another sign of previous actions, which speak of the maximum inefficiency, rigidity and ungovernability of this entire state and this vertical. preliminary signs were the situation in the belgorod region, when they could not organize the evacuation from the front-line villages, the same situation was connected with the terrorist attack in crocus, when they could not even guarantee the safety of their capital, the same situation was in june 23- th year, when they could not prevent. a half-moon within its own system, that is, this another sign of the approaching collapse of this statehood. well, in principle, this is how russia has existed throughout its history. they talk about collapse all the time, but we see that the russian center is never interested in the russian province, and the russian province will not do anything to get the attention of the russian center, so why are these signs of collapse? it is also necessary to understand that such complex things do not always happen. at one point and in one

historical period, once a province of the russian federation was helsinki, warsaw, and then the province of the russian federation was astana, kyiv, tbilisi, baku. now we will see, this is the third stage, scheduled for the next few years, that yakuska, lanode, kazan, bufa and so on will cease to be provinces. the question is how the national republics will be forged, but these are very different regions in some of these republics. russians constitute the majority of the population, national minorities, so to speak, indigenous peoples are a minority, others have a complex national composition, in which these peoples themselves have complex relations with each other, for among them, the russians are a balancing nation, others have a national majority that can claim some kind of subject representation, can all the national republics of the russian federation be somehow measured by one, by one...

some kind of ruler only because they are national republics , you understand that these are all artificial regions, that in fact the borders are there and the national-ethnic composition of any russian republic is just such an artificiality invented by the central committee of the bolshevik party, like any other russian the region where ethnic russians live is, but beyond that, it does not mean that subjectivity, which is currently virtual or created by the bolsheviks, cannot turn into a political given to us a political map, how did it happen? for example, with kyrgyzstan, uzbekistan, turkmenistan and jakistan, which are also in many ways their border states themselves were determined by the soviet union, and but in the year 91 they gained independence and have been in various fields for more than 30 years, of course, some of them are proxies russian, part very dependent, but her keep, a very important factor, which you said, of course, that it is not one line, because the situation is different, the ethnic, demographic, economic, historical context is different, but the second component. there is regionalism,

because in reality it will be about secession from moscow not only in the regions of the so-called national republics, but also in many regions that are inhabited mainly by the so-called russians, who in themselves are either a nation, an ethnos, or a super-ethnos , this is a separate topic of discussion, most likely siberia, so-called the far east, i.e. the pacific coast with vladivostok, there and the primorye, straight to khabarovsk, possibly the region of st. petersburg, ingria, possibly the kuban. in the don, they will most likely also move from moscow to the creation of their new independent states, where new nations will emerge, including the urals and siberians, because no one wants to associate themselves with moscow and all of russia. can you explain to me how this approach differs from the russian approach to ukrainians. on february 23, 2022, vladimir putin spoke about some kind of self-determination mythical peoples of ukraine, which have never existed in nature, because here it is mainly national. the majority, as you know,

are ukrainians. the russians invented donetsk and luhansk people's republics and said that some mythical people of donbas live there, although the majority of the population in these regions of ukraine are ethnic ukrainians. now you are talking about some new nations that should arise on the basis of the ethnic russian nation, which is the vast majority in russia itself. how this approach differs from putin's, i still did not understand, honestly saying, mr. olash. in fact, there is a very big difference and they are a component. i... as we know, what is called the united states of america today, it was the english, the scottish, the other colonists who decided that they wanted to pay taxes to london, yes, have a levy there and not have a representation, yes in canada itself, in australia there were people who identified themselves with the british crown for a very long time, which again did not prevent them from creating their own national states, if we are talking about the territory of the so-called russian federation, then on the territory of the far east, on the territory of siberia, even 100 years ago during the first

