these are the plans of the enemy, mr. general , it is clear that with the end of the russian-ukrainian war, russia will not go anywhere from ukraine, it is meant in terms of the border, in terms of its proximity, its location, eh, is it possible to create in the future in ukraine something similar to an iron dome, of course, israel, ukraine, these are different countries in terms of scale, territory, and the number of people who... live in this territory, but one way or another, after victory we will have to think about how to protect our sky, because russia, given its capabilities, will be able to at any moment to fire at us, or is it possible to create such a system? well, in general , the assessment of the construction of anti-hail and anti-missile defense systems is incorrect and is reduced to actions, for example, iron.

and because in israel this four-level protection is done by different systems and the same dome, it did not provide one hundred percent security, as we see the events in israel and in the middle east, when a large number was used and the question is ambiguous, that it is not a panacea and not wunderwaffe, which will solve the problem. hello, you must have it complex approach, which is in israel, and there are different complexes, and as for supplies, we know that they are limited from ours from our allies, but the statements of the heads of the military-industrial complex regarding the fact that an anti-aircraft missile is being developed are also confirmed a complex close to nesams, and the norwegian-american one, it is important for a start, we have a potential opportunity... to develop a complex, and it

is done in the medium, long range, but the question is time, the question is money, and in general , all this was done and before the war, but apologists, the russians we have here, including those that had an influence, some of them remain now, influence to slow down these processes, not to promote them, although it is very difficult for them in all... conditions, when our sbu and other structures act accordingly , but unfortunately, they exist, and that is why we did not complete these tasks in a timely manner, and that is why, but now it is said that a 640 km missile complex is appearing, this is very important, and we have a program from the 22nd year there is a missile, but it is difficult to implement it in the conditions of shelling of our military-industrial enterprises of the complex, we are talking about the fact that...

development is going on this anti-missile complex, like nasams, that is , there are promising developments, but i say once again that it takes time, and this kind of weapon and this kind of capabilities are needed to us already now, without saying that it would have been necessary yesterday. mr. general, the highest military official of the north atlantic alliance, the chairman of the nato military committee, rob bauer , arrived on a visit... to kyiv for the first time since the beginning of the large-scale invasion of ukraine by russia, in his speech he warned the world from excessive pessimism about ukraine's chances in the war and assured that ukraine would become a member of the north atlantic alliance. let's hear what rob bauer had to say. nato and ukraine are closer than ever before. every day we become. increasingly closer, more compatible,

more coordinated. together, we are doing everything for ukraine to become a member of our alliance. the swedish flag will not be the only yellow and blue flag near the nato headquarters. mr. general, very briefly, do you agree? rob bauer's optimism about ukraine becoming a member of the north atlantic treaty organization alliance, well, as i understand it, when he says that it is not necessary to look at it pessimistically and that he looks at it optimistically, are you an optimist or a pessimist in this matter? yes, of course, i really wanted and there are prospects that 33 beautiful numbers, in my opinion, ukraine itself will become a member of the alliance, that is, if the countries that... go to the alliance,

first of all , the americans will energetically move from political statements to i would say that they are very good at taking specific actions to provide assistance. right now, uh, that is, in your opinion, we can and we have a chance to get an invitation to the north atlantic alliance at the anniversary summit of nato, yes, the struggle is going on for this invitation to be formed in washington, but it is not dependent on this, moreover, we need not just a political statement, and i say again, we need weapons, equipment, ammunition, everything... it 's more important than that, but the strategy must be maintained and fought for, that's for sure. well, let's hope, mr. general, that everything will be like that. thank you for the conversation, it was ihor romanenko, the founder of the charitable foundation we will close the sky of ukraine. retired lieutenant general, former deputy chief

of the general staff of the armed forces of ukraine. friends, we continue our broadcast live on the tv channel, as well as on youtube and facebook. for those who are now. watch us live on youtube and facebook, take part in our vote, today we are asking you if the summit in switzerland will bring peace closer to the end of the war in ukraine, yes no, on youtube everything is quite simple and we can press a button or yes, or not, write your comment if you have your thoughts on the matter of this, and if you are watching us on tv, pick up your smartphone or phone and vote if you think the swiss has a peace summit. will bring the end of the war in ukraine closer 0800-211-381 no 0800 211382. all calls to these numbers are free, please call, it is important for us to know your opinion. next, we will be in touch with tetyana vysotska, correspondent of espresso in brussels. tatyana, i

