drive, that is, some explanation that if russia attacks ukraine, there will be a joint response of the bloc, not what is happening now, when against a country of 120 million people, which has practically transferred its entire economy to war rails and a president who enjoys war, as the best time in his life, there is a 30-million state, whose citizens seek peace, unlike their neighbors on the other side of the border, who consider war the best state for russian statehood, as we understand it, and that is in this situation. in this situation, you and i see that nato is not very good realizes how much risk it can take, that is, let's imagine this model, what it should look like in principle, a nato summit is coming, in order for this to happen, there must be a nato summit, well, let's imagine fantastically that an extraordinary nato summit will take place, before the deadline the biden presidency, and this summit... nato invites ukraine to nato.

all allies agree with this. i don't really see how that can be done when we don't know the results of the us presidential election. and the idea of ​​the new american administration about it. but let's imagine that kamela garis wins on november 5, who agrees with this concept. ok. invited now the question is the following: in order for ukraine to become full-fledged. a nato member, the fifth article should apply to it. in order for the fifth article to be extended to it, it is necessary that the agreement on ukraine's accession to nato be ratified by all parliaments of nato member countries. you believe that the parliaments of countries like turkey, hungary or slovakia will do it quickly. it can take years. it could take years, that's for sure. if on sweden took two years, two, two. how many

will go to ukraine in such a situation, and they will say that they are absolutely in favor, they just want a political solution to the conflict to be reached in this situation, to reach some kind of agreement between moscow and kyiv on a ceasefire, something like that, and moscow will believe that if it only reaches this agreement, then ukraine will immediately join nato, so there is no need to rush, so there may be some intermediate option, an intermediate option, this is when ukraine receives an invitation to nato, and... individual parts of nato, nato countries, say, the united states, great britain and france provide ukraine with security guarantees of the swedish and finnish type. but again, and we carefully studied the swedish guarantees, it is implied that if, say, sweden is waiting for nato or finland to join, and at that moment russia attacks it, then the russian division crosses the russian-finnish border and heads to helsinki, this. means that the united states

is participating in this war, or is it just helping finland? it is necessary to analyze it in essence of guarantees. ukraine is still being helped, well, in fact, and it is not only the united states of america that is helping, dozens are helping the country correctly, so i am asking what will change in these guarantees, if there is a change, that is how the united states provides guarantees to ukraine, and clearly to a specific territory, or to a non-disputed territory, or to a territory along the contact line. then this is one story, by the way, how to define a military border for ukraine, but it defined the border, and tomorrow the russians broke through somewhere in some in another place, what does this mean, or that they will not break through, they definitely understand that this is a border and then it is a nato border. ugh. so, now the next question arises for the americans and the british, let 's say they have provided guarantees similar to the fifth article of nato until the moment when the fifth article begins to act in reality. and... she took and launched

a missile, let's say, the kharkov race, the next day, or even the same day when it is signed, in the same city in which it is signed, somewhere in kyiv, they came to sign, there was a rocket bombardment, what is this means what the united states has to do, or they have to say, well, you know, well, it's not the same thing, well, then that's the bankruptcy of the whole idea, because what we've announced is, you 're with us, you're in nato, we you were invited, but you will be... while being shelled, or the united states said, well, listen, you russians don't respect us, we said that this is all, this is nato territory, we are defending this territory, there is just a protocol process of ratification, where did you go, we destroy with our missiles from the territory there, i don't know poland or germany, your launchers, ladies, well, great, destroyed, but what will happen the next day, and there are guarantees that vladimir putin will not hit romstein there, let's say with his missiles, but we know that for sure. who

guarantees it? who is the person who will say: you can hit russia, and it will not respond? that 's the problem with all of this, that is, i precisely adhere to this point of view that... that if ukraine receives security guarantees in the controlled territory, the russians will have to shoot, because they also do not have a guarantee, that america will not shoot back in such a situation, they do not know this, they may not want to check it, they will continue to operate there within the framework of donetsk region or kherson region, i believe in this, but not to cross this line, which will be determined, uh, but i'm not the president of the united states, i can assume that's my point of expertise. but i'm not responsible for those millions of people who might die as a result, if i'm wrong, if they die, i'll just sit down at the computer and write a text called millions disappeared from the face of the earth, i will think about metaphors, about how to describe all this in such a way that it will be interesting to read about readers in the future who will be

