nemo us, of course, from the visit to kyiv, actually mark rutte, the new secretary general of nato, he arrived in ukraine and made several statements related to, including, ukraine's possible membership in the north atlantic alliance. in particular, mr. ryute stated that ukraine is closer to nato than ever before, also... mr. ryute also commented on the possibility of striking russia with western weapons, and in particular, again, a large number of publications appeared in foreign the press, which concern the possible membership of ukraine in nato, here is the financial times, several articles appeared there, one today, some articles appeared during the previous days, in particular - one of - in

one of the articles it is written that nato is considering the so-called german model of ukraine's membership, that is, relatively speaking, we understand , that this is part of the country can join the north atlantic alliance, including other statements, in particular, former nato secretary general jen stoltenberg said that ukraine can become a member of nato even with... with occupied territories, at least there was a statement but in addition, let's pay attention to one article from the same edition of financial times, which is very actively circulated today in the e-e ukrainian, at least in the internet segment, which is actively discussed by ukrainians, in particular, i will quote: western ukrainian officials made a decision , that the basis for negotiations can be essential... security guarantees in exchange for

russia's control over the occupied territories of ukraine, in particular, under these essential security guarantees, membership in nato, at least that part, is also being considered of the country, or those territories that are under the control of official kyiv. the publication also notes that this will be a tacit agreement that these lands should be returned by diplomatic means in the future to ukraine. must define a military defense border, agree not to station troops or nuclear weapons on a permanent basis on its territory, if it is not threatened by an attack, well, this is one, some, relatively speaking, one spectrum of those articles that were in the foreign press, we will also talk about others, but let's at least let's discuss this mass of material that we now have: ukraine in nato, about this...

the second question began to be actively discussed again, this is actually this so-called tacit agreement, by the way, i also want to add here that according to the sources of the mass media information, some who published a response, allegedly in the president's office, reacted to the article, one of the tv channels notes this, about the supposed security guarantees, again, the president's office allegedly says... that this is a delusion, it is not true, there is no no one at the event officially and clearly proposed such a conversation ukraine has such security guarantees that would definitely prevent the expansion or recurrence of the war. well, these are the things, mr. vitaly, mr. rutte's arrival in kyiv, his opinion on nato, jens stoltenberg's opinion, and these articles in the western press, what are they about. testifies on this

so-called political and diplomatic track and whether today our western partners really consider the possibility that ukraine, at least in some perspective, or perhaps within the framework of some formal or informal agreement, joins nato, but without the actual occupied territories. well, look. i will discuss this story from 2022, not 2024, if you remember, i publicly talked about this in 2022, as a possible version of the development of events, and by the way, it was then that i said that the issue was being discussed, as it should to look like a zone that will not be covered by the guarantees of the fifth article, that is, ukraine is accepted there by donat in all its territorial integrity, but here is the question of the fifth article. it's

about the same with germany, it's true that germany thought it had the right to all its territories, including on the territory of the gdr, but the fifth article covered the territory only. and the german democratic republic was a completely different state organism, a part of another defense union, as, say, happens with the occupied territories of ukraine to a certain extent. but, again, even then there were options that were discussed. one of the options is to provide a security guarantee along the contact line, another option was to provide a security guarantee without... from the territories that are considered disputed between russia and ukraine, many people took offense at me then, that i called these territories disputed, but from the point of view of the constitutional law of the two countries, whether we like it or not, these are disputed territories, simply russia destroyed international law, but this does not make the fact of the dispute

invalid, non-existent, the constitutions of russia are donetsk, luhansk, kherson , zaporizhzhia regions and the republic of crimea and sevastopol. and even if we liberate these territories by military means, they will not go anywhere from the constitution of the russian federation, it will consider these territories occupied by ukraine, it will consider that it must return these territories either politically or militarily, it will prepare for revenge, well, in a similar way to azerbaijan with nagorno -karabakh and its regions, which were the so -called security zone, of course, it would be international law was on the side of azerbaijan. we will not even argue with this, i think, for a minute, but azerbaijan believed for a long time that it would be able to return these territories through political dialogue, but all this time it was preparing for a new war with armenia in order solve this issue by force, for example, if we regained our territories

in russia, and russia would leave these territories in the constitution, it would be necessary to understand that it is preparing for the moment when it can take these territories. by the way of a new war with ukraine, by the way, there is also a downside, even if we do not liberate these territories, but continue to consider them constitutionally ours, then russia in any case considers ukraine a potentially hostile state and a threat, that is, a country that claims these territories, which are prescribed in its constitution and which it has the right to legitimately take away by political or military means, and therefore, of course, russia first of all... will always demand from ukraine such constitutional changes that would remove from the constitution of ukraine, donetsk, luhansk, kherson, zaporizhzhia regions, crimea and sevastopol to date, and secondly, if this withdrawal does not happen, it will prepare for the destruction of the ukrainian state that resists such changes and for the creation of such a ukrainian

