influencing the information space of ukraine continues to influence, because russian television was closed, at one time, social networks vkontakte, classmates closed, tiktok they still use, telegram so far they use it, and obviously, the largest network, i will also call it, the kremlin network, this after all, the roc exists, it is an even greater danger that threatens ukraine. rather than any social networks or services, messengers, why hasn't a clear decision been made so far that the branch of the russian orthodox church in ukraine should not to be, no matter what the church is called there, the ukrainian orthodox church or ooc mp, well , such a church should not exist during the war. well, i want to say that, to our great regret, first of all , the law of ukraine has not been implemented in our country for several years, by the way, ihor lapin, the author of this law, does not exist in our country. the state of ukraine, the ukrainian

orthodox church, the moscow patriarchate. if the church has a connection with the aggressor country, the aggressor, with another country, it should be called the russian orthodox church, then it will be clearer if on the sign "russian church" will hang on it, then i think that many citizens will stop even going to it. this is one story. as for agency networks and the tiktok network and so on. well, for budanov , you see, telegram, not tiktok, is a bigger threat, although the americans still single out and fight against tiktok. i wonder why? i'll tell you why? well, probably none of the ukrainian politicians or the military are as popular as budanov in tiktok. well , that's all, maybe telegram, maybe telegram just not as popular in the united states of america, it could also be that the tikto is chinese, it is much more aggressive in the united states. i emphasize once again, i believe that... what belongs to

the aggressor country should be banned in our country, what belongs to the countries allied to the aggressor country should also be banned. recently, narratives and everything else do not associate a country like china with a democratic country, it is still considered an authoritarian country, and we are a democratic country, well, we don't need that crap, i think so, well, that's my opinion subjective, let's say so. to decide , of course, we were able to ban classmates and vkontakte, by the way, i want to boast that ihor lapin wrote the first appeal to the national security council on this matter. i remember very well how much he did not respect my freedom of speech at that time and was generally so bad, and what 's the matter, it's so convenient for classmates to listen to music on vkontakte and so on. i then heaped so much crap on my head, but nevertheless thank god we would live...

without that crap, i also think that it is necessary to deal with any informational or so-called information networks , which are not a threat to national security, the only thing is, well, you understand, give zelensky today another tool to usurp power, well, come on, he has five or six managers instead of the parliament, in he is a yermak who gives instructions, separate instructions to the prime minister, i.e. instead of the government, and give him also... levers of influence to exclude or include something besides the single marathon, this is the biggest risk, i see that we went to war for democratic ukraine, and we will return from the war and we are freaking out about what will happen here , but god forbid, let's put an end to it, mr. major, it was ihor lapin, a major of the armed forces of ukraine, a special agent, a deputy of the supreme council of the eighth convocation, friends, we are working live on the espresso tv channel, and also on our youtube and facebook platforms and on youtube. and on tv, we are conducting a survey,

we are asking you today, should the activities of the russian orthodox church be banned in ukraine? yes, no, everything is quite simple on youtube, on tv you pick up your smartphone or phone and vote if you believe that the russian orthodox church has activities of the russian orthodox church should be banned in ukraine. 0800-211-381, no, 0800 211-382, all calls to these numbers are free, at the end of the program we will sum up the results of this vote. next , we have taras on the phone. british political scientist , mr. taras, i welcome you and thank you for being with us today, good evening, glory to ukraine, glory, mr. taras, terrorism against russia and russian terrorism against the world, this is one of the topics, the main topics of this week, today , the so-called spy of the so-called russian federation, accused of involvement already that they have evidence of the connection of terrorists from crocus with ukrainian nationalists, as they said. although it is absolutely obvious that we

should not talk about terrorism or the involvement of ukrainians, because this is complete delusion, but about why the world... still has not recognized the terrorist essence of the modern russian state, you have versions of why this is not happening , although everyone can see that they are terrorists? well, i think it should be understood here that only the united states of america does this, it is not done by great britain or the european union, it is only the united states of america and, as i understand it, want to do this... to define russia as a state that supports or is a terrorist state, like north korea, iran, but here it is the biden administration, it is against it, and it is blocking it here the biden administration,

why is it blocking it, they haven't said publicly, but it's probably because i think it's very weak. and the administration, they, this, it can be seen that, as they are very slowly handing over weapons to ukraine, and plus, the biden administration, it seemed a week ago, when they complained that ukraine should not attack inside russia, and that they never said that they wanted russia to lose the war, this is very important. because the british said it, the scandinavian countries said it, the poles, the baltics said it, but the united states of america has never said that it wants russia to lose the war, and i think it is precisely this conciliatory