interested in my testimony of this disaster, if i myself survived, but the president of the united states, he is not for his own life only carries responsibility, and for the lives of all these... millions of people, he has to risk for the sake of peace in europe, for the sake of ukraine, and the prime minister of britain too, and the president of france too, first of all as the leader of the nuclear powers, what should they do in this situations, this is a difficult question, that is, we convince, as you can see, there is a whole group of people who make such statements, such as jen stolterberg, andersfors rasmussen, pavlo klimkin, it's just me... lists people who spoke about such a discussion, i can relate myself to it, and we say, no, do not be afraid, it is not risky, but these people make such statements when they do not hold positions, it is an expert assessment of the situation when you are the head

of the state, you have a different level of responsibility, so i do not know, andriy, you understand how it will all develop, but let's suppose if the president of the united states the united states of america... elects donald trump, in which case the architecture that you and i have just described is possible, or is it no longer possible? in principle, i do not think that donald trump will consider the issue of ukraine's accession to nato. that is, if trump becomes president, then, accordingly, such an idea, from the side of biden and without trump, may not go anywhere, you know? and just to exist as a theory. ugh. but if trump really becomes the president, so what can i say, i say again, i don't really believe that this story will end like this with nato, because trump, as you know, is not at all a big supporter of nato, for once it is possible

and unlikely that he is a supporter of ukraine joining nato, well, at least according to the characteristic signs that he presents, he says that it is necessary in to promise russia that ukraine will not become a nato member, because from jd vance's point of view, that is what really confuses russia, but jd vance has another idea, which i also find completely illogical, which is that russia will have to then arm ukraine then, so that russia cannot attack it to attack, well, all this also does not mean that russia has to agree to this, right here we always want to ask, and in what way will we put russia in front of the fact? "how do we put russia in front of the fact, and i don't have any answer to this question, if we, if we start from the point of view of this article, about which i quoted from the financial times, well

, is it true or not, if this is a controversial issue , but still, here is the language, i remind you once again, western ukrainian officials have decided that the basis for negotiations can become essential guarantees of security, mr. vitaly, from the point of view of the ukrainian authorities, are the ukrainian authorities really ready for such a position, and how will they communicate this position to ukrainian society, here in any case there will be a certain split, that is, some people will believe that in fact, it is to leave these territories to their own devices, and they are already writing about it after this article was published. others say, clap their hands, say, oh, great, finally the war will end, well, first of all, it is necessary to clearly understand whether to leave these in the territory or not, it is no no no a situation when we are advancing somewhere and we are told to stop advancing and give

control over these territories to the russians, i want you and i to move into reality, understand that the choice is not ours, whether these territories will actually be controlled by the russians or there will not be, but the choice is between... will ukraine lose some more regions, and most importantly, will ukraine even exist on the political map of the world, then as an independent state in the near future, because the prerequisites for the disappearance of ukraine, they exist, are not because the russians will win. no, i am has already said many times: the russians have no chance of conquering ukraine, they do not have the strength to do so, but they have every opportunity, through a long-term war, to bring ukrainian society to a state of indifference, to the very idea of ​​statehood. if people live for years in war, in the cold, in the absence of prospects, in fear of being killed, and this happens not for 2.5 years, but for 10 years, then as you understand, it arises from... the feeling that let it all end in under any conditions, most people's

moods change, this is the so-called chechen variant the end of the war, this is how the second chechen war ended, i always say that it is dangerous, yes, ukraine has different dimensions, yes , ukraine has a larger population, yes, ukraine is in europe, but if ukraine is not surrounded by security guarantees, then for to bring the ukrainian population to such a state, it just takes more time, and , frankly, i don't really care... what ukrainians think today, i care what they will think tomorrow, because the people who sit today and answer sociologists about the fact that they believe that the war can end only at the borders of 1991 and only with reparations from russia and the punishment of the war criminal vladimir putin in 5-6 years, when they will see that some ukrainian regions are still under russian control, putin not only punished, and travels around the world and meets with the leaders of the countries of the global rooster , nothing special happens to the russians themselves, and we live in

