Original subtitles

- Mr. Medvedchuk. - Yes, hello.

- Nice to meet you, I'm Oliver Stone.

Nice to meet you.

- Oksana. - Hello.

- Welcome to my hotel. - Thank you.

- Please, join me at my table.

- Yes, please.

- Nice place.

I can sit because I wanna talk on Ukraine now.

- Well, your English is very good.

And this interest in Ukraine,

why are you interested in Ukraine at all?

Where is Ukraine and where is America,

Russia, big countries, big politics?

And suddenly, Ukraine?

- Because I care about war and peace

and I'm a citizen of the world.

I was in Vietnam War.

I don't wanna see my country go down this militaristic path.

I knew nothing about Ukraine until I interviewed Mr. Putin

and I learned a lot about Ukraine

and I worked on Ukraine on Fire.

And, action!

- Good morning, Mr. Viktor Medvedchuk.

I'm honored to be here to talk to you.

So, just to introduce yourself

to people who don't know anything about you,

can you just tell us a little bit

about where you come from, who you are?

You were born in the 1950s, right?

Viktor Medvedchuk was born August 7th, 1954,

in Pochyot, Siberia, where his family was exiled.

In 1978, Medvedchuk graduated from Kiev University

with a degree in law.

He soon rose to great heights in his profession.

During the Soviet era,

Medvedchuk was never a member of the Communist Party.

Since 1990, he has been the head

of the Lawyer's Union of Ukraine.

During that period, he began to transition

into the political arena.

He was elected a member of the Ukrainian Parliament,

the Verkhovna Rada,

where he served from March 1998 to April 2002.

The Ukrainian economy showed its biggest growth

during this time, reaching an impressive 12% per year.

But after a new president came to power,

the economy drastically stagnated,

becoming a sixth of what it once was.

Medvedchuk also had great success in the business world

with his law firm, BMI, soccer team Dynamo Kyiv,

and trading in the energy sector.

He returned to his political and public in 1998,

eventually rising to the position

of the first vice-chairman of the parliament.

He was the head of Ukrainian President

Leonid Kuchma's administration from 2002 to 2005.

He was in the opposition

to both Presidents Yushchenko and Yanukovych,

who succeeded Kuchma.

Medvedchuk is considered to be a close friend

of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Putin is the godfather of Viktor's daughter, Daryna.

- Yeah.

- Oh, well...

I thought it was a big honor

for you to be the godfather of his daughter.

- Ukraine split from the Soviet Union in 1991.

In Moscow, the Hammer and Sickle

is lowered for the last time and an era comes to an end.

Can you describe the moment?

Myself, like many of my peers

and the older-generation people,

we didn't know what the standard of living would be

in Ukraine as an independent state now.

Gorbachev was on Ukrainian television

still arguing for a Moscow-based central government

linking the parts of the old Soviet Union.

Otherwise, he predicts anarchy.

Although most people

supported that path of independence,

we thought the path of self-sufficiency and sovereignty

would lead to greater success

than it was in the Soviet Union.

On December 1st, 1991,

at the Republican Referendum,

the population of Ukraine, by a majority vote,

expressed support for secession from the USSR.

On December 5th, the Bialowieza Agreements were signed

and the Soviet Union stopped existing.

In Ukraine, it seemed that after gaining independence,

the republic could, in a short time,

become a prosperous European country.

There were all reasons for this:

a huge scientific and industrial potential,

qualified specialists, developed agriculture,

and the absence of inter-ethnic conflict in Ukraine.

The determination to be self-sufficient in practice

has led to a reduction in relations with Russian partners

that were worked out over the decades.

25 years after gaining independence,

all illusions were dispelled.

After the 2014 coup in Ukraine,

there is no developed economy,

no peace.

Control over parts of the territories has been lost.

I'm a supporter of a sovereignty of Ukraine

and I believe that the path that was chosen

in 1991 was the right one.

The governance of the country was

and remains being incorrect though.

The problem is that people did not really benefit

from sovereignty and independence.

This really is a problem.

- And I gather that because of your husband's positions,

you were blacklisted, so to speak.

Being a wife of an opposition politician

is very hard, especially in the last five years,

when the "democrats" came to power

"that preached democratic values."

And they are ready with a hot iron

to finish those who they don't like,

who is undesirable and says something that they don't like.

- What about your show?

What happened to your show?

Your colleagues?

People who worked with you?

I've produced 13 seasons

of the most successful shows in Ukraine:

X-Factor, Ukraine's Got Talent.

But after the American sanctions

were imposed against Viktor, I was fired.

And, of course, it was a political punishment

for me as a wife.

And it is terrible that a family, the wife,

in a democratic country,

are punished, in fact, for her husband.

- We are imposing sanctions on specific individuals

responsible for undermining the sovereignty,

territorial integrity, and government of Ukraine.

- You're also on the sanctions list,

the United States sanctions list.

I was one of the first

put under US sanctions, one of the first in March 2014.

The official White House documents

indicated that I was subject to sanctions

by the United States because,

first, that I defended the principles

of building a federal state structure in Ukraine.

This is strange for a country that is a federation

and against the Ukraine being federation.

Interestingly, the views of Medvedchuk

on the need to give more freedom to the regions of Ukraine

are shared by the vice president of the USA, Biden.