stage of the collapse of the russian empire , state formations arose: the siberian republic, the far eastern republic and many others, respectively, people in these regions economically. geographically, demographically, the russian so-called ethnic group is quite capable of creating an independent state, it is very difficult to call it a nation, it does not necessarily have one state, it can be a multi-state ethnic group, for example, germans in europe live not only in germany, live in austria, yes, then the germans of austria became austrians, that is, the process of creating a political nation that took place over the last 100 years, no germans of german ethnic origin live in switzerland and in some other countries. therefore , there will be nothing unique in this case with the russians either, we know latin america, which was actually created by the spaniards together with the local population, the yews, and the struggle for independence from the spanish crown was led mainly by immigrants from the iberian peninsula, but now there is argentina, there is peru , is

colombia, and they have their own subjectivity and their own political nation, and you know what the difference is, you're wrong, you compare immigrant civilizations with autochthonous ones. and ukrainians and russians in these territories are not immigrants, perhaps there are in siberia and the far east, in the far east russians are immigrants, by and large, they are a resettled ethnic group that was formed there from various slavic groups that came to these , moved to these territories, there in the far east, maybe there were even more ethnic ukrainians than ethnic russians at the beginning 20th century, but in any case, they are autochthonous, and the americans or canadians or there... the peoples of latin america, who are the majority there, where there is no majority, the population that comes from the spaniards, these are immigrant civilizations, they immigrated from the european continent, nobody immigrated here, well, i have

140 for the majority of the russian population there out of 100 million, because , as you remember, not many people live in the far east in siberia, this is also such an important point, there are actually several factors here as well, firstly really. divides the land and sea empire, yes , that is, somewhere the atlantic ocean separated the former metropolis from its colonies, and somewhere the ural mountains divide it, but besides that , russians are also not the ethnic group that lived in no man's land, that is, in essence, the creation of new political identities , and there, for example, the siberians or the urals can be restored by those who were maximally russified, but who existed first of all, these are the finno-ugric peoples, mishtorya, ryza, a little and the like, most likely these... the renaissance of old identities, creating new ones will be parallel, but at the same time, even if the russians remain in this core of theirs, yes, in this central highland of theirs, on the territory of non-black earth, it will still be a much smaller, more compact, less dangerous state both for its citizens and for of this

world, so this process will not necessarily be 100% yours, but it can be to a considerable extent, and for moscow it is much more important to control not over the national republics, but over its colonies, primarily siberia. sakha and so on, well, sakha is a national one the republic, because from there they get money and the opportunity to finance their estates on the lyceum coast and wars of conquest. well, on the other hand, we remember the situation when russia actually left at the disposal of the leadership of the republic of yakutia sakha all the income from the trade in diamonds and nothing, somehow they coexisted without this money? it was quite a long time ago and it was an extremely short period, that's because considering only a million of its population. and colossal resources, not only diamonds, yes, sakha with 3 million square meters km population, maybe, well, conditionally northern qatar or ooe, the question is again that economically and politically, an independent saha will not focus on moscow, which is

far from it in all aspects, on tokyo, on saul, on washington, i.e. in the asian pacific region, it will develop and interact normally and will be absolutely indifferent to ukraine. which is a great sign for us, but before that, in order to interact with tokyo or washington, it is necessary to swim there somehow, for that pasaha has access to the ocean in general, to his icy one, do you remember to which ocean and what is the possibility of economic activity in this ocean, i apologize, do you mean quiet or not, like yakutia saha there is no exit to the pacific ocean. yes, to the arctic ocean, which is now again, in the context of climate change , turning into a very important international highway and its importance will increase, in addition, there are various options for the territorial organization of the post-russian space, in particular, annexation to the sahimada region, which

will give them access to the pacific ocean, and this option is quite interesting and has a certain potential, but tell me, please, when we are talking about siberia and the far east. you probably remember that the siberian republic appeared after the february revolution and the october coup precisely because it was the residence of its white generals. from those political forces that simply did not want state unity with the bolsheviks, and the far eastern republic, instead, was a buffer state created by the bolsheviks themselves in order not to join a direct combat confrontation with japan, so these are also quite difficult, you know, state formations from the point of view of historical continuity, this is not the ukrainian people's republic, which was created precisely so that it would be a state of the ukrainian people, yes, but the things that are created with one goal, they are not in a geopolitical vacuum, they are in... dynamics, and the gradual acquisition of independence can change the contexts of the conditions in which they were created. i remind you that the ukrainian

