by the way, it will prepare for revenge, well , roughly like azerbaijan with nagorno -karabakh and its regions, which were the so -called security zone, of course, if international law was on the side of azerbaijan, we will not even deal with that, i think and minutes to argue, 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 to resolve this issue. by force, let's say if we conquered our territory 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 means of a new war with ukraine, by the way, there is also a turning point, even if we do not have these territories release, 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 written in its constitution, and which it has the right to legitimately take by political or military means, and therefore, of course, first, russia will always demand from ukraine, from ukraine, such constitutional changes that would remove from the constitution of ukraine, donetsk, luhansk, kherson, zaporizhzhya regions, crimea and sevastopol as of today, and secondly, if this removal does not happen, it will prepare for the destruction of ukrainian. of a state that is open to such changes and to the creation of such a ukrainian state that will agree to the constitutional changes, what was done in principle in 2022, so that it can be assumed that between russia and ukraine in general there can be peace and that we will live to some real peace, when we will feel safe in our country, only a person who does not realize the depth of the abyss that we have fallen into thanks to putin's aggressive actions can only do this once, twice, now nato. nato

has always hoped and continues to hope that putin will come to his senses and at least agree to freeze the war, er, along the contact line. they hoped for it in 2022, they hoped for it in 2023, 2024 is coming to an end , there is no sign of the war ending, even on horizons, money, billions are spent, the european economy does not look happy, the influence of china will increase. 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 declared

her yours, all this is terrible, but, but we understand that we are nothing here by force we cannot solve, but you must understand that you will not achieve anything new by force either, so that you understand this for sure, we are announcing the euro-atlantic integration of ukraine, understand that ukraine is a cut off piece of land that even if you are 10 years old fight, you won't get it, well, maybe you don't have to fight for 10 years, maybe you can calm down. but in order for the russians to start thinking in this direction at all, some kind of formula for the presence of ukraine in nato is needed, that is, some explanation that if russia attacks ukraine, there will be a joint response block, and not what is happening now, when against a state of 120 million people, which has practically transferred its entire economy to war rails and whose president enjoys war as the best time of his life, is a state of 30 million people, whose citizens seek...

of 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 how much risk it can take, i.e. let's imagine this one the model, how it should look in principle, the nato summit is going on. in order for this to happen, there must be a summit. then let's fantastically imagine that an extraordinary nato summit will be held before the end of biden's presidency, and this nato summit invites ukraine to nato. all allies agree with this. i don't really see how this can be done when we don't know the results of the us presidential election and how the new us administration thinks about it. but let's imagine that kamela garis, who agrees, wins on november 5. with this concept,

ok, they have invited, now the question is the following: in order for ukraine to become a full member of nato, it is necessary that the fifth article 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 was 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 sweden took two years, two, two. so how much in such a situation will go to ukraine. why will they say that they are absolutely in favor, they just want a political solution to the conflict to be reached in this situation, for some agreement to be reached between moscow and kyiv on a ceasefire, something like that, and moscow will believe that if it only reaches of this agreement, so immediately ukraine gets into nato, which means that we must not

rush, so there may be some intermediate option, an intermediate option, this is when ukraine receives an invitation to nato, and individual parts 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 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 taking over. participation in the war, or are they only helping finland? do you need to understand the essence of the guarantee? so it is in ukraine and now they help, well, in fact, and not only the united states of america helps, dozens of countries help, that’s right, so i ask what will change in these guarantees, if there is a change, that the united states provides