state that will agree to constitutional changes, what was done in principle in 2022 year, so to think that there can be peace between russia and ukraine at all and that we will live to some. real peace, when we will feel safe in our country, only a person who is not aware of the depth of the pit into which we have fallen thanks to putin's aggressive actions, this time, the second time, now nato, nato has always been hoped for and continues to be hoped for , that putin would come to his senses and at least agree to freeze the war, uh, along the contact line, they hoped for it in 2022, they... hoped for it in 2023 2024 ends, there is no sign of an end to the war even on the horizon, money, billions are being spent, the european economy does not look happy, china's influence is increasing, the united states is in

a difficult political situation with elections, everyone is asking, so what next, and then there is an option , maybe it will be possible to stop them in this way, to say that we do not want to... interfere, but we will intervene if you destroy the status quo, you have achieved this, we condemn it, it is bad, you occupied ukrainian territory, you announced her own, all this is terrible, but, but we understand that we cannot solve anything here by force, and you must understand that you cannot achieve anything by force... god , so that you understand this for sure, we announce the euro-atlantic integration of ukraine, understand that ukraine is a piece of land that has been cut off, that even if you fight for 10 years, you will not get it, well, maybe you don't need to fight for 10 years, maybe you will calm down, but in order for the russians

to start at all to think in this direction, we need some kind of formula for the presence of ukraine in nato, that is, some explanation that if russia attacks ukraine, it will be joint. the response of the bloc, not what is happening now, when against a nation of 120 million people, which has practically put its entire economy on war rails and a president who enjoys war as the best time of his life. a state whose citizens seek peace, unlike their neighbors on the other side of the border, who consider war to be the best state for russian statehood, as we understand it, and in this situation, in this situation, you and i see that nato does not really realize as far as it can take risks, that is, let's imagine this model, how it should look in principle, the nato summit is coming. in order for this to happen, there must be a nato summit. well, let's imagine fantastically that the extraordinary

nato summit will take place before the end of the term of the presidency of biden. and this nato summit 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 outcome of the us presidential election. and the idea of ​​the new american administration about it. but let's imagine that... kamela wins in november harris, who agrees with this concept, was invited, now the question is: in order for ukraine to become a full-fledged member of nato, the fifth article must be extended 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 the parliaments of the nato member countries. you believe that the parliaments of countries like ... hungary or slovakia will do it quickly. it can take years. it could

take years, that's for sure. if sweden took two years, two, two. so how much in this one situation will go to ukraine? moreover, they will say that they are absolutely in favor. they just want to reach a political solution to the conflict in this situation, to reach an agreement between moscow and kyiv on a ceasefire, something like that. and moscow will consider that if it only reaches. an intermediate option, this is when ukraine receives an invitation to nato, and certain parts of nato, nato countries, for example, the united states, great britain and france, provide ukraine with security guarantees of the swedish and finnish type, but again, and we have carefully studied the swedish guarantees, it is implied that if, say, sweden... expects to join nato or finland, and at that moment it is attacked by

russia, then the russian division goes to the russian-finnish border and goes to helsinki. does this mean that the united states is participating in this war, or is it just helping finland? it is necessary to analyze it in the essence of the guarantee. so ukraine is still being helped, well, in fact, and not only the united states of america is helping, dozens of countries are helping. that's right, that's right i ask what will change in these guarantees, if there is a change, that is how the united states provides guarantees to ukraine, and clearly for a specific territory, yes, or for an undisputed territory, or for a territory along the line of contact, then this is another story, by the way, how to define the border for ukraine military, she defined the border, and the russians broke through tomorrow somewhere in some other place, does this mean that they will not break through, because they definitely understand that this is a border and then it is a nato border, huh. so, now the next question arises for the americans and the british, here they, let's say, provided guarantees similar to the fifth