attitude towards russia, it is very slowly transferring weapons , this is all related to the administration of biden, and remember that he is a person from the obama team. and remember, i'm in the 14th year, they were also very weak, mr. taras , but what does the defeat of russia mean, i.e. is there a vision, well, in the same great britain, what is the defeat of russia, this is the departure from putin's power, this is the demilitarization, denuclearization of russia, this is the defascismization of russia, that is what, what, what will we consider russia's defeat, or just simple? withdrawal from the territory of the ukrainian state, well, i think that there are exactly two points here, the first point is that ukraine did not lose and won the war, and the second point is that russia lost, and precisely here they are obvious

are connected, but it seems to me that on the one hand the states of america are connected and on the other hand scholz and germany, because he always hides behind his back. and they, they are afraid of what will happen to russia, how it will lose the war and fall apart, i remember, it was the same, more than 30 years ago, in the year 91, when bush sr. visited kyiv, we remember his speech on august 1, 1991, where he gave advice to ukraine. so that they don't hold on to their independence, and this approach is still there today, they are very afraid that how russia will lose the war in ukraine, how there will be, for example, something like in

the 17th year, when the army of the tsarist empire crumbled, what will happen then, this will be the region... there will be a country in crisis, it, it will spill over, it will not be russian national minorities that will demand independence, and they are afraid of what will happen with nuclear weapons, and because of this, this is a question of escalation, as they say, they are precisely because of this, they are not ready to support ukraine to the end, and to the end means that russia loses, they do not want, for ukraine to lose, it will be. give a little weapon, but to give ukraine enough weapons to win, we can already see that this will not happen. against this background, mr. taras, literally over the last month there have been hints or leaks of some kind of information in

the french press about the position of french president emmanuel macron, that french troops can be on the territory of ukraine there under such and such conditions, under such conditions . there were different statements, and macron kept letting the world understand that the situation on the territory of ukraine would suddenly worsen, french troops could be there. while bloomberg wrote that american officials were allegedly angered by emmanuel macron's statement, and state department spokesman matthew miller commented on the publication, referring to bloomberg, which referred to dissatisfaction on the american side. let's hear what matthew miller had to say. i have no reaction to this publication, but of course we have made it clear that the united states... is not going to send any troops to ukraine. macron is a head of state that is a longtime ally of the united states,

and we are working productively with them on a number of issues issues, including support for ukraine. mr. taras, is it possible to defeat the russians and the ukrainians without opening a second front? well, i don't think it's about the second front, it's about the fact that... you need to understand macron, macron wants to show himself that he is the new de gol, the french have always wanted to show that they rule europe, that the eu is not has its headquarters in brussels, it has its headquarters in paris, and due to the fact that now there is no more british in europe, there is no more, there is no more american aid to ukraine, it means that here macron uses the moment to show that he is the goal. that he will rule europe, that europe will be autonomous from the united states of america. he

has dreamed of this for a long time and wants to be, so to speak, the new older brother of europeans. and this is the first reason. the second reason, i think, is that the majority of europeans now, not only eastern europeans, ukraine's neighbors, but also western ukrainians began to understand more, rather, as americans, what... what is it, what is the russian threat, and i also think that macron is only saying in the sense that whatever scenario happens, i don't think it can happen, but what if the scenario were to happen that ukraine is already starting to lose the war, and the russian army threatens kyiv, for example, then one could think of various scenarios so that countries that would like to send their... troops, it is not a question of au sending or nato sending, but

individual countries, maybe poles, swedes, finns , er, lithuanians, french, so that they would help ukraine to defend the central place of kyiv, i think that only in such a scenario it is about this, plus probably also training, assistance in the matter of security, e- eh and weapons, but eh... but in france and the same as what to me it seems that it is interesting now that france has completely changed its point of view, for example, at the nato congress in vilnius last july, france for the first time supports ukraine's membership in nato, ah, and this means that the biggest , the biggest country that does not support is the united states of america, and behind them, too... obviously, the germans also have scholz, and even then france changed its point of view,

but this does not mean that it will immediately hang the army, no, this is about how such a very bad scenario happened for ukraine, if kyiv were really threatened, i think so, but so far it is not, i doubt that it will be so, by the way, the prime minister. italian prime minister giorgia meloni said that she personally told macron about her disagreement with his words about the deployment of troops to ukraine . attention to what tones we use, well, obviously, both macron and the leaders of western europe in general talk about or allow such opportunities for participation of his troops against ukraine , taking into account the threats that exist from russia towards western

europe, eastern europe and the baltic countries, putin once again said that this is complete nonsense, that about the possibility of a russian attack on nato countries, they say the disproportionate military potential of russia and the united states of america, and in addition, the allies of the united states of america will fear in vain, let's hear it... this is complete nonsense, the possibility of an attack on some other countries , poland, the baltic countries, they are also scaring the czechs with this. this is complete delusion, this is another method deceive your people and knock out additional costs from people, make them bear this burden on their shoulders, that's all. here it could be said very simply, putin always lies when he says something, he always said that he would not attack ukraine, he said that he would not