Anyway, on December 8th, 2015,

speaking in the Verkhovna Rada in Kiev--

- Thank you very much.

He practically repeated

the ideas of the opposition leader of Ukraine.

- This issue of federalism

is the thing that almost prevented our nation

from coming into being.

This is all because of disagreement

with my position, which I state publicly and openly,

and which neither the government

nor the national radicals like.

At first, I was very afraid.

It was terrible when you were absorbed by this feeling.

I asked Viktor, "Let's leave."

Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians left;

talented, promising.

But Viktor said, "Where would we go?

"This is my country.

"This is my homeland.

"This is my home.

"I can be disliked by someone.

"Someone can hate me.

"I will have a different opinion, but this is my country.

"I love it; why should I leave?

"We stay."

In 2018, Ukraine was already in

a state of deep economic recession and political crisis.

The Crimea was lost.

In the east,

a bloody war continued in the Donbas for four years.

Two stable concepts have been formed

in Ukrainian society.

According to the first, Ukraine should set a course

on complete political, economic,

and cultural isolation from Russia.

At the same time, within the country,

it is necessary to eradicate

any manifestations of anything Russian,

including historic monument, religion,

communication, and language.

According to the second concept,

Ukraine cannot and should not break relations with Russia,

and the Russian-speaking population

should have equal rights to preserve

their customs, religion, and culture.

Viktor Medvedchuk became an expression

of this second concept.

Since 2018, he has been one of the leaders

of the For Life, Opposition Bloc,

the party who represents the interests

of the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine.

Opposition Platform-For Life is a political party in Ukraine

founded in December 2018 with the aim to contest together

the 2019 Ukrainian presidential election

and then the 2019 Ukrainian parliamentary election.

Government and our opponents

call it pro-Russia, but it is incorrect.

It is incorrect because people who live

and who want to be friends with Russia

who are against the policy that the authorities profess

in the form of radical Russophobia and anti-Russian hysteria

and want normal relations with our neighbors,

people who stand for the values that unfortunately,

in recent years, have disappeared.

- Your solution, although it probably is impossible to get,

would be to split Ukraine into west and east.

A defacto division has always existed.

When we talk about the west and east in the '90s,

we precede it from the fact

that there is a split in Ukraine.

It threatens to break up the country.

Unfortunately, the process of disintegration has begun.

The question is, why?

The fact is Ukraine, with its current borders,

is a territorial association.

If we analyze the history of the last 10 centuries,

then the territory of Ukraine

was the territory of various regional associations.

Since the 10th, 11th century, it was Kivean Rus.

Then the Golden Horde.

Then the Great Lithuanian Principality,

which occupied most of today's territory of Ukraine.

Then the Crimean Khanate.

The Kingdom of Hungary.

Kingdom of Poland.

The Ottoman Empire.

The Austro-Hungarian Empire.

The Russian Empire.

And all these territorial associations

created their own culture here, implanted their faith,

and recognized certain historical facts.

When you underline the fact, which I oppose,

underline the fact that this would be

more of a Lithuanian principality,

the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and it was the Russian Empire,

therefore, there is a different faith,

a different history, and different languages.

The mistake of the current government,

it tries to build a single identity

out of this whole country

where they speak different languages,

where they practice different religions,

where they have different assessments of historical facts,

builds this identity on an identity

close only to the part of the people, the population.

That part.

This is a mistake that leads to nowhere.

This is the biggest strategic mistake

made by the authorities in Kiev today,

because this identity will never establish itself

throughout Ukraine.

On April 25th, 2019,

the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted a law

according to which the only language that can be used

in all spheres of life in Ukraine is the Ukrainian language.

This law immediately provoked sharp criticism,

both inside and outside the country.

Ukraine is a political state

where the second language in importance and spread

is the Russian language.

By its decision, the Verkhovna Rada announced a defacto ban

for almost half of the country's citizens

to use their native language.

Experts suggest that further, the law,

contrary to the European Charter of Languages,

will be another factor in the split of society

and in the future of the country.

Yes, we will now learn English.

- Yeah, well, I understand that too,

but they're trying to make it more European.

You can't go against your nature.

There are so many Ukrainians

who are different traditional values, different values.

You don't have to force America down their throats.

But you're getting the worst of America.

You're getting the America as a debtor nation.

You're losing your economy.

You're going the worst of capitalism

and you're gonna go past the 1990s Russia.

It's gonna be...

America is doing the same thing

that they did to Russia in the 1990s.

I know you've said Russia and Ukraine

are two different countries

that are united by history and by tradition.

Both, countries and people.

- And you've made the point that you're two nations.

Explain what you're thinking.

These are two distinct nations.

Preceding from today, and for the last 200 to 300 years,

there is the Russian nation, there is the Ukrainian nation.

But these are close nations.

These are Slavic Orthodox peoples.

This is the basis of civilization characteristics,

community of Russia and Ukraine.

If, in general, we compare Ukraine and Russia,

this is one thing.

If we compare with the western part of Ukraine,

then this a completely different thing.

Imposing this position here,

the influence on the position of the whole country

is a mistake.

We must understand that no matter how life develops further,

I believe in it and firmly believe

that we will still be neighbors.