congratulate you, thank you for being with us today. congratulations serhiy, greetings from the european council. so, therefore, today is the leader. of the european union in brussels is discussing many issues, including aid to ukraine, and in particular the issue of a possible asset freeze, or rather confiscation of assets of the russian federation in europe and the transfer of these assets to ukraine in order for it to fight against the russian federation. are there already any statements and results of this summit, or has anyone already spoken about whether there is such a decision or not. whether there will be such a decision or not, so the summit started with some delay, because first the leaders had lunch with the un secretary general, then they spoke with the president of the european parliament , roberta matzola, and about 2.5 hours

before the summit began, the president of ukraine zelenskyy addressed the eu leaders, who also, by the way, asked to speed up the resolution of the issue of transferring to ukraine, if not... russian assets, then at least revenues from them, which, as we know, amount to an average of 3 billion euros per year, and therefore the leaders began to discuss the ukrainian issue, the issue of security and defense, but so far no decision has been made, the discussions took place behind closed doors, and now we only know that the leaders went to dinner, after dinner the conversation about ukraine will continue, but in the meantime, while the readers were sitting behind... this door was periodically visited by diplomats of various countries, as well as european officials who spoke with journalists, and now we can say more or less about the frozen assets, the next thing is that there is

a consensus among the leaders of the european union that the profits from the frozen assets of the european union can be used for the benefit of ukraine, not even against hungary, but... the question is how to use these profits, because in the document submitted by the european commission to the european council for consideration by the eu, it is planned that 90% of the income from the frozen russian assets should go to the european peace fund, which will purchase weapons and ammunition for ukraine, and 10% should go to the budget of the european union in order to provide ukraine. aid, then a number of states oppose such a distribution, of course, led by hungary, and also states of a neutral type, such as austria, ireland, malta, they are against russian money were used for the purchase of weapons, and

they insist that they go only to the reconstruction and humanitarian needs of ukraine, but just recently a german diplomat came out and he talked for a long time about the discussion of the leaders, and he said that , in fact, there is no sense then to use these assets in general, if not to purchase , not to purchase on them what ukraine needs first of all, and in... ukraine first of all needs weapons, that is, now the discussion has stalled precisely on this, and it is quite possible that in the final document e russian assets will be mentioned in passing , only as a phrase that, for example, the leaders of the european union recognize the good idea of ​​the european commission or, as they say there, approve the idea of ​​the european commission regarding the use of frozen profits, frozen assets of the russian federation for... the benefit of ukraine, without detailing. and offer the ministers of foreign affairs of the european union

to continue the discussion on this matter. here is something similar we can expect in the final document, but unfortunately no more today. it is interesting that, for example, olaf scholz, an eyewitness of germany, who has always been famous for being very careful in all his statements regarding russia, today stated that it is precisely with the profits from frozen russian funds... that weapons for ukraine should be purchased, he emphasized that this money does not belong to anyone, for example, the same chancellor austria, on the contrary, said that it will not be missed for his country, this is the situation with frozen funds so far, and what is interesting, hungary also says that if these funds are directed to humanitarian needs, it will not be against it, this is so interesting thing, thank you tetiana, we will wait for the results of the eu summit, tomorrow will be another day and we will monitor it, it was tetiana vysotska from brussels, who is monitoring

the progress of the summit of the leaders of the eu countries. friends, we are working live on the espresso tv channel, as well as on our youtube and facebook platforms, conducting surveys. we are asking you today about the following: will the peace summit in switzerland bring the world closer to the end of the war in ukraine? yes no. in youtube, everything is quite simple. if you sit in front of the tv, take to hand smartphones, phones. vote if you think that the summit in switzerland will bring the end of the war in ukraine closer (0800-211-381), no 0800 211 382, ​​all calls to these numbers are free, vote, we will sum up the results of this vote at the end of the program. next , ihor reiterovych, political scientist, head of political and legal programs of the ukrainian center for social development, will be in touch with us. mr. igor, i congratulate you and thank you for joining our broadcast. good evening. mr. igor, let's start our conversation with a statement from jake sullivan, a political consultant