people's republic, for example, as well as finland were created by tsarist imperial generals, yes, well , about the ukrainian state, not about the state, yes, there were no tsarist generals in the ukrainian people's republic, none, yes, but wait, but there were colonels and the entire army, yes bolbachans, diamonds, greeks, these are people who fought for three years before that and in previous wars on the side of imperial russia. therefore, the question is that when one person today belongs to the empire and perceives in the context that he is loyal to the empire, when his national formation arises, he can very quickly change his affiliation, and among the leaders as well, you notice a general change in russian national consciousness in recent decades, when there is a very rapid russification of non -russian peoples and a very rapid political marginalization of russian regions. which did not happen in soviet times, we can say that it also happened in soviet times, we remember,

in particular, on the example of ukraine, this russification, yes, because ukraine in the 20s, ukraine in the 50s, ukraine in the 80s x years before the start of perestroika - this is a different ukraine, the same processes are happening now, they were the same during, let's say, the peak of the russian empire, yes, when it comes to the independence of, for example, ukraine in 1 there 913 or 1960. the central council until the last until the bolsheviks advocated the autonomy of ukraine, but the political context has changed and fortunately we have the , that we have our own independent state. there may be a reverse process of restoration of the empire within the borders of 1991, which vladimir putin dreams of, but let's say, ukraine cannot fight for its own. regain their territories, the former soviet republics, like dominoes falling at the feet of moscow

as a result, as putin wishes, the russian federation extends to the borders of the soviet union, what then will happen to the people of russia? of course, this is the worst option for the peoples of russia, because in this case, when the empire is restored or strengthened, they will lose their next, and perhaps the last chance for their own independence and sovereignty, or if such a thing is possible, then what you mentioned is not possible . on gravity, therefore, in principle, it is not historically deterministic and it can happen, however, most likely, it will not happen, many in why, thanks to our position opera, but in many ways the likelihood of this scenario will depend on our key partners and the position of the states of the free world, first of all the united states, if they remove themselves, if they give up the role of the leader of the free world, of course it will free the hands not only to the so-called russian federation, but also to its key allies china, iran. dprk and such a domino effect, it could lead to a very weakening of all our key

partners and our ability to resist. no, why am i asking this question, because maybe vladimir putin is right, he is destroying ukraine and wants to destroy other former soviet republics, because the alternative is the collapse of russia itself, to prevent the collapse of russia itself, the russians must do everything possible and impossible to destroy ukraine and other former soviet republics, simple , i would say, an existential conflict, or russia will be, but in the border. soviet union, or it will not exist even within the current borders. is it worth fighting for? fortunately, russia will not, because of course it is a colonial empire, the last century europe, which is like all other empires, there are belgian, portuguese, dutch, spanish, french, ottoman, moreover, the austro-hungarian one, it is a shambles, yes, that is, as much as this crazy criminal and terrorist putin is, he is an absolutely inadequate person, i would not to avert the inevitable, by his actions, he is, on the contrary , a summoned prophecy, he... believing that someone there is working against russia, wants to dismantle it, he contributed to the course of history, when

he really forces people from all over the world, who are adequate, to work systematically on it dismantling and speeding it up, it would happen anyway, but thanks to putin it will be faster, unfortunately, at too great a price, primarily for the ukrainians. it can be said that the west is interested in preserving the territorial unity of the russian federation and will do everything possible to preserve its stability, at least so that a few do not appear again on the political map of the world. nuclear states, which will then need to be convinced to give one of them nuclear potential, the denuclearization of the post-russian space will be complete, i.e. not there won't be any state with nuclear space in... in this space, this is a big plus for the whole world, as to whether the west will help to maintain this empire, well, again, we understand that the west is a very big cliché, there are various countries, there are different interest groups in each of the countries, including in the united states, and a part, although the establishment is all bureaucratic, diplomatic, it is always in favor of maintaining this status quo, against any changes, it is extremely inert, but already