article of nato, until the moment when the fifth article begins to act in reality, and russia took and launched a missile, let's say the kharkov run, the next day, or even on the very day when it was signed, in the same city in which it was signed, someone came to kyiv to sign it, there was a rocket bombardment, what does this mean? what should the united states do? or they have to say: well, you know, well, it's not the same thing, well, then it's the bankruptcy of this whole idea, because what we announced, you are with us, you are in nato, we invited you, but you will still be shelled, or the united states said: well, listen, you russians do not respect us, we said that all this is nato territory, we are this territory we are protecting, the protocol process of ratification is just going on, where did you go, we destroy with our missiles from the territory. i don’t know poland or germany there, 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, that’s for sure we we know who guarantees it, who is the person who will say, you can hit russia, and she will not respond, that is the problem in all of this, that is, i precisely adhere to this point of view, that if ukraine receives security guarantees of russians on the controlled territory . they will not fire because they also have no guarantee that america will not fire 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. or kherson region, i believe in that, but not to cross this line, which will be determined, uh, but i'm not the president of the united states, i can think so, it's my expert opinion, but i'm not responsible for those millions of people who could die as a result, if i'm wrong, if they die, i'll just sit down behind the computer and i will write a text called millions, disappeared from the face

of the earth, they will think about metaphors, about how to describe it all so that it is interesting. 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 only responsible for his own life, but for the lives of all these millions of people, and he has to take risks for the sake of peace in europe for the sake of ukraine, and the prime minister of great britain, too, and the president of france , too, primarily as the leader of the nuclear powers, which what should they do in this situation? this is a difficult issue, that is, we believe, there is a whole... you see, a group of people who make such statements, such as jen stolterberg, er, andersfors rasmussen, pavlo klimkin, i'm just listing for you the people who spoke about such a discussion, i can do to carry it, and we say, no, don't 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 state, you have a different level of responsibility, so i i don't know, andrei, how it will all develop, do you understand? but let's say if donald trump is elected as the president of the united states of america, in this case the architecture that we just described is possible or is it already impossible? in principle, i do not think that donald trump will consider the issue of accession ukraine to nato. that is, if trump... becomes president, then, accordingly, such an idea, from biden’s side, may not go anywhere without trump, you see, and just exist as a theory, huh, but if trump really becomes president, then what do you think to say, i'll say it 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 very big ... supporter of nato, this time trump can, and he hardly is a supporter of ukraine's accession to nato, well, at least according to the characteristic features that he submits to, well, you saw that jd vance, he generally says that russia should be promised that ukraine will not become a member of nato, because from the point of view of jay divens, this is something that really confuses russia, but from jay divens there is another idea, which i also consider absolutely illogical, that is, it will be necessary to arm russia and then ukraine. so that russia could not attack it, well, all this does not mean that russia has to agree to this either, here we always want to ask, how will we put russia in front of the fact, how will we put russia in front of fact, and i have no answer to this

question, if we, if we start from the point of view of this article, about which i quoted financial. times, well, is this true or not, if so, it 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 be essential security guarantees. mr. vitaly, from the point of view of the ukrainian government, is the ukrainian government really ready for such a position, and how will it communicate this position to ukrainian society, here would be in which case there will be a certain split, that is, some people will believe that in fact it is to leave these territories at will 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 on the territory or

not, this is not a situation when we are advancing somewhere, and we are told to stop advancing and... and give such and such control over these territories to the russians, no i want you and i to move into reality and understand that the choice is not between whether these territories will actually be controlled by the russians or not, the choice is between whether ukraine will lose some more regions, and most importantly, whether ukraine will even exist on the political map as a secular dependent state in the near future, because the prerequisites for the disappearance of ukraine, they exist, not because the russians will conquer ukraine, no, i have already said many times, the russians have no chance. to conquer ukraine, they do not have the strength to do so, but they have all the opportunities through a long-term war to bring ukrainian society to a state of indifference to of 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, there is a feeling that let it everything will end under any conditions, the mood of most people changes, this is the so-called chechen version of the end of the war, this is how the second chechen war ended, and i always say that it is dangerous, so ukraine has different dimensions, so ukraine has a larger population . yes, ukraine is in europe, but if ukraine is not surrounded by security guarantees, so it just takes more time to bring the ukrainian population to such a state, and to be honest, i don't really care what ukrainians think today, i care what they will think tomorrow, because people , who today sit and answer sociologists that they believe that the war can end only at the borders of 1991 and only with reparations from russia, and until... the war criminal vladimir putin in 5-6 years, when they will see, what else some ukrainian regions are under the control of russia, putin is not only not punished, but travels around the world and meets with leaders, at least

of the countries of the global south, nothing special happens with the russians themselves, and we live in anticipation of every winter as a disaster, this person can change your point of view, it happens, it is actually the consequences, probably, of the information policy that... we had or still have in the 22nd, 23rd, 24th years, we apologize, very often it is not us, but some means mass media, some pro-government, conditionally speaking, yes, the 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 belittled and... for example, the capabilities of the same russia, in including, i am not saying anything, maybe for some first months it was done correctly, but then,