And most importantly, it should be so.

- Yeah, I understand.

Mr. Putin may not agree completely.

He feels that Ukraine

is really a part of Russia historically.

Very close; I mean, very close.

- One people, two nations.

- You think it's one nation?

Indeed, Mr. Putin said

that they were not two nations, but one.

I had long discussions with him about this.

I think that he is inclined to my point of view.

When I raise arguments, these are really two nations.

He never said that this is one country.

It used to be one country and was called the USSR,

but this country does not exist.

Today, there is an independent Russian federation,

an independent Ukraine,

and other former republics of the Soviet Union.

Jubilation on the streets

of the Ukrainian capital as protestors took control of Kiev

and President Viktor Yanukovych was impeached.

On the 20th of February, 2014,

on the main street of the Kiev, horrible things happened.

And this was a point-of-no-return to Ukraine as we know it.

From the very early morning,

unidentified shooters opened fire on the protestors

and on law enforcement.

Tensions were very high and both sides were furious.

President Viktor Yanukovych, special forces of Berkut,

and Special Security Services forces

were immediately blamed for the killings.

Angry crowds of protestors began to attack the police.

- Who shot the protestors?

Do you have an idea?

The first official

government investigation started.

Investigators accused special forces of Berkut,

Viktor Yanukovych,

President Putin's assistant Vladislov Surkov,

and Russian Spetnaz.

All the accusations were lacking one thing:

evidence.

Someone who has been gathering this evidence

is professor Ivan Katchanovski

from the University of Ottawa in Canada.

Professor Katchanovski kept investigating

the events of the Maidan massacre

during the last five years.

In his extensive scientific research

based on a cross-examination of the video and audio files

throughout the timeline of the shooting,

he got much further in his investigation

than all of the official teams together.

This was quite unprecedented

to have so many television cameras, basically,

so many journalists following and witnessing

such a mass killing.

On mostly all television networks in the United States,

in Canada, Ukraine, Germany, Poland,

all different countries, with exception of Russia,

it was presented basically as evidence

that this was massacre by police.

Here, police fire on protestors

with AK-47s and sniper rifles.

During the five years of official investigation

of the Maidan massacre,

very important facts were completely ignored.

Snipers were located in buildings

under the control of protestors.

During the investigation, Professor Katchanovski

discovered even more horrifying facts.

And only recently, actually,

I found a footage which was filmed by

this Belgian television from Hotel Ukraine.

This video shows they were walking to

the spot of the massacre.

They were not walking just on their own.

They were led by two other protestors

who were very loudly calling them to the site.

No reason to go there,

and they were specifically called into this massacre spot.

Victims were escorted to

the places it was planned for them to be killed and filmed.

In Professor Katchanovski's investigation

that was based on scientifically organized analysis

of all available video and audio recordings,

he reached a conclusion.

The Maidan massacre was key

in a plan of an ongoing coup d'etat

and killings were planned in advance.

There were two interviews

published in the recent book

by a Ukrainian pro-Maidan journalist.

And in this book, they produced interviews

of two far-right leaders of Ukraine.

One was head of Svoboda Party

and another was the deputy head of the parliament of Ukraine

at the time of Maidan massacre,

who was also one of the leaders

of this far-right Svoboda Party.

And they and Maidan leaders

met with some senior Western officials.

And this Western official told them basically

that killings of a few protestors

is not enough for a Western government to change support.

They said specifically

end of recognition of Yanukovych government

basically would change

only if number of victims would be 100.

The Western government policy

changed immediately after Maidan massacre.

Not an accident,

because you have exactly 100 people who were killed.

Over these four years,

a lot of versions have been made public.

A lot of television footage was filmed

about the fact that they were Georgian snipers

or that someone else did this

in order to provoke confrontation and bloodshed.

The fact that has not yet been established

who started shooting at the protestors.

And if this has not yet been accomplished

in four-and-a-half years,

then as a person who understands a thing or two

about law and criminal investigations,

I can tell you that it will remain unresolved.

- Research has revealed there were snipers at the Maidan.

The forensics with the angle of the shooting,

bodies of the police and the protestors,

it was very badly investigated; not at all, really.

But what evidence we have

seems to point to there being Georgian snipers.

- I remember you were telling me about the Obama phone call.

- President Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin

still disagree on all the basic facts in Ukraine,

but the two leaders are talking about a potential,

and I must capitalize that word,

potential resolution to this crisis.

- Obama and you had an agreement

that there would be no firing.

And he gave you a promise that he would...

But murderers get away with murder

after a successful coup d'etat.

These events that occurred on Maidan

that started in the end of November

and ended on February 21-22, 2014,

they were mostly predetermined

as elements of external management

which were then actually implemented

by Washington in Ukraine.

First, nongovernmental funds, organizations,

and government officials represented by Mrs. Nuland,

then by Vice President Biden, and by many others

openly supported the escalation of violence,

which resulted in the overthrow of power.

The most interesting thing is that the armed actions,

they really took place,

and there were signs of a crime in these actions.

These were serious crimes.

But when that happened,

by the time they ended in February 21-22,

the government had already granted amnesty.

So, a law was passed that there would not be prosecution

of people who participated in the protests.

And according to this law, all participants were exonerated,

including those who committed crimes.