guarantees to ukraine, and clearly on a specific territory, or to a non-disputed territory or to a territory along the contact line, then it's one story, by the way. how can ukraine define the military border, it has defined the border, and tomorrow the russians broke through somewhere in some other place, what does this mean or what they don't will break through, because they clearly 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, so they, let's say, provided guarantees similar to the fifth article of nato, until the moment the fifth article begins to act in reality, and russia took and launched... they launched a missile, let's say, in the vicinity of kharkiv, the next day, or even the very day when it is signed, in the same city in which it is signed, for some reason they came to kiev to sign, there is a missile bombardment here, what does this mean, what should be done the united states, or they should 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're with us, you're in nato, we invited you, but you there will still be attacks... or the united states said: well, listen, you don’t respect us russians, we said that everything is nato territory, we defend this territory, the protocol process of ratification is just going on, where are you going, we are destroying with our missiles from the territory there, i don't know poland or germany, your launchers, ladies, well, great, they destroyed it, 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 does? a person who will say: you can hit russia, and it will not respond, that is the problem with all this, that is, i precisely adhere to this point of view, that if ukraine receives an uncontrolled security guarantee territory, the russians will have to shoot, because they are not have guarantees

that america will not shoot back in such a way situation, they don't know it, they may not want to check it, they will continue to act there within the framework of donetsk region or kherson region, i believe that, huh. but not to cross that line that's going to be defined, uh, but i'm not the president of the united states, i can say that, that'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 at my computer and write a text called millions gone off the face of the earth and think of metaphors about how describe everything in such a way that it would 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 only responsible for his life, but 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,

primarily as the leader of the nuclear powers, what should they do in this situation? this is a difficult question, that is, we convince, there is a whole group of people, as you can see. who make such statements, that is yen stolterberg, andersfors rasmussen, pavlo klimkin, i am simply listing for you the 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 state, you have a different level of responsibility, so i i don't know, andrei, how it will all develop, you understand, but let's suppose if donald trump is elected president of the united states of america. in this case, the architecture that you and i have just described, is it 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 biden's side, may not go anywhere without trump, you know? ugh, just to exist as a theory. ugh. but if trump really becomes the president, then... well, 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 a very big fan at all nato, it is possible and it is unlikely that he is a supporter of ukraine joining us, at least according to the characteristic signs that he presents, well, you saw that jay divens, he generally says that it is necessary to promise in russia that ukraine will not... no a member of nato, because from the point of view of jaydivens, this is something that really

confuses russia, but jaydivens has another idea, which i also consider completely illogical, which is that it will be necessary to arm russia then, ukraine then, so that russia could not attack it, well, all this does not mean that either russia has to agree to this, right here we always want to ask, how will we put russia in front of the fact, how will we put... russia in front of the 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 from the financial times, well, is it true or not, if, here is a controversial issue, but still, here is the language, i remind you once again, western, ukrainian officials have decided that essential security guarantees can be the basis for negotiations. mr. vitaly, from the point of view the ukrainian authorities, are the ukrainian authorities really

ready for such a position, and how will it communicate this position to ukrainian society, there will be a certain split here in any case, that is, some people will believe that in fact it is to leave these territories at will, and they they are already writing about it after this article was published, others are saying, clapping their hands, saying... "oh great, finally the war will be over". well, first of all, it is necessary to clearly understand whether to leave these on the territory or not to leave, this is not, no, not a situation where we are advancing somewhere, and we they say, stop advancing, and give these territories, control over these territories to the russians, i want you and i to move into reality, understand that the choice is not ours, not between , uh, will these territories actually be controlled by the russians or not, the choice between whether ukraine will not lose some more regions, and not... more importantly, whether ukraine will exist at all on the political map of the world, that is, as an independent state in the near

future, because the prerequisites for the disappearance of ukraine are there, not because that the russians will conquer ukraine, no, i have 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 in war for years , in the cold, in... the essence of prospects, in fear of being killed, and this is not happening for 2.5 years, but for 10 years, then as you understand, there is a feeling that let it all end, under any conditions, in most people's mood changes, this is the so-called chechen version of the end of the war, it is how the second chechen war ended, i always say that it is dangerous, so ukraine has different dimensions, so ukraine has a larger population, so ukraine is located in europe, but if ukraine does not... and security guarantees, then in order to bring the ukrainian population is in such a state, it just takes more time, and