expecting every winter as a disaster, this person can change your point of view, it happens, it in fact, the consequences, perhaps, of the information policy that we had in the 22nd, 23rd, 24th years, and we still have, we apologize, very often it is not us, but some mass media, some right-wing. conditionally speaking , yes, experts, yes, they, they tried all this time to make amends for this reality, that is, not to talk to people from the point of view of rationality, truthfulness, sometimes they belittled there, for example, the capabilities of russia itself, including , i don't say anything, maybe for the first few months it was done correctly, but then... i think this one position has done a very, very big disservice to our citizens, who still live in

some such illusions that so-so-so, as if a miracle should happen soon, and we here are absolutely not against a miracle happening, yes, but we have to say, but we have to say that unfortunately, as of today and the time has finally shown that this miracle is so far as unexpected as the authorities will propose it, although for one reason, i do not know at all whether in she will be able to offer it, whether this option will ever be realistic, maybe the authorities will not need to offer anything, maybe it will remain as it is, if the western allies finally come to such a decision, well, i don’t see any problems for the authorities, hasn’t the president of ukraine repeatedly said that there may be a situation when we part of our territories we will return politically, well, that's what he will say, as he has repeatedly said, that this is how we with... now we receive security guarantees for our allies, from our allies, we become members of nato, our main

desire there is fulfilled, we continue negotiations for introduction to the european union, and regarding the occupied territories, we will continue to fight for them politically, no one is forcing us to give up these territories, we will never give them up, we believe that these are ukrainian territories, and as nato members of the european union we will fight for the floor. in these territories with the support of our allies, one might say? maybe, maybe, well, why, what if we still remember that the popularity of volodymyr zelenskyi is not based on the common sense of his supporters, but on the sectarian attitude to politics, i think that he can afford anything, and those who have now begun to accuse volodymyr zelenskyi, by the way, absolutely baselessly of all mortal sins, when he himself wants the continuation of the war and the preservation of power, he will never convince them of anything, it’s like the situation... with petro poroshenko, that is, if we consider it from the point of view of

volodymyr zelensky’s holding of power, well, these are not my problems, these are the problems of the president himself, his entourage, i don’t at all i believe that the president zelensky can win some real fair competitive elections after the war, but if they believe in it, but let them work for his election result, not for reality, this is again not my problem, i just repeatedly said that in history does not happen, the president of war never becomes the president of peace, but... president zelensky became the president of war and it is not his fault, by the way, he wanted to end this war, he wanted to come to an agreement with putin, these were certainly unrealistic, unprofessional expectations, but he wanted it, war he didn't start the war, he started it. putin, but one way or another, in this war, zelensky looks like the president of war, not the president of peace, which means that when it comes to peace, new people, new forces will appear, i think that in general there will be a serious reformatting of everything of the political field, or it may not be so, or the war will continue for years, there will be no elections here, and there will be such an actually authoritarian regime of volodymyr zelenskyi, i

don’t know there for another 10 years, it may be so, absolutely, absolutely, in many countries like you know what you are... given by the outposts of democracy, martial law was not abolished in taiwan for decades, let's say in the time of chiang kai-shek, the first real free elections there were 30 years later, it seems, after chiang kai-shek managed to withdraw his troops to taiwan, but taiwan was considered a fortress of the free world, no matter what, and ukraine can be considered a fortress of free education, and in elections, what are elections, here the inhabitants of this country will forget for a long time. they simply won't be, but they will be after the war, i guarantee that. vance and walls. let's go to debates of the vice-presidential candidates in the united states of america, and in general the election campaign in the world's largest democracy, there is exactly one month left before