the president, or rather, the national security adviser, the president of the united states of america, and who outlined his vision for winning the war while in kyiv. let's hear what he said. from the rostrum of the white house and from other rostrums, i said that ukraine must win. today i say here, ukraine must win. what does it mean? this means that ukraine, after this war, will be sovereign, independent and free, able to deter future aggression, with a strong living democracy, with deep democratic institutions, with an economy that is developing over the past few days, the americans have made several such statements. jake sullivan said that ukraine should win. lloyd dosvin, who spoke at ramstein 20, said that ukraine. ukraine will not, will not be allowed to be defeated

, and why does washington not say that russia must suffer this defeat, or that ukraine must defeat russia, or russia must be without putin, or russia must be in some other form, or russia must to be demilitarized, denuclearized, well, in such a state that it did not threaten anyone. why in rhetoric , official washington is so restrained, i think there is one simple reason, well there are actually many of them, but there is one key one, and it is that washington does not have a clear understanding of this victory over russia to this day , that what for them is a victory and what to do with the defeated russian federation, they have this fear, it is largely existential, you know, that is, they cannot find any... with a huge country that has the largest nuclear potential in the world, will this not lead

to some, well, negative consequences that the united states of america will no longer be able to control in any way, so they are not talking about the defeat of russia so much as they are talking about the need for victory ukraine, yes, but you can actually put a lot of things into ukraine's victory, and even mr. sullivan's statement, well, it caused one such warning: if you listen to it all, he talked about victory, democracy, the economy, and so on, but there was no mention, for example, of the internationally recognized borders of ukraine, and you know, i am far from some... theory about the language, but i perfectly understand that such things, they are prepared in great detail by the representatives there administration of the white house, and when such statements are made, they are very verified, that is, they have approximately the outline of the victory of ukraine, well, it is at least to keep all the territories that we currently control, to develop the economy, to preserve democratic institutions, to strengthen national security and defense, well, and many

other such things, it is possible to return part of it, and possibly all the territories, yes, but they are very careful. they are talking about it, but they will not talk about the defeat of russia now, because they believe that this will trigger russia and it will, you know, provoke some inappropriate actions, including those related to nuclear weapons, and b. they just don't have that plan, they're afraid to talk about these things because they think that this problem, well, it's so insurmountable and impossible will decide in practice what to do with a disintegrated russia, what this disintegration should be and in general what way... you have to move and you understand, here there is another problem that the experience, for example, of the collapse of the soviet union, it will not work in the situation , which has developed now on the territory of the russian federation and will develop, for example, in the future, and therefore they do not even have the opportunity to compare with anything, well , to build such plans from this, to justify them, only one thing can be said, there is no such plan not only in united states

america, i'm afraid, does not have such a plan, well , almost all other countries that have it today. are partners of ukraine, that is, they are not thinking so much about the defeat, disintegration there, disintegration, denuclearization, and physicalization of russia, as they are simply thinking about how to help ukraine survive and survive in this war against russia. but the fact that jake sullivan did not talk about borders and that ukraine should return to the borders of 1991, does this mean that washington admits that there is some kind of peace with russia. ukraine and russia, possible, including for the conditions when russia will control part of the ukrainian territory? i think that is the way it is, and look, there is no betrayal in this, we just have to understand one simple thing: the countries that are even our partners, they are considering different scenarios, they have at least three scenarios on the table, the optimal ,

some kind of pessimistic and, you know, more or less, for example, realistic, and one of these scenarios, at least, maybe not even one, does not involve going to the borders of 1991. just an important clarification, by the way for today, the scenario promoted by ukraine, the ukrainian peace formula, the return to the borders and so on, it is at the top of this stack of scenarios, but it may be that it will be lower, or at the very end. we must understand this, and of course do everything so that this scenario is on the mountain. but the fact that they are considering different options, well, it 's not a secret for... for anyone, just look at the activities of the think tanks that are in the united states or in certain european countries, they produce almost every month certain scenario forecasts, which primarily concern the russian-ukrainian war, and they draw various scenarios there, some are very favorable for us, and there are some that we cannot consider under any circumstances, but