Moreover, in Article 9 of this law,

it is forbidden to collect personal data,

meaning those who later came to power.

So, they established the ground in advance

so those who performed any criminal activity at that time

couldn't be prosecuted.

We understand that the seizure of power

happened by force of arms, but no one ever took

nor will ever take the responsibility for that.

Legislative solution was adopted in this regard.

I gave you the example of Article 9,

of the law on amnesty of February 21st, 2014, for a reason,

where it is forbidden to collect personal data

and to record any actions

that were related to those who protested,

so to those people who could participate or organize

what you call today using weapons.

- Nationalist groups, they burned your villa down.

Basically, no.

It was in February 2014,

just in the heat of the events on Maidan.

- Yeah, but who burned it down?

These were national radicals, yes.

The fact is that over the years,

the investigation pretended that the case was investigated,

but they couldn't identify the perpetrators.

- So, no justice?

There is no justice in this matter

and in general,

and probably there is no point in expecting it

because this is not the only event

that affected me or my family.

Because in 2014 and 2015,

there were attempts to occupy my office.

And several times, my office was set on fire.

This is all because of disagreement with my position,

which I state publicly and openly,

and which neither the government

nor the national radicals like.

By the way, the last attempt of setting my office on fire

was several months ago,

in September 2018.

And the problem is that since 2014,

the government has lost its very important function.

As an expert in state-building issues,

I can say this function is the use of violence.

- So, why do so many Ukrainians hate Russia so much?

This is related to the processes

that have occurred during these last four years

in order to bring this division,

a split in relations between Russia and Ukraine.

This is the policy of today's government,

which has been elevated to the level of state policy.

Resentment against Russia

has been growing for a long time.

Ukraine claimed a leading position

in the entire post-Soviet era.

One of the largest countries in Europe

could not have been on the sidelines,

but it was losing the competition

for the leadership to Russia, and it was difficult

for the awakened national consciousness to accept it.

In addition, it quickly became clear

that it was very convenient for Ukrainian politicians

to blame all the mistakes in the economy

on the nonconstructive position of Russia.

Until a certain time, disputes and rivalries

did not go beyond the relationship

of two brothers living in the neighborhood.

However, with coming of nationalist President Yushchenko

to power in 2005, the situation escalated.

The anti-Russian policy of the Ukrainian leadership

has become more pronounced

and the propaganda pressure on the population has increased.

However, this did not prevent millions of Ukrainians

from moving to work in a richer and more stable Russia.

Since December 2013,

anti-Russian propaganda has become hysterical.

During the days of confrontation on the Maidan,

fake news was constantly spread.

For example, the Russian special forces

are allegedly already in Kiev

and are preparing to use force against the protestors.

The death of people on the Maidan

was also readily associated

with the presence of Russian special forces.

When the situation is constantly escalating

that Russia is to blame for everything,

then it is perceived by the majority of the population

as a fact that Russia is an aggressor.

But today, the majority of the population of Ukraine

considers Russia to be the aggressor.

After losing Crimea,

Russia is openly called an aggressor in Ukraine.

Tearing away the whole region

was painfully perceived by Ukrainian society,

part of which grew

and was formed in conditions of independence.

The war in Donbas was also associated

with Russian interference.

Pro-government media kept telling

that there were whole Russian divisions in Donbas

and it was them who bombarded the urban neighborhoods

of Donetsk and Luhansk.

The population of Ukraine willingly believed it.

It is much easier to think of Russia as an aggressor

than to accept the fact that the Ukrainian army

is bombing and shelling Ukrainian cities,

that the killed women and children

are the victims of the Ukrainian army

and the Ukrainian Nazi military formations.

It was easier to blame Putin directly.

- Mr. Putin, you can win the fight against the troops,

but you will never win the fight against the nation,

united Ukrainian nation.

- So, Mr. Putin, who's the godfather of your daughter,

is the bad guy here, is the face of the enemy.

It seems to me, from having talked to Mr. Putin,

that he's been trying to keep a balance,

trying to keep a lid on this violence.

There is a great danger.

I'm sure that Mr. Putin has pressure

from his own nationalists

who are unhappy with the situation,

so he's trying to keep the peace.

He's not just balancing.

Putin's attitude to Ukraine is extremely positive.

- Mr. Medvedchuk would be a good liaison.

In a move that has angered Russia

and fueled massive uncertainty

over the future of the war in Ukraine,

President Donald Trump has approved the sale

of lethal munitions to the Ukrainian government.

- Ukraine can be used to push against Russia

'cause it sits right nextdoor to Russia

and because there's a history of animosity

between half of what was Ukraine and with Russia.

They're able to really push on

some real background animosity there

that a lot of Americans just don't understand.

It goes back generations.

And the press's job in all of this

hasn't been to report on it; it's been to cover it up.

And anybody who actually looks at the facts

of the Ukraine coup in 2013 and 2014

can see how the US was directly involved.

Thank you, thank you!

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

- But it wasn't just an end in itself.

It was a means to an end.

And the end that they were going for

is a way to antagonize Russia.

We'll give Russia

no chance to invade Ukraine.

That's why we are doing everything possible

to provide extra financing for the armed forces.

- And then, when Russia responds in any way,

then they can say, "Well, see, they're the aggressors,"

and they've done this over and over again.

