakokonmist in principle, but at this moment, in my opinion, quite aptly observes that in our allies, both we and ours, even the citizens of our society within the country, have different interpretations about what victory is, you ask andriy from one person on the street, they will tell you a ceasefire. all our soldiers go home, everyone is alive, the rockets are not flying, at best, the rockets are not flying overhead, someone will say that the end of the war is an exit exclusively to the borders there in 1991, already now there will be those who will say, what is this the borders of the 91st, let's talk about kurshchyna,

and then also about kubay, well, i do, of course i am exaggerating a little, but less so. within the ukrainian society itself , the victory in this war is understood in different ways, for some this war is three years, for someone it is the 11th year, for someone it is existential, someone who is familiar with history understands that this is not a war of the first century, but no, well, that is, not one century continues, and it also depends on how people see the way out of this extremely difficult, almost... painful situation, to be honest, so it is inappropriate to somehow blame the economy now for the fact that they bring both us and our allies to the point that we decide what will be the victory, intermediate or final, i don't know how, thank you for that, here they formulated it very

aptly, on the other hand, as far as this article is concerned, and you know, andrii, that i was just madly cut, both in my heart and in my soul and in my brain, this is basically a reminder for an economist that vladimir putin and the russian federation are not interested in our territory, they are interested in ukraine not becoming a prosperous european a democratic state, that is putin is not interested in our territories, well, then i have a question, does the economist know anything about putin's aspirations, well, to restore in all parameters, including. of the territorial soviet union, which he called its disintegration in the early 2000s almost the biggest personal tragedy of his life, which in principle already occupies almost the entire luhansk region, a huge part of the donetsk region, still seems to be a larger part than the donetsk region, the zaporizhia region, so ugh, and

kherson oblast, i’m already silent about the long-occupied crimea, it’s not, it’s that... no, it has no purpose, he is not interested in the ukrainian territories, he is not interested in expelling ukrainians from these territories, and then inhabiting this semi-criminogenic russian mentality, already such assessments, as they say, he is certainly not interested in fighting with the ukrainian language, culture, identity, faith in the territories, which he occupies, of course not these... it is interesting to steal everything they can give in these territories, the first thing that comes to mind is, for example, ukrainian grain, which has already been exported, well, i don't know, let the specialists say how much, but this colossal, colossal loads and quantities, when i say that putin is not interested in all this, of course, i am using sarcasm, because

he does all this, which means that he is interested in it, which means that ukraine is in everyone, absolutely in all of them. sensah, this is what he needs, ugh, ugh, and he, well, probably, here as a body is that lord, my god, immortal, here for sure, and, as they say, his needle is hiding in the egg that is ukraine , here is his death, but that's all, that's all pathetic, i'm not inclined to believe that sweat is not interested our territories, putin is interested in absolutely all of ukraine, which should... successfully reintegrate into the russian federation and already now the tentacles of the russian world are reaching out and trying to invade again in... us average , ordinary ukrainians, those who are interested and not interested in the war, are interested and is not interested in political realities in ukraine and in the world,

now everyone, everyone is dragged into the russian world together, anyone who disagrees in particular can rest in the bykivnyat forest, for example, history already has such precedents zmala, so i will gradually adapt, uh, to our next topic, andriy, and i said briefly that russia is never interested in the plans that other countries are preparing for the end of the war, in the plans that ukraine is preparing, in particular, it has everything and that's how good this russian federation is, which moves as it needs to, on the other hand, here and there, a conditional will slip through, lavrov, and he will definitely remind us that we must return to the very first demands of the russians. is that the protection of the russian-speaking population, it is actually so, by the way, what about, about this, about, about this,

i suggest you listen to the synopsis of what mr. lavrov said, yes, and what he said, let me say it again now, lavrov is the minister of foreign affairs of the occupying country, and in particular he called on the president, not the president, well, the president, but not the president. the current candidate for the presidency of the united states of america, the president in 16-20 years, donald trump, to contribute to the cancellation of the laws passed by kyiv on ukrainianization and the actual ban of the russian orthodox church, that is, we are talking about the law on language and we are talking about the ban of the russian church, and only in fact, from lavrov's point of view, this will be the first step in order to talk about something in general. what cynicism, let's listen, it's not about the territories, as zelensky is asking, give us the territories in the borders