they proceed from the data they have, from the methods they use for preparation. these scenarios, and they get to a certain extent to the authorities, and the authorities process them, take them into account somewhere, postpone them somewhere, and some ask, for example, to write them down and lay them out in more detail, well, i i will say even more, we should also deal with these things and have several backup options just in case, not in the plan that we should promote them, no, we should have one and the one that is, it is absolutely correct, it should be key , but just in case of the development of events there. for example, in a context that is not very positive for us, we should have some backup options, and these options should be offered by ukraine itself, so that we are not then shown some scenario and told that we will move according to it, if you don't want to, then you are on your own , a so that we are, in principle, the initiators of the implementation of certain initiatives. during the last few days, we have witnessed the activation of beijing and delhi, or nothing in

the matter, in the ukrainian issue. the politician wrote that xijin ping is going to visit emmanuel macron in may, it is officially the sixtieth anniversary of china's diplomatic relations with france, and there, among other things, xijin pin is going to talk to macron about peace in ukraine, about the peace issue. in parallel with this, we see how the prime minister of india is in rendra mode. called supported putin, congratulated him on his victory in the elections, the so-called elections, and then called zelensky, and this is how the president's office reports. ukraine, what did modi say? he conveyed his consistent support for all efforts to establish peace, as the fastest termination of the ongoing conflict, that is, we see

those leaders of those countries who communicate with putin quite actively, and who are already transporting, as diplomats, vip diplomats, or as parties who are interested in the fact that russia somehow in this... situation got out of the war or got out of on some terms, to what extent do you think china and india can influence other world leaders on this issue, and is it even possible to promote the narratives that putin is pushing through the leaders of india and china? well, look, it seems to me that after all, india, china, they are trying to promote their narrative, yes, it coincides to a certain extent with the ... tives of russia, but they proceed primarily from their national interests. it turns out that their national interest now is, on the one hand, a weakened russia, but with on the other hand, the end of the war, which

will allow them to exploit the same russian federation even more actively, to solve some of their other issues there. but they, of course, these peace initiatives will somehow try to promote china more actively there, because china wants, well, if in the future to take part in the russian-ukrainian war, then it wants to have such a position there, which will allow it to claim the status of a geopolitical center of influence. india, it is a little more detached relates to this story, and it seems to me that she may even choose some option that will be offered there, which will more or less suit her, that is, she will join some initiative that will already have a certain practical implementation, well, let's say let's imagine that... a peace conference is implemented, everyone there supports the ukrainian peace formula and says that we will implement this history, it is key there and so on, well, not exclusively, that india will join this, well, it won't of course there

impose sanctions against russia, but at least verbally supports this idea. of course, china will be more aloof here, because what we are observing now, the visits of chinese diplomats, the statements they make, you know, such and such sounding, monitoring of the situation in general, they assess... readiness, unreadiness parties to certain negotiations and are looking for a place for china in these negotiations. the only thing is, i am convinced that the second time china will not allow itself a false start, as with this chinese peace plan, which in principle ended badly, they voiced it, everyone attacked him and they pretended that nothing like that happened. now they will keep this pause as much as possible, and they will only join certain initiatives when they can insert something of their own there, which what... can't be called a unique chinese offer, not necessarily, it will be a plan in general, it may be some part of the plan, but necessarily with the indication that it is the authorship of china, but

they will agree to such an option, and you know, there is a way well, there is a certain danger, because, well , the same sinzimpinja has certain economic tools in order to put pressure, or at least try to influence the same european union or some other countries, but on the other hand, there can be a very big one for us influence, well, according to rumors, chinese diplomats... have now conveyed the need to invite russia to the negotiations, when the peace formula will be discussed, and that if russia is not invited, then they will not participate in it, well, china will not participate , so they can be beaten, as they say , with their weapons, russia can be invited to that forum there, if it will take place according to the ukrainian peace formula, which is supported there by several dozen countries, and not only the countries of the west, but also those , which relatively recently joined it, but which are not. by some partners of the russian federation who are categorically opposed to what it is doing, and then china will find itself in such a, you know, tightrope, on the one hand, they wanted russia to be invited, russia was invited, but