repeating the words of a war criminal, let's put it this way, like it or not like the empire collapse. therefore, recalling bush's chicken speech three weeks before the gcp drove the last straw into the ussr, the same thing will happen without the will and desire of the establishment of the free world country, the dismantling of russia will take place. the question is, it will be controlled, the whole world will benefit from it, yes, starting with the enslaved peoples, from all the so-called non-citizens of the russian federation, yes, because there is no citizenship, they are subject, and ending with ukraine and all its neighbors, global security, or is it will be uh burying its head in the sand, the huge bosnia of 17 million km in 1994, so the question is whether russia will be dismantled, whether it will not be, but whether we will be ready for it, whether we will be able to direct it in a more constructive direction, and what will be after that dismantling, because geography will still exist, some states will exist on the eastern and northern border of ukraine from millerov, there will not be,

unfortunately, the pacific ocean, and the question is how adequate or inadequate these states will be, many in why. this is a task of ukraine, our geopolitical entity. thank you, thank you, mr. oleg, oleg magaletskyi, a researcher of regionalism in the russian federation, was in touch with us. we talked with him about the future prospects of the russian federation, about what will happen to this state in the next ten years. we understand that how the russian-ukrainian war ends will also depend on this. we see now that the stakes in russia are very high, in order to preserve this empire, and it is necessary to destroy everything around, and ukraine is... such a first stage that russia chose for themselves to start this destruction, it is obvious that if ukraine falls, so will other former soviet republics, there will be thousands of victims, there will be a huge migration crisis, and therefore the west should help not so much us, but themselves, to prevent this political processes and the historical process, realizing that russia is at stake if it fails to destroy

the ukrainian state and other former republics of the soviet union. now. we will see with you the conversation i had with the british writer, director and screenwriter alex garland in connection with the release of his new tape, which you can see now on the screens of ukraine, and i will say goodbye to you before this conversation, all the best to you, friends, until the next meetings. congratulations, mr. garland, and let's begin with the plot of your new film and the script. 19 states seceded. the united states army is ramping up the intensity. the white house warns both western powers and the florida alliance. elected for a third term, the president promises

to quickly put down the rebellion. want to try something on? and you are aware that the real thing is going on civil war? across america, we're out of politics, judging by the news, that's for the best. civil war in the united states. many say that this is another utopia, however, the plot itself is superimposed on the fierce political struggle that we have all witnessed in recent years. were you trying to create a utopia, or just fear the future that lies ahead? world united states soon. the action of the film takes place in the usa. because america is the most powerful country in the world. but the problems highlighted in the film may concern not only america, but also many other countries of the world. for example,

extremism is among these problems. divisiveness and populist politics, which also exist in my country, are common in many societies in europe, asia and south america, so yes, it's definitely a global problem that the film is talking about. i would like to understand how you feel about... how the audience will react to this film, whether you want to warn them or just want to state the reality in which they almost already find themselves. the problem we are dealing with is partly one of scarcity communication i think the problem with the lack

of communication is that people are being told by others what to think instead of engaging in open discussions. instead of talking , lectures often take place, so i don't want to contribute specifically by lecturing someone, of which there are already too many in the world, but instead i hope to facilitate a two-way communication with the film audience. i ask this question because i just want to understand how you perceive this prophecy in art as a statement reality, which... can definitely happen, or as a warning that allows you to somehow stop the destructive processes in society. no country is immune from