They've stirred up aggression against Russia

right at Russia's border

and then blamed Russia for anything that happened.

- This is a act of aggression by Russia,

that these were Ukrainian vessels traveling peacefully,

seeking to go through the Kerch Straits to a Ukrainian port.

On November 25th, 2018,

the first armed incident between Ukraine and Russia

took place in the Kerch Strait.

A conflict that could've escalated

into major hostilities.

Ukrainian warships attempted to enter the Sea of Azov,

violating the state maritime border,

according to the Russian version.

The Ukrainian side claims that its ships

were in neutral waters.

During the conflict,

Russian border guards acted aggressively and used weapons.

The ships of Ukraine were detained

and the crews were arrested.

- I haven't seen you since the Kerch Strait.

Any comments on that?

Even though Viktor Medvedchuk

was in tough opposition to the administration

of President Poroshenko, he went to Moscow

to negotiate with Prime Minister Medvedev

on the release of Ukrainian sailors.

It wasn't the first time Medvedchuk

engaged in the fate of Ukrainian prisoners.

Practically, he fixes the passivity

and inactivity of the Ukrainian official authorities

by addressing humanitarian concerns.

- How often do you go down there to Donbas?

You know, I used to travel very often;

have been to Donetsk and Luhansk.

I had direct negotiations

on the liberation of our citizens there,

as well as in Moscow.

So, I have been engaged in negotiations,

exchanges since December 2014.

- The Donetsk People's Republic government

say that moving forward

there can be no communication with Kiev

other than prisoner swaps that might be in the pipeline.

Only Russia could act as a mediator.

- I feel sorry for Ukraine

because I don't quite understand all the forces

that brought this division,

this polarization of the country.

From the American point of view,

it's simply a button, a leverage point to use

to excite the Russians and go after the Russians.

So, I would be very worried if I was anybody in the world,

a citizen, that the United States

is gonna use this Ukraine thing at any moment

to push towards a hot war.

- The whole world is watching you.

That's a fact.

They're watching you,

because their hope's for your success.

- Do you think that was a plan of the Wall Street people,

of the Western people,

where they wanted to make Ukraine a dumping ground?

You know,

I don't even have to speculate about, I'm sure of it.

At the time of the collapse

of the Soviet Union,

many experts reasonably included Ukraine

in a top 10 of the most developed countries in the world.

Starting positions of the independent Ukraine

were impressive: one-third of the whole USSR industry,

the largest Black Sea shipping company in the world,

rocket, aviation, and space industry.

As a result, after reckless economic reforms,

after breakdown of economic relations with Russia

and other post-Soviet countries, Ukraine had a failure.

Since independence, its economy has shrunk by a third,

ahead of the poorest countries in Europe.

After 2014, Ukraine took a sharp turn

towards de-communization.

Memories of the Soviet time fade one by one.

But together with the monuments,

Ukraine is parting with its industrial grandeur.

- Okay, what happens?

So, Wall Street people make money on this?

Does Ukraine become a junk bond?

Do they trade the future of Ukraine on stock market?

Ukraine as part of the Soviet Union

was the largest republic in the production of locomotives

and diesel locomotives.

De-industrialization in Ukraine led to the fact

that we now purchase these diesel locomotives

from the United States of America.

Who benefits, Mr. Stone?

This is beneficial to those who today

are lobbying illegal methods

affecting economic integration, the sale of their products.

Five years after the Revolution of Dignity,

suddenly it became clear to everyone

the West is not going to open its sales markets to Ukraine.

Nobody needed to have unexpected competitors.

It was much more profitable

to force the Ukrainians to eliminate their potential.

Ukraine used to be one of the few countries

that could produce aircraft carriers.

Now, there is no ship-building in Ukraine.

Ukraine used to create space rockets.

Now it has no space industry.

No aircraft industry.

Ukraine doesn't have its own automotive industry.

The military-industrial complex

once brought up to $3 billion annually to the budget.

Today, most of the enterprises are closed.

Some of the enterprises are located in territory

not controlled by Kiev.

Naturally, to say that today

we are trying to export these products,

these amounts are insignificant,

which, of course, cannot come close to what it was before.

Because the less we produce, the more we will purchase,

that this is one of the elements of this external expansion,

an external management that Washington has introduced

in relation to Ukraine since 2014.

- Kiev looks fantastic.

Another amazing experiment over common sense

was the coal scam.

Ukraine, which has rich coal deposits in the Donbas,

has suddenly turned from an exporter

into an importer of coal.

It seems that in Kiev and Washington,

they agreed to give a new meaning to the saying

to carry coal to Newcastle.

After the start of the conflict in the Donbas,

Kiev definitely refused to buy Donetsk coal

and decided to replace it with imported coal

from the USA and South Africa.

It was possible to buy it in Russia,

but the politics took over.

The second example,

Pennsylvanian coal is much more expensive than Russian coal

and it is more expensive than coal from South Africa.

And can you imagine the difference

in transportation logistics:

Ukraine and Russia,

Ukraine and the United States of America,

and Ukraine and South Africa?

At the same time,

today we buy 63% of coal imports from Russia.

And we already buy 30% of all imported coal

from the United States of America.

Is this not the result of what you ask about?