russia will refuse, we even remember the statement of this zakharova, yes, who said that the peace formula offered by ukraine is a formula for the capitulation of russia, well, they can call it whatever they want, but if this formula is supported by a large number of countries, and the leaders of these countries will agree to come to this summit, therefore... you can even try to invite putin, knowing perfectly well that he will not come there and will not send a delegation, and this will then be an argument for the same china that, look, they are not capable of negotiating, with them there is no point in communicating, we fulfilled your request to a certain extent to invite the russian federation, but they themselves do not want to participate in all the negotiations and do not want to end the war, so there is a wide enough room for maneuver here, and we must use it, including ... establishing some kind of relationship with the same people's republic of china. at the moment, unfortunately, we still have a big problem, our diplomatic department, well, practically does not work, because no one there communicates with

our diplomats. and some statements on well representatives of our government of such, you know , semi-offensive character, well, this is a wrong story, we should try to find a common language somewhere with china, offer some certain things there, well, so that it at least takes a neutral position, and does not start openly playing along with the russian federation. well, dmytro kulebash has already said that china can play a significant role in ending this war, in ending the war, or rather he said. in an interview with lastamp, he said, and actually another short video, we'll see, this pope francis, who, during a speech in st. peter's square in the vatican, once again called for an end to the wars in ukraine and the middle east through peace negotiations. let's hear what he said. let us never forget that war is always a defeat.

the war cannot be continued. "we must make every effort to negotiate an end to the war. let's pray for it. mr. igor, the pope says let's pray, let's negotiate, but the pope avoids calling on the side that is the aggressor, and in the war on the middle east, and accordingly in ukraine. why doesn't the pope speak of an aggressor as...". well, he doesn't speak of russia as an aggressor for one banal cynical reason, these are the results of the so-called havana declaration, when they shared spheres of influence with the russian orthodox church, and ukraine was then attributed to the sphere of influence of the russian orthodox church. i think that he remembers this very well, and it is precisely because of this that he does not call russia, i don't know there, you know, some kind of satanic country, although in principle many other religious

actions chivs who openly point to this, he does not mention the aggression of the russian federation in particular, he talks about the war in ukraine, he does not talk about the russian-ukrainian war, for example there, yes, and he tries to put everyone there at the table of changes, because this is a realization of the previous agreements that were made with kirill at the time, i think that some part of the administrative corps of the vatican understands this very well, that is, those people who also make decisions there, who are around the pope, but they are still not able to there, no i know, remove him from office or point out that his position has nothing to do with the position of the vatican. perhaps they also share this thesis and do not want to simply interfere in this story, recognizing the right of the russian federation there, since they had some agreements, some of which are not public, although even those that were public, they were evidence that in the 16th year, they have by and large not lost their relevance even today. thank you, mr. igor, for the conversation, it was igor

reitarovych, a political expert. friends, we we are working live on the tv channel, as well as on our youtube and facebook platforms, and we are completing a survey that we conduct both on youtube and on tv. this survey sounds like this: will the peace summit in switzerland bring the end of the war in ukraine closer? we see the final results of the television poll: 28% yes, 78, 72%, no, these are the results of the television poll on... on youtube we also have a vote of 31% that the peace summit will bring the end of the war in ukraine closer 69% no. friends, i'm putting an end to this, it was the verdict pre serhii program ordenko, read our news also on the espresso tv website. we work for you 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. goodbye.

will ukraine receive money from frozen russian assets? will europe finally dare to develop a scheme to confiscate russian billions? if so, when? let's analyze it in today's issue. of bbc ukraine, i'm olga polomaryuk. the issue of the transfer of frozen russian assets in ukraine is not new. they have been talking about this for months, but now it seems that the situation has moved from a standstill. today in a two-day summit began in brussels, among the key topics of which is a plan to use profits from frozen russian assets. they want to transfer billions of euros to ukraine, but it is not so easy, because for some countries it is a matter of transferring funds.