do that, the first, the second, the third, still, in your opinion , mr. taras, to the north atlantic alliance. it is necessary to prepare for war with russia, well, they, they are already saying this publicly, it is so here, and this is why macron, when he now starts talking about such things, i think that in the western europe already understands, as it has been understood for a long time in eastern europe, that even if it were to happen that ukraine would lose the war, then they are next, no one, no one trusts. there is putin, he, he is simply the biggest liar in the history of russia, and there are many examples where his ambassadors or himself, kremlin leaders, they one day or two days before a full-scale attack on ukraine, they said that no no, we are let's not repeat, no one, no one believes him,

and it's obvious, you can only stop russia with weapons, and this is understood, i think that here, here, there has already been a revolution of consciousness among europeans that they are next, and this is very important, and this is why macron is criticized less in europe, such as in washington, but this is related to the fact that i say that the biden administration very weak, as it has always been, and this is nothing, nothing has changed, the last... time when the united states and america supported ukraine, ukrainian membership in nato, it was george bush in 2008, it was a long time ago. mr. taras, can you imagine that after what putin is doing in ukraine, what will become of him? something will be negotiated, and there will be some negotiations that he will be among the people who

previously pressured him until 2022, the year, and he was. it's just that at all the summits of the g7 and the g20, he was one of the main heroes of all these summits, we remember it very well, and will it turn out that people in the world will have anything at all to congratulate him? well, we have to remember that the biggest export from russia was corruption, it wasn't oil or gas, it was corruption , they exported it. but even that is not enough certain influence in the west, putin used oligarchs who sat in london, cyprus, france, austria and so on, and

so on no, i'm not surprised that there were, there were many... places where the west turned a blind eye to what russia was doing, either in georgia or in ukraine in the 14th year or in syria, and and and and, but we remember i think that it is necessary to remember that a lot has changed in the 22nd year, and i very much doubt that it is possible to go back to what, what was, because, because there are too many po... i don't think it will be a return to that, but obviously there will always be prostitutes everywhere, and they will be in western europe also in france, germany, especially ,

unfortunately, but, but that was until the 22nd. year, i doubt that they can return. thank you, mr. taras, for the conversation, it was taras kuzio, a british political scientist, friends, we are working live on the tv channel, as well as on our youtube and facebook platforms. throughout our program, we conduct surveys. today we ask you about this, is it necessary to ban the activities of the russian orthodox church in ukraine? yes, no, everything is quite simple on youtube, if you sit in front of the tv, take an expensive smartphone or phone and vote if you think that the activities of the russian orthodox church should be banned. ukraine 0800 211 381 no 0800 211 382. all calls to these numbers are free, vote, at the end of the program we will sum up the results of this vote. further. we are in touch with oleksandr musienko, director of the center for military legal research. mr. alexander, i congratulate you. i congratulate you. today is the day it was made public part of zelensky's interview, cbs news,

that the russians are preparing for a major offensive, and it may take place either in may, or at the beginning, or throughout june, foreign minister sergey lavrov said that by... may 21 the issue of recognizing volodymyr zelenskyi as the legitimate president of ukraine may lose its relevance, i don't know if it coincided so, or if they are trying to speed up something, let's say, this offensive until may 21, in order to already prove that the legitimacy of president zelenskyi may or may not be necessary to confirm, let's hear what he said, a very short synchronicity, concerning, concerning. may 21 and what will happen on may 21, let's live until that, maybe we won't need to admit anything, mr.

oleksandr, what did he mean, that the military offensive will develop so rapidly? i think that this is still an effort, but now to conduct such a multi-stage operation for this offensive, that is, for preparation. offensive, the purely military component is one thing, it is clear that the russian troops and the enemy are preparing to intensify hostilities, to achieve advance, try somewhere, well, actually go through our front line, break through and advance deep, that’s understandable, although you know, i have to mention here just for the sake of remark that, well, in principle, the offensive of russian troops is still ongoing, this one is not over yet, already there is a lot of talk about the next one, but in fact... this one is still ongoing, and there are quite intense battles going on in our east, but i think that if we now distance ourselves somewhat from the military component

itself, and move into such a political and even an element of psychological warfare , then it is clear that now russia will press extremely powerfully , they are already doing it, they are doing it in several directions, these shellings of sumy region, these shellings of kharkiv and kharkiv region, this is... inciting, let's say, now that and this somewhat hysteria that russia will go to kharkiv, russia will go to sumy and possibly again to kyiv , and that this may happen soon, and again, no one excludes this, cannot exclude it, as long as the war continues, all this is possible, but at least now it is not seen as of now, and they are already spreading it, this one element that constantly follows such psychological pressure and psychological terror alongside rockets. terror, and the second is what russia is trying to play, including at the international level, and they get this card again that, they say,