Is it not the result of who benefits?

Who does it?

Those who benefit from the sale

of their products in Ukraine

in order to avoid domestic production

so that the country from the manufacturer

turned into the country of the acquirer and the buyer.

That's what the benefit is.

- Is there any oil, gas; there's nothing here?

You know, we have oil and gas everywhere,

but we do not produce it.

It needs to be developed.

Therefore, Ukraine is rich in resources,

but resources require investments

that must be made in the economy of Ukraine

in order to extract these minerals.

But the situation with the investment

and investment climate in the country is extremely bad.

The economy is not developing.

The investment climate has not been created.

There is pressure from the administrative resource,

raider seizure of business,

the lack of a fair judicial system.

So, who would invest?

However, there were brave people

who decided to invest in Ukrainian oil.

The attention of world media

is attracted by one company: Burisma Holdings.

There are very, very interesting people

on the board of directors of Burisma;

for example, Hunter Biden is the son

of the vice president of the United States.

Of course, this state of affairs is welcome,

but one detail interferes.

The son of the US vice president

received his post almost immediately

after the official visit of his father to Ukraine

in the light of obvious interest of Biden, Sr.,

in everything that is happening in Ukraine.

- Ex-Vice President Joe Biden,

his son, Hunter Biden, has a deal in Ukraine; explain that.

Yes, his son was

and remains on the board of directors

of one of the companies that is engaged

in oil and gas production in Ukraine, so this also explains

the economic interests of the Biden family;

not only the son,

but probably his high-ranking father as well.

Perhaps this was precisely

what allowed Mr. Biden

when he was as curator when he was in power,

curator from the side of Washington in Ukraine.

He actually behaved like a person representing

not only the country that introduced external management,

but it was a representative or leader of the metropolis

in relation to the colony,

where the colony was, unfortunately, my country.

And his speech in the parliament, I remember it very well.

- Thank you very much.

It was not just instructive.

It was a speech in which he said

what to do and how to do it.

And when stating his position,

he didn't base it on argument or explanation,

but on the fact that this decision

was made somewhere overseas.

- The Office of the General Prosecutor

desperately needs reform.

The judiciary should be overhauled.

The energy sector needs to be competitive,

ruled by market principles, not sweetheart deals.

"And you," the so-called legislature

before whom he speaks, "should implement this policy."

- Ukraine needs a budget

that's consistent with your IMF commitments.

Anything else will jeopardize Ukraine's hard-won progress

and drive down the support for Ukraine

from the international community, which is always tenuous.

On March 22nd, 2019,

Ukrainian politicians from the opposition,

Viktor Medvedchuk and Yuriy Boyko, met in Moscow

with Prime Minister Medvedev.

It was about the conclusion of a new gas contract

between Russia and Ukraine,

as well as the transit of gas through its territory.

Interestingly, on behalf of Ukraine,

negotiations were not conducted by officials,

but it could not have been otherwise.

Until 2014, Ukraine was almost completely dependent

on Russia supplies.

However, due to disputes over the price of gas

as well as for political reasons,

Ukraine does without gas supplies

from the Russian Federation;

in fact, as Ukrainian politicians themselves

have already recognized, in the reverse mode.

Through the special schemes,

the same gas is purchased from Gazprom supplies to the EU,

but through European intermediaries;

for example, through Poland.

As a result, over four years,

the price of gas for the population increased by 1,079%.

That is the price citizens of Ukraine have to pay

for fictitious gas independence.

And then, a bilateral economic war began.

The thing is that Ukraine

joined the EU sanctions against Russia,

and Russia imposed counter-sanctions against Ukraine.

And this dealt another crushing blow

to the economic abilities of selling Ukraine's products

to the markets of Russia and the CIS countries.

Fortunately, has not found a replacement for these markets.

- And 30% of the budget goes to pay the debt.

These are financial burdens

that even a normal economy cannot withstand,

let alone a state that is in deep crisis.

I want to tell you

that along with de-industrialization,

we are still in a process that the authorities

and our media do not notice.

This is another process.

It is called de-intellectualization.

Why?

This is due to the harmful negative educational system

introduced in Ukraine.

This is due to the lack of scientific

and technical development today

because science and the introduction of new technologies

is not actually financed in the country.

And naturally, the brain drain goes along the line

of finding use for these brains.

De-industrialization led to the closure

of tens of thousands of large- and medium-sized enterprises.

And after that, people were looking for work.

And today, they are looking for it in Russia,

in Poland, in Europe.

They left because they couldn't financially support

their families in Ukraine.

- I set up the foundation in Ukraine in 1990,

which is two years before the independence of Ukraine.

- Where does George Soros figure in all this?

Unfortunately, everywhere.

If we talked about some positive results

from the activities of this gentleman,

then we should've noted some success.

But his activity is mainly focused on those countries

where he took an active position with his various funds.

We remember the countries in North Africa

where the Arab Spring happened:

Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt.

We remember the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan.

We remember the Rose Revolution in Georgia.

We remember the Orange Revolution in 2004.

And finally,

the consequences of not only the Orange Revolution

but also the Revolution of Dignity of 2013 and 2014.

This is also his activity.

He did not stop.

He continued to operate in 2015 and 2016.

- The Russians were successful.