the elections, before americans go to the polls and... choose a new president, actually , this week there was this debate, who was more convincing, let's talk about it, in particular, many were surprised by how divens, who is the republican candidate, the candidate of donald trump for the post of vice president of the united states the united states showed itself to be not the worst or. there was even an expert environment, and the voting showed that somewhere around 50/50 opinions were divided, people’s voices were divided, at least on cnn, well, and one more interesting detail, the candidates did not mention ukraine, that is, the war in

ukraine, they concentrated more on internal issues of the united states, discussed. there is everything, including social issues, immigration, but they did not discuss ukraine. well, mr. vitaly, there is a month left before the elections, they have already taken place this debate, perhaps not exactly followed in ukraine, unlike what happened when the debate between trump and harris took place, we see the election campaign taking place in much the same way. in which it was held before, that is, nothing so extraordinary happened, well, in addition to the fact that there trump once again distinguished himself by calling harris mentally retarded, even the republicans criticized the former or vice president of the former donald trump, well, and such information,

if i may add, reuters reports, republicans are preparing to appeal. the results of the elections in the united states of america, in particular in those states where in those shaky so-called states, and even today, by the way, the current president of the united states of america, joe biden, said that he is afraid of what will happen after the election, actually , we are talking about possible provocations, most likely from the same donald trump. here, mr. vitaly, is the debate from. candidates for vice presidents, the general concept of how the election campaign is going now, if we are talking about it, is it is somehow changing the electoral paradigm now, are we still in those 50/50 percentages, when no one knows and no one can predict who will be

the next president, i think that no one knows, no one can predict, who will be next... precisely because you do not know what the electoral college will be like, and precisely because sociology speaks of the authority of the candidate among the entire population exclusively there, in the ugly states there, in principle, sociology is still on the margin of statistical error, in some no longer, some already visible, some findings, of course, but one way or another, that's exactly why... attention is drawn to the debates of the candidates for the position of vice president of the united states, in any other situation we would not pay attention to them at all attention, do you remember at one time that you were interested in the candidates for the position of vice president on... a number of times that biden was already with someone, when he was obama's vice president, he had a debate with someone, we don't even remember who, who was this person, and she definitely was, and this was some strong

republican politician, we just didn't pay attention to it no attention, now we're in a different situation where every event seems to be decisive, every event is not decisive, because this debate is the vice presidential candidates, it was interesting only because ... everybody thought that wentz would behave like hysterical the way he behaves at rallies, and vance, by all accounts, decided to use this debate to show his own political agenda of the soft face of trumpism, which means that he thinks about the next presidential elections that are his current the presidential election is not much of a concern, and in any case, if donald trump even wins the presidential election, it will be his last term unless he changes something significantly in the united states. he will have to give up running for president of the united states for the next term, and then the question is who is the heir to trumpism, because we have to

understand that this is no longer republicanism, trumpism, and it is clear that in such a situation, when the question arises, can trumpism survive without trump, and that's when a person, it looks with on the one hand, civilized, and on the other hand professing the values ​​of trumpism, then this... could be a good option for everyone, both trumpists and anti-trumpists in the republican party of the united states, or vice versa, if trump loses the election, someone has, there should be the next ones, because trump is unlikely to be able to be so strong after that, not that he is already a candidate, but a leader, i don't argue, i don't argue, yes, but in... in what case can such a situation be absolutely real. we understand that great and in this regard, to be honest, i

can't really imagine what event could significantly affect the course of the election campaign. surely you have already forgotten that there was an assassination attempt on trump? do you remember? two, well, the first one was the most interesting, yes, a real person died there, trump was dead. a millimeter from death, and everyone believed that this was definitely done by his election campaign, but do you remember how bookmakers and in general all these forecasts, even artificial intelligence, showed that trump has an 80% probability of winning, and i, when you ask, said it doesn't mean anything, it will pass a couple of weeks and it will be forgotten, this is not an invincible moment, there will be other photos, calm down, because this is a different situation. people who hate trump won't love him because he was shot. people who adore trump don't really need an extra shot to say he's their