there are no presidential elections in ukraine, and therefore the ukrainian president may lose legitimacy, at the same time, manipulating, absolutely distorting, they know very well in principle and the content of ukrainian legislation, i think, and they perfectly understand that... the conditions of martial law, to ensure the holding of elections, it is technically impossible, let's say, and all the parameters are missing for it to be an election process when the war is going on, but i think that they are trying to shake up this very situation, who is its recipient, we need to understand here, because well, it's clear that not the ukrainian people, russia, i think, to the russians there in russia in the hinterland, they are generally sorry for the cymbals, when the term comes up there, when what happens and... and so on, how they hated the ukrainians and, accordingly, the ukrainian president, whoever he is that's how they will do it, and when there are elections there, they are not very interested in it, but the recipients should

be in the west, who should react in such a way according to the opinion of russia, that after all , to convince ukraine to hold elections, you understand what a trap, to pressure with the fact that you will hold elections, and they will also conduct offensive actions under this, well, the calculation is very acceptable. naive, but they promote it, that is, to shake up the situation in such a way that they say the elections must be confirmed, how so, the values ​​there and so on, democratic, for this also carry out an offensive, so of course, in such conditions, when russia is preparing for a more intensive offensive campaign, it is not about the elections, here other tasks must be carried out in defense of the state, we understand that, but russia wants to disrupt all this, and that is why they... will actively send these signals to the west that the president may lose legitimacy and so on. well , kyiv can send a signal that

putin is an illegitimate president. he gained this legitimacy in the occupied territories of the ukrainian state, and it is impossible legitimacy can also not be recognized, since this result that he showed there can be considered legitimate, because there were a lot of violations, temporarily occupied territories, the absence of opposition, well , there was a lot, a lot of things, next to that there was information from scholz, the chancellor of germany, who said. who commented on the prospects of peace talks on ending the war in ukraine, reminded about the regular meetings of national security advisers and political advisers, the leader of the states regarding the implementation of the ukrainian peace formula, i will quote scholz: a number of countries, including ukraine, is currently being discussed at the level of security advisers about what something that could look like before the peace process, but let me make one thing clear: peace

is possible at any time. putin just needs to cancel his barbaric campaign and withdraw his troops. everyone is talking about peace, that this peace must be, and it is obvious that in this situation, well, it remains unclear for now, exactly how germany and other countries see any kind of conversation with russia about this peace at all, because to tell putin, withdraw the troops there and cancel its barbaric campaign, well, this is not enough, right, that is, in your opinion, does the world have a formula for how peace in ukraine should come about? i think that there is no consolidated position, because you see what the situation is, everyone is talking about the fact that in ukraine, well, by the way, pay attention that olaf scholz, he has such a somewhat diplomatic

formula. uses something like this, you know , that is, he says that russia should withdraw its troops, apparently, in order for russia to withdraw its troops, they must be forced to do so, true, that is, voluntarily, putin this will not be done, we all understand perfectly well how to make them do it, support ukraine, provide the necessary weapons and provide, in particular, taurus missiles, which are very much needed, and right away in this interview the german chancellor says that no, there are no taurus will be as this could lead to an escalation and a direct war between russia and nato. that is, he confirms his position, which he expresses, well, during these few weeks, when again the taurus were discussed particularly actively and when russia recorded this information of the conversation, luft vafiim the bundeswehr in singapore, well, this scandal that was with the leak of information. that is, and here i have a question: well, should russia

withdraw? troops from ukraine , i agree, we all agree, but how to make them do it without taurus missiles, for example, which are really needed, and in the context of that, by the way, it is not easy that now, when they are talking about the same missiles, it not just to attack, but to defend, to attack russian logistics, and here you see, we are approaching the issue of a consolidated position, the idea that a international law and order must be renewed, and that russia must be punished as an aggressor, it acts everywhere, it is international. the formula of how to achieve this, here the positions differ, and here we will take the approach, for example, of the french president, who says that it is not excluded that under certain conditions french troops may also appear, and this is another position, for example , we have the position of the british providing the same stormshadows that at least fly at the occupiers in crimea, and

recently there last weekend... very there was a successful attack, the objects were hit, that is , they went further, they provide these weapons, again, there is the position of the united states, and there it is also interesting, because everyone hears very often that ukraine has already won, or russia , or russia has already lost, hinting at the fact that ukraine retains its statehood, and kyiv is the capital, for her now, it is actually controlled by the ukrainian authorities and troops and... and in principle, bypassing the topic, what to do with the deoccupation of the territories, i.e. speaking of what is already, and, for example, there are statements by the same british minister of defense, grant shabsa, who is coming, came to kyiv and recorded this address on mykhailivska square, where he said that ukraine must win, or from time to time we hear such formulations from gramstein, but this is for ukraine to win when it is convenient. ..