to be honest, i don't really care what ukrainians think today, i care what they will think tomorrow, because people who sit today and answer sociologists that they believe that 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 is not only not punished, but travels around the world and meets with the leaders, at least of the countries of the global south, the russians themselves do not know anything special. and we live in expecting every winter as a disaster, this person can change your point of view, it happens, it is actually the consequences, probably of that information the policy that we had or still have in the 22nd, 23rd, 24th years, we apologize, very often it is not us, but some, mass

media, some right-wing, relatively speaking, experts. by the media, 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’m not saying anything, maybe some in the first months it was done correctly, but then it seems to me that this position made a very very... big bear a service for our citizens who still live in some such illusions that a miracle will happen here and there, as if soon, and we here are absolutely not against a miracle happening, yes, but we have to talk about, but we we have to say that unfortunately, as of today and time has finally shown that this miracle is so far as unexpected,

so i don't know how the government will propose it, although for one reason for... i don't know if it has will it be possible to offer it, will this option really be realistic someday, maybe the authorities will not need to offer anything, maybe it will be like that and it will remain if the western allies finally come to such a decision, well, i don’t see any problems for the authorities, did n’t the president of ukraine repeatedly say that there could be a situation when we will return part of our territories by political means, well, he won’t say that, as he repeatedly said, this is how we now get security guarantees for our allies. from our allies, we become members of nato, our main desire there is fulfilled, we continue negotiations for joining the european union, and regarding 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 return of these territories with the support of our allies, one might say? maybe, maybe, well, why? if we still remember that the popularity of volodymyr zelenskyi is not based on the common sense of his supporters, on the sectarian attitude to politics, then i think that he can afford anything, and those who now began to accuse volodymyr zelenskyi, by the way, absolutely baselessly of all mortal sins, when he himself wants the continuation of the war, preservation of power, he will never convince them of anything, this is how from the situation with petro poroshenko, that is, if we... we look at it from the point of view of volodymyr zelenskyi 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 zelenskyi can win any real honest competitive elections after the war, but if they believe in it, then let them work for his election results, not for reality, this is again, these are not my problems, i just repeatedly said that in history this does not

happen, a war president never does not become the president of peace, but president zelensky became the president of war and he is not in this. guilty, by the way, he wanted to end this war, he wanted to come to an agreement with putin, these were of course unrealistic, unprofessional expectations, but he wanted it, he did not start the war, the war started by putin, 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, new people, new forces will appear, i think that in general there will be a serious reformation of the entire political field, or it may not be so, or the war will continue for years, there will be no elections here. 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 has not been abolished for decades, in taiwan, say, during the time of chiang kai-shek, the first real free elections were held there, 30 years later, it seems, after

chiang kai-shek managed to withdraw his own. not taiwan, but taiwan was considered a fortress of free education, 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 be, but they will be after the war, this is me i guarantee vance and walsh, let's move on to the debate of the candidates vice presidents in the united states of america, and in general to the election campaign in the largest place in the world, exactly one month is left before the elections will be held, before americans will go to the polling stations and choose a new president. actually, this week there was this debate, who was more convincing, we will discuss 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 of america , showed himself not in the worst way, there is even an expert environment and voice. showed that somewhere about 50 to 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 the internal issues of the united states, discussed everything there , whatever, and social issues, immigration. but they did not discuss ukraine. well, mr. vitaliyu, there is a month left before the elections, so

these debates took place, perhaps which are not quite followed in ukraine, unlike what happened when the debate between trump and harris took place, we see that the election campaign is taking place in about the same way as it was conducted before, that is... nothing so extraordinary happened , well, in addition to the fact that trump once again distinguished himself by what harris called mentally retarded, even the republicans criticized the former or former vice president donald trump. well, there is also such 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 from... 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 elections, 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 for... the general concept of how the election campaign is currently proceeding, if we talk about it, does it somehow change the electoral paradigm now, or in basically, we are still in that 50/50 percentage, 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 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, sociology is still on the verge of statistical uncertainty, in some already not, in some already visible in some in favor of haris, of course, but anyway, that's why so much attention is drawn to the debates of the candidates for the... usa, in any other situation, we would not pay attention to them at all, do you ever remember that you were interested candidates for the position of vice president, hardly, but biden is already with someone, when he was obama's vice president, he held a debate with someone, we don't even remember with whom, who this person was, but she definitely was, and this was some strong republican politician, we just didn't pay any attention to it, now we are in a different situation where every event seems decisive. and every event is not decisive, because this debate, the vice presidential candidates, it was interesting only because everyone thought