They accomplished what they set out to do.

They had an objective to sow discord and divisiveness

within our society at large

and to help Donald Trump, and they succeeded.

- The biggest mistake people make

when talking about the Trump-Russia collusion

sort of MSNBC/Russiagate narrative--

- The Kremlin offered dirt to the Trump campaign.

The president's campaign said yes to that offer.

That's no longer an open question.

All that stuff has now been proven.

- They think that it started Election Night 2016.

In fact, it's part of a much longer series of events.

When Barack Obama was elected--

- I, Barack Hussein Obama, do solemnly swear--

- Hillary Clinton comes in as Secretary of State.

- I just wanted to have a chance to publicly say thank you.

I think Hillary will go down

as one of the finest secretary of states we've had.

- And at that point, she sets up a private email system.

I think now it's pretty clear that part of what was going on

is they were setting up the underpinnings

that would set up the Maidan.

She introduced a program called Civil Society 2.0.

- And what we've done

with Secretary Clinton's Civil Society 2.0 program

is we've taken one of America's undeniable strengths,

the strength of our technology and of our innovators,

and we've put 'em to work

in service of our diplomatic goals.

- This is a way for the US government

to work directly with NGOs like International Renaissance,

funded by George Soros,

and, while working with those NGOs,

funnel money to them, but also training,

and the kind of training that would be used

when the Maidan would start.

- I am the Ukrainian, the native of Kiev.

And now, I am on Maidan.

I want to you know why thousands of people

all over my country are on the streets.

- The direct involvement of this

we don't know anything about

because Hillary Clinton's emails were all hidden from us.

That Civil Society 2.0 program

shows that the understand that cybertechnology,

that smartphones and all of that technology,

the tactics of activism were changing.

The scandal that has become well-known

throughout the world,

which for some reason is called Russia's intervention

in the US presidential election,

erupted in Ukraine.

- They're calling it the digital equivalent of 9/11.

- A new report from the US intelligence community

says that Putin and the Russian government conspired

to help President-elect Donald Trump's election chances.

- This is an electronic Watergate.

- Russia did not help me.

- The FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission,

is investigating the Russian government's efforts

to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

- Obviously, Russia's been accused and accused

over and over again of interference in the 2016 election.

- But now in the US, there's been investigation

about Ukraine's interference in the election.

It was a very confusing situation.

Poroshenko seems to have been

very strongly pro-Clinton, anti-Trump.

- Do you think there was interference?

For some reason,

we are talking about the interference of Russia,

associated primarily with the former campaign chairman

of the then-presidential candidate Donald Trump,

Mr. Paul Manafort.

- Lock him up! - Lock him up!

In this scandal, which erupted in Ukraine,

he played an organizational and ideological function.

- Let's talk about this new reporting

from the New York Times this morning about Paul Manafort

and his dealings in the Ukraine.

In order to organize this scandal

to discredit the presidential candidate and his campaign,

which he actually managed,

Mr. Manafort was removed from power of the head of staff.

Last August, a jury convicted Manafort

of eight felonies, including tax and bank fraud.

One month later, he pleaded guilty

to two more counts of conspiracy

and agreed to cooperate with the Russian investigation

in exchange for a lighter sentence.

- Paul Manafort, he was consulting

with the Party of Regions.

The Party of Regions

is a political party of Ukraine created in late-1997

that then grew to be the biggest party of Ukraine

between 2006 and 2014.

- So, Andrew Kramer publishes a story in the New York Times

about Paul Manafort's name being found in this black ledger.

Serhiy Leshchenko is a Ukrainian journalist

turned lawmaker who staked his career

on fighting corruption.

- This use to be office of Paul Manafort.

This, he says,

is where a potentially crucial bit of evidence was found:

a suspicious invoice that appears to be personally signed

by Paul Manafort.

- So, the person who put the accusation forward

about Manafort was Serhiy Leshchenko.

- Today, I present the documents signed by Paul Manafort.

Leshchenko, he has the image,

I call it primitively inaccurate, the fighter of corruption.

- The problem of corruption, this is a problem

of the whole period of Ukrainian independence.

But he fights against corruption

following orders.

There is an order to fight with a corrupt person; he fights.

If not, he does not.

He has lost a lot of slander lawsuits directed against him,

because often some of the information that he has presented,

considering his authority as a journalist,

is not simply implausible, it is deceitful.

It was he who, as a member of parliament,

as a former journalist,

was instructed to make these records public

from this ledger of the Party of Regions.

The interesting fact of the matter

is that when the story of the so-called ledger

of the Party of Regions came to light

and when he first reported about it,

there was no mention of Paul Manafort.

He spoke about other people.

That is, there was a test run for the main strike.

All this was done with one goal:

to strike at the presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Why am I sure about this?

I have good arguments for this,

because in this ledger, there were the names

of hundreds of people for these four years.

There were huge amounts, tens of millions of dollars,

many tens of millions of dollars.

There were specific people

where not only their names were indicated,

but also a personal signature

that they received the money informally.

No criminal cases have been investigated

on these records yet.

No one has been prosecuted.

Hence, the conclusion is that this was done

for a concentrated, focused strike against the main target.

This main target, which was dictated from overseas,

was called presidential candidate Donald Trump.