it seems to me, this position did a very, very big disservice to our citizens, who still live in some such illusions that ot- here and there, as if soon it must, must must come a miracle, and we here are absolutely not against a miracle. time has finally shown that this miracle is still unexpected, so i don't know how the government will offer it, although for one reason, i don't know at all that they will have the opportunity to offer it, or if this option will ever be realistic , maybe the authorities won’t need to offer anything, maybe it will stay like this if the western allies finally come to such a decision, well, i don’t see any... problems for the authorities, didn’t the president of ukraine say repeatedly, that there may be a situation when we will return part of our territories politically, well, that's what he will say, as he

repeatedly said, that this is how we now receive security guarantees for our allies from our allies, we become members of nato, our there is fulfilled the main desire is that we continue the negotiations for joining the european union, and regarding the occupied territories, we will continue to fight. for them, no one is forcing us to give up these territories by political means, we will never give them up, we believe that this ukrainian territories, and how nato members of the european union will fight for the return of these territories with the support of our allies, can you say so? maybe, maybe , well, why, if we still remember that the popularity of volodymyr zelensky is not based on the common sense of his supporters, on the sectarian attitude to politics, then i think that he can afford everything. anything, and those who now began to accuse volodymyr zelenskyi, by the way, completely without grounds for all mortal sins, whenever he wants to the continuation of the war, the preservation of power, he

will never convince them of anything, it is like the situation with petro poroshenko, that is, if we consider it from the point of view of volodymyr zelensky holding power, well, these are not my problems, these are the problems of the president himself, his entourage, i do not believe at all that president zelensky can win any real, fair, competitive elections after the war, but if they... believe in it, but let them work for his election results, not for reality, again, it's not mine problems, i just repeatedly said that this does not happen in history, the president of war never becomes the president of peace, and president zelenskyi 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, he didn’t start the war, putin started it, but one way or another, in this war , zelensky looks exactly like... the president of war, not the president of peace, which means that when it comes to peace, then new ones will appear people, new forces, i think that in general there will be a serious reformatting of the entire political field, or it may not be so, or

there will be a war. to continue for years, there will be no elections here, and there will be such a virtually authoritarian regime of volodymyr zelenskyi, i don’t know there for another 10 years, it may be so, absolutely, absolutely, in many countries, as you know, which look like outposts of democracy, martial law was not abolished for decades, in taiwan, say, during the times of chiang kai-shek, there were the first real free elections were, after 30 years, it is given, after. how chankeshia 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 elections, what are elections, here the inhabitants of this country will forget for a long time, they simply will not exist, but they will be after the war, i guarantee it, vance and walsh, moving on to the debates of the vice-presidential candidates in the united states of america and in general to the ...

election campaign in the largest democracy in the world, exactly one month left until how the elections will be held, before the americans go to the polls and choose a new president, in fact this week there was this debate, who was more convincing, we will discuss it, in particular, many were surprised by how... benz , who is the republican candidate, the candidate of donald trump for the post of vice president of the united states of america, showed himself not in the worst way, there is even an expert environment, and the voting showed that somewhere about 50 to 50 the opinions were divided, the voices of the people were divided, at least on cnn, well... one interesting detail:

the candidates did not mention ukraine, i.e. the war in ukraine, they focused more on the domestic issues of the united states, discussed anything there, and social issues, immigration, but did not discuss ukraine. well, mr. vitaly, there is a month left before the elections, and these debates took place, perhaps which were not completely followed. in ukraine, in contrast to what happened when the debate between trump and harris took place, we see that the election campaign is going along roughly the same lines, in which it was held before, that is, nothing so extraordinary happened, well, besides the fact that there trump once again distinguished himself by calling harris mentally retarded, even the republicans criticized

the former. the vice president of former president donald trump, and one more piece of information, if i may add, reuters reports that the republicans are preparing to challenge the results of the elections in the united states of america, in particular in those states where those shaky so-called states, and even today, by the way , the current president of the united states america's joe biden said that he is afraid of what will happen... after the election, in fact, we are talking about possible provocations, most likely from the same donald trump. this, mr. vitaly, is the debate of the vice-presidential candidates, the general concept of how the election campaign is currently proceeding, if we talk about it, does it somehow change the election paradigm now, or are we still in these in principle...

.50 percent, 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 become the next president, precisely because you don't 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. logy is still on the verge of statistical uncertainty, in some it is not, in some it is already visible, in some it is in favor of harris, of course, but one way or another, this is precisely why such attention is drawn to the debate of the candidates for the position of vice president of the united states, we in any in what other situation would they not have paid attention to them at all, do you ever remember that you were interested in the candidates for the position of vice president, hardly, but biden already dated someone...