of 1991, we are not about the territories, we are about the people who lived for centuries, developed these lands, built factories, built roads, ships , etc. here are the real reasons. if mr. trump succeeds in repealing these laws that we are talking about, that will already be a step. this is the main confirmation that russia needs all of ukraine, and that in fact russia is implementing a scenario of essentially destroying all of ukraine through the prism of the occupation of territories, that is, it is an absolutely hybrid complex approach, and when someone... says that we are sorry, but it is either a war not over the territory, or a war, someone says, not for ukraine , but only for the territories, then this

is absolutely not the case, and when, let's say, the foreign press says so, it once again emphasizes my thesis that they do not fully understand the context, or do not want to understand it, or unfortunately, they are still within the framework of this of the russian... context of the vision of the war in ukraine, the war in ukraine continues because putin needs two things: the first thing is the occupation of ukrainian territories, but maybe this is a thing for putin, well, so secondary, and the first thing is the destruction and in the end the occupation of all of ukraine, and the destruction and occupation of the whole. country, it can pass through the prism of absolutely different things, let's remember even historically, how russia carried out the

actual occupation of ukraine, wasn't ukraine then called ukraine, but the hetman state, yes, the cossack state, it is first of all did what? ems decrees, the destruction of the ukrainian language, the banning of ukrainian books, the banning of ukrainian education. the banning of everything ukrainian, and in the end, as they say, the solution to the ukrainian issue, the same is what putin is proposing today, it’s just another and very, very, very interesting reminder, an important reminder that, to those who say in ukraine that these are unimportant things, that these things are out of time, that there is a question of banning the church, a question of language, a question of memory... a question of renaming streets, a question of historical justice, that all of this is unimportant today in ukraine, then lavrov together with putin

today... once again remind that for them this is the number one issue, that for them it is the number one priority, it is the destruction of everything ukrainian, and then, accordingly, the occupation of ukraine. what does putin want, putin wants to secure for himself those territories that he occupied today, well, not putin, but russia, but to leave ukraine in the so-called gray zone, where it will not join nato. where it will not join the european union, where it will have a limited army, where it will have the russian language, and everywhere it will have the russian church and russian narratives, i.e. russia is important creeping, gradual, if they can not take over in general, they will carry out a creeping gradual occupation of our country, ugh, and therefore, of course, that is absolutely

logical. that lavrov and putin and russia in general declare these things, for them they are of primary importance, and because when we say that in fact this is a war for the whole of ukraine, and not only for individual territories, then this is an absolute and direct confirmation of the fact that putin wants, putin wants a solution to the ukrainian issue. first ukraine, first the russian federation occupies the minds, only then it occupies the territory where these minds live, it has always been so, and this, this is a reasonable approach, frankly, a pragmatic approach, and if i had the goals that the russian federation has, i would did absolutely the same thing, people who are used

to certain... things have a hard time giving up these habits, forcing them to give up these habits, well, except for crazy stress, fear, release of adrenaline and a sense of danger. this is what the ukrainians, the people of russia, the ukrainians, at one time the people of russia, who moved over, were guided by consciously or unconsciously, in the vast majority of them consciously and they tried to speak the ukrainian language after the first rockets on february 24, 22nd. year, this week i came across a rather interesting phenomenon, why a phenomenon, because it is really a phenomenon, i follow it in many planes, we already talked about it with you andriyu, when we talked, for example, about the ukrainian instablogosphere, let's say, and how much the narratives that they start to launch at the same time are put into one kind of caravan, so these narratives about what...

ukrainians, ukrainian-speakers very often pressurize russian-speakers, and sometimes, because of this, i want to return to russian, this is how this phenomenon looks like, it is pushed from above, and already now i see that similar tendencies are taking on such, you know, already conscious, clear outlines, among among ordinary people, people who are engaged in completely different things. in our lives, and we come back to the topic, unfortunately, we come back to the topic of what's the difference, what's the difference, in what language, it's extremely dangerous, and when you start explaining to people that we've already been there and that it's enough to jump on one and the same rake, people go into aggression, into misunderstanding, absolutely

absolutely. but presenting everything in the opposite light, they say that those ukrainians who speak ukrainian are aggressive, and they demand this, at least from the public environment, so that no victory can be won, i will certainly not be original if i say that to grow ukrainian-speaking children in ukraine now, at least in the capital. this is a daily job, because russian content is everywhere on the network, if we talk about it, the russian language is everywhere, the overwhelming amount children, at least in my child's school he really speaks russian, although the educational process, and it is already excellently conducted in the beautiful ukrainian language, and here all specialists, absolutely all teachers.