that vance was going to act hysterical, the way he acts at rallies, and wence, apparently decided to use this debate to show his own political agenda of the soft face of trumpism, which means that he is thinking about the next presidential election, that he is not ... concerned about the current presidential election, and anyway if donald trump even wins the presidential election, this will be his last term, unless he changes something significantly in the united states, he will have to give up running for the presidency of the united states for the next term, and then the question arises, who is the heir to trumpism, because we we must understand that this is no longer republicanism, trumpism, and it is clear that in such a situation, when the question arises, whether trumpism can survive without trump. and that's when a person looks civilized on the one hand, and on the other hand believes in the values ​​of trumpism, then this can be

a good option. for everyone, both for trumpists and anti-trumpists for the republican party of the united states, or vice versa, if trump loses the election, someone has to be, because trump is unlikely to be so strong after that, not that he is already a candidate , and the leader, i don't argue, i don't argue, yes, but in any case, this... situation can be absolutely real, we understand it perfectly well, and in this regard, frankly, i don't really imagine , which event can significantly influence the course of the election campaign, you have probably already forgotten that there was an assassination attempt on trump, do you remember two, well, the first one was the most interesting, but a real person died there, trump was really a millimeter away from

death. and everyone believed that his election campaign did it for sure, but do you remember how bookmakers and in general all these forecasts, even artificial intelligence, showed that trump had an 80% probability, and then i asked you and said that this does not mean anything, it will pass a couple of weeks and it will be forgotten, this is not a victorious moment, there will be other photos, calm down because this is a different situation trump haters. won't like him because he got shot at, people who love trump they absolutely don't need an extra shot to say he's their hero, for people who support trump, his fist was a sign of strength and mitzvahs. 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 alien to them, nothing has changed, but

most americans, even observers did not want to understand this, they did not want to understand what kind of world they are in, and to believe that something can change in this situation, all this is so important, what we said, and you know, this person will win the elections on november 5, it is not possible, a month left until the end of the campaign, a crucial month that won't decide anything, because by and large we won't know until the morning of november 6th, or later, because you rightly said that the republicans are preparing to fight for to contest the election results, but there is a solution of the supreme court of the united states on donald trump, which effectively rehabilitates any of his actions as president of the united states, even when it came to capitulation, and thus joseph biden, thanks to this decision of the supreme court, got the opportunity

to act decisively with any attempts. violent changes in the results of the election and not fear any responsibility, that is, the judges of the supreme court of the united states, that conservative majority that decided to save donald trump from charges of participating in a de facto coup d'état in country, this was an attempted coup d'état, there is no need to even doubt that if mike pence would have followed the path of participating in this coup d'état. refused to implement the results of the election, we would not know at all what happened, what the procedure would look like in general, what the legitimacy of the american government would look like, it is not clear, but now joseph biden, when there will be any attempts there to storm something, uh, speak with some there radical demands, he can act absolutely decisively, he can stop these people, he can use force against them and

absolutely not. states in this position has immunity in situations like this, what these judges, they gave trump a gift along with that, but at the same time they made it impossible for him to take any forceful actions that could help him get back to the white house, and that's also important a moment that says that when you make one decision, very often you have to face it. in just a few months, which nullifies its meaning, because you understand that if, say, the supreme court of the united states grew up and decided that donald trump is guilty, and that he must answer, and that he does not have immunity, now, on the one hand, there would be another process, but as we can see, how many of these processes are there on trump, his political sect does not pay attention at all.