hero. for people who support trump, that fist of his was a proof of strength and power. people who hate trump once again saw a person of totalitarian and authoritarian composition, who will go to any lengths for his goal, which is foreign to them. nothing has changed. but the majority of americans, even observers , did not want to understand this, did not want to understand what kind of world they were in, and believe that something could change in this situation, all this is so important, what we said, and you know, this person 5- th of november will win the election, it is not possible, there is a month left before the end of the company, a crucial month that will not decide anything, because by and large everything that we need to know, we will be ... only on the morning of november 6, or later, so what are you rightly said that the republicans are preparing to fight to challenge the results of the election, but there is a decision of the supreme court

of the united states on donald trump, which effectively rehabilitates any action by him as the president of the united states, even when it was about capitulation, and thus joseph biden, thanks to this decision of the supreme court, got an opportunity. deal decisively with any attempt to forcefully change the results of the election and not fear any liability, that is, the justices of the supreme court of the united states, ota the conservative majority decided to save donald trump from the accusations of participating in an actual coup d'état in the country, it was an attempted coup d'état. there is no need to even doubt that if mike pence had gone... by participating in this coup d'état and refused to implement the election results, we would not know at all what happened, what the procedure would look like, what

the legitimacy of the american government would look like, not how? but now joseph biden, when there will be any attempts there to storm something, uh, speak with some radical demands there, he can act absolutely decisively, he can stop these people, he can use force against them and absolutely not fear any charges, because the supreme court has already ruled that the president of the united states in this position is immune from such situations, so that these su'. they gave trump a gift along with it, but they also made it impossible for him to take any forceful action that might help him return to the white house. and this is also an important point that says that when you make one decision, very often you have to deal with the consequences of it months in advance, which nullify its meaning, because you understand that if, say, the supreme court of the united states decides that...

donald trump is guilty, and that he should be held accountable, and that he does not have immunity, now , on the one hand, there would be another process, but how many of these processes are there on trump, as we can see, his political sect absolutely does not pay attention to these processes, and on the other hand, joseph biden would think a hundred times, how should he behave so that the day after the end of the term of office of the president of the united states, not to be in the dock next to trump. it's such a shaky situation, and the situation is very volatile, and now. we can say with confidence that the president of the united states has the ability to defend the results of the election, that the republicans are so preparing to defend them themselves, the evidence is that they basically accept their defeat, and how will this help them, will it really help them, well, they appealed, if, if the people, the voters voted and the voters voted for

another candidate, what do they need? appeals will help them, don't simplify, there was already a situation in the state of florida, that is, which brought george bush jr. to the post of president, that is, it is possible that the results will be invalidated somewhere, yes, and it will help to simply cancel a certain part of the votes , of course, and get a completely different voter result, we don't know how the situation would have developed if there had been, if the votes in florida had been counted, you know? that george w. bush then won the election, on what is yours based, here you really, here you really correctly noticed that the republicans may be preparing precisely to probably cancel in theory, in theory, again, because we do not know, cancel, recount, some precincts are possible cancel so that... if in certain

states, shaky, let's say, there, issues will be decided by hundreds of votes, then in order to cancel in some precincts, conditionally so that the result is overturned, or in both states, in order to overturn the number of voters, yes, to your advantage, maybe maybe so completely, so in this regard , i think we have to understand that there are still a lot of surprises waiting for us, this is a... and a campaign that is very, very serious will then be given as a sign of insecurity in the whole world, everyone it is perfectly understood that this is the choice of the future for america, that this is the choice of the future for europe, that this is the choice of the future for ukraine, for russia, these are decisive years, in fact, this year 2024, 2028, it will show what the world will be like in the next decades 21- th world, century, and in which

century we will live. military or in peaceful, because an accurate awareness of the challenges and dangers depends on this cadence, and of course, next month we will follow the elections in the united states of america as much as possible, because they will also have a huge impact on what will happen in ukraine during the next not just months, but years, and maybe tens. years, we have a short break, the saturday political club will be back in a few minutes, so don't switch, we still have a lot of interesting topics. a journalist who joined the armed forces, a political expert who became special agent taras berezovyts in a new project on espresso. the real front is a thorough analysis of the main ones.