terrible events. one of the biggest mistakes countries can make is to believe that they are exceptional. that they will not be affected by the problems that others are currently experiencing. such complacency is false: extremism is something that requires constant vigilance and protection from it, wherever it is and everywhere. and you can ask why you decided to turn to actually current plot. all your previous ones. the scripts were, let's say, such a fantastic picture of the distant future, and this film is more of an appeal to an almost current

political reality, why did you decide, let's say, to descend from heaven to earth, i don't know, this is the story that i was burning with.. in fact, i described what was happening and it seemed to me quite scary, disturbing and dangerous. the truth is that even fantastic stories often stem from something real. this may be due to... a breakthrough in the field of artificial intelligence, psychology, or like the developers on our tv show about how tech billionaires in silicon valley are treated like

geniuses when they're actually just entrepreneurs. so i always try to reflect on the current state of things in the world, but in this case i felt that this kind of plot was not suitable for making a sci-fi film. that's all. one of your previous films was about contact with artificial intelligence, which at the time did not exist as a reality, today we have actually come closer to this reality, as you do you generally imagine worlds with artificial intelligence, do you think that art can give an answer to this question? that's a serious question, i'd be an idiot if i... said i knew the answer to it, frankly, i don't, but i'll tell you what i think, the process is already underway, humanity

has already observed such a process, i have mean nuclear energy or nuclear weapons, as soon as it became clear that it was possible, it already meant that it would inevitably happen, the same will happen with artificial intelligence, people, journalists, filmmakers or just ordinary citizens can spend a lot of time thinking about it , worrying and asking yourself: is it good or bad, but you can't do anything anymore, because the process is irreversible. so the question is not whether we can stop it, but what we will do when the new age comes. if you look at nuclear weapons, in some ways we've dealt with them, both good and bad. bad because nuclear weapons have spread all over the world, and at some point in the future. all this can easily turn into a disaster. on the other hand , we did well because nuclear weapons did not used in conflicts since world war ii. so it's kind of a mixture. i

can assume that with artificial intelligence, something similar will happen. a large part of the problems that we are experiencing today, which you raise by and large, it is still connected with the thinking of the person himself, and we can say that this is such a comic thinking, thinking in fragments, small, fragments of reality, and you? the person who created this comic book mindset, you grew up in a comic book environment, created your own comics like for a person to remain whole in such a fragmented way of thinking that dominates the world today? that's interesting, i really grew up on comics, my father was a cartoonist. i

don't have a concrete answer to this question, but i can say that there is a certain connection between comics and movies. after all, it is a sequence of images that are connected and tell one story. often, when i'm writing a movie script, i see it as a comic book in a weird way. i see a sequence of images or frames that are very similar to drawings. in the comics, does it affect anything other? not sure, maybe it doesn't affect it, but it's something that's lived in me since childhood. one of your halo scripts, it is dedicated to such a clash of svits who cannot find common ground among themselves, there are people, there are

covenants, remember, this is good. it is essentially a theocratic empire, and we in ukraine also very often perceive our own war, a clash of civilizations. can you imagine how civilizations can coexist when they have completely different values, how to prevent this constant conflict? in my opinion, of course it is better for civilizations not to clash at all, any clash, as a rule. has bad consequences, one of such consequences is disrespect, so it is better that civilizations, instead of clashing, should treat each other in a neighborly manner with proper human kindness. one of your scripts was written based on a famous novel, one can say by my

favorite writer. and this novel, like his other works, was essentially devoted to the question of humanity's deficit. we can say that we also see this in your new film nostalgia for humanity, but the question arises, how to restore this feeling now in the 21st century? i hope i understood the question correctly. i think the essence of yi shiguro's works is how people can quickly slide into inhuman acts. if they do not think properly and act fairly and intelligently. these actions can be absolutely ethical. and

morally wrong. the lesson i learned from his writings, and from life in general, is the importance of acting rationally and caringly. after all, abandoning the basic ones values, decency and respect, people are very quickly able to drive themselves into the breadth of total madness. it takes very little time for individuals or states to reach this level of insanity. thank you, mr. alex.