- Serhiy Leshchenko and his anti-corruption team

have every reason to wanna see Donald Trump defeated

this election because of his support for Russia,

which is currently at war with Ukraine.

- And this is the point in the story

where the music changes and gets ominous and dark.

And it succeeded.

Manafort was removed as the campaign chairman.

Such things can't happen in the autonomous mode.

They can take place

only if the authority gave the green light.

Therefore, these actions cannot be regarded

as nothing other than an interference,

especially as interference as a term is very popular.

- Russian-- - Russians--

- Russia-- - Russia--

- Russian--

- Russian election interference.

- Russian witch hunt!

They just talk about it

mostly when it comes to Russia's interference

with the US presidential elections.

But in this case, even the court found

that these actions were illegal,

which influenced the electoral process.

I am sure that Mr. Soros is behind this too,

because this is a team of Democrats.

Nuland, Soros, Biden,

in favor of the interests of Hillary Clinton,

did everything to prevent Mr. Trump

from being elected in the 2016 elections.

- People use the word dossier

and it has such an official sound to it.

I mean, let's just call it for what it is:

rank hearsay put together by an FBI source

who was later defrocked,

paid for by the Democrat National Committee, and,

oh by the way, Christopher Steele hated Donald Trump too.

- Throughout the summer of 2016,

Victoria Nuland was being updated by Christopher Steele.

In early-2018, Victoria Nuland admitted

that she's been being briefed by Christopher Steele.

She talked openly about it on CBS's Face the Nation.

- During the Ukraine crisis in 2014 and '15,

Chris Steele had a number of commercial clients

who were asking him for reports

on what was going on in Russia,

what was going on in Ukraine.

- Why is that?

Okay, my conjecture here, they were concerned.

They wanted to get ahead of the reporting

and explain why they were talking to Christopher Steele.

- Chris had a friend at the State Department

and he offered us that reporting free

so that we could also benefit from it.

- Victoria Nuland said,

"I immediately urged him to go to the FBI."

- In the middle of July,

when he was doing this other work and became concerned--

The dossier?

- The dossier, he passed two to four pages

of short points of what he was finding.

And our immediate reaction to that was,

"This is not in our purview.

"This needs to go to the FBI."

- And you'll find a spate of people

who urged Christopher Steele to go to the FBI.

John McCain urged him to go to the FBI.

Everybody urged him to go to the FBI.

And why is that?

I think they're setting up a cover story.

They wanna say, "We told him to go to the FBI."

I think, in fact, what they were doing

was setting up the information operation.

- I used to work in the Ukrainian Embassy

here in Washington in 2015, 2016.

And one day, I was approached

by the DC Ukrainian Embassy, Oksana Shulyar,

asking me to meet a person she knows really well,

and I met with a DNC operative, Alexandra Chalupa.

- Alexandra Chalupa, who, as a lawyer,

she had worked in the Bill Clinton Administration

as an intern, she'd been a DNC operative for about 12 years,

and she's the Ukrainian-American

whose mother was deeply involved in politics.

In 2015, Alexandra Chalupa and her sister

start campaigning very hard against Paul Manafort.

- This is who Paul Manafort is.

He is a puppet master

of some of the most vile dictators around the world.

- Manafort was from Connecticut.

They went to Connecticut and protested against him.

It's not clear to me exactly why he was being targeted,

but Alexandra Chalupa has said

she was pulled out of retirement to work on this.

She was asking any more information on dirt,

that's how she put it, to get Trump off the campaign

in September/October of 2016, right before the elections.

- Most of the key evidence that shows the collusion

between the Ukrainian government

and the DNC, operatives for the DNC,

came in an article that was actually published in Politico

before the inauguration.

Ken Vogel and David Stern wrote an article in Politico

that talked about how the Ukrainian government

had tried to collude and interfere

on behalf of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election

and, furthermore, how Petro Poroshenko was very worried

that the Trump Administration would figure out

they'd been working against him.

And anybody who's watched Donald Trump for a few minutes

knows he's fairly vengeful

to people he feel has wronged him.

- John McCain received a fake and phony dossier.

Did you hear about the dossier?

It was paid for by crooked Hillary Clinton, right?

And John McCain got it, he got it, and what did he do?

He didn't call me.

He turned it over to the FBI, hoping to put me in jeopardy,

and that's not the nicest thing to do.

- So, Petro Poroshenko was concerned that that would happen.

Two reasons:

one, because of the arms deals

and the economic deals and the loans, but also personally.

Petro Poroshenko, since he'd been elected,

had become a very unpopular president.

At one point, I think his approval rating

dipped down under 10%, a shockingly low number.

In fact, polls showed that Ukraine

has the least confidence in their government

of any country on the face of the Earth.

So, after Poroshenko was put into power

by the United States,

things have been disastrous for Ukraine.

So, Poroshenko was also worried

that if he could not withstand a reelection bid

that he was gonna have Donald Trump in the West mad at him.

And you can see his fears evolving.

The first thing they tried to do was make sure

they patched up things diplomatically for Ukraine.

But then later, he started to throw people under the bus

just to protect himself.

Because it was a failure

of Ukraine's foreign policy.

The interesting thing is that the court acknowledged

the fact of interference

by such actions in the US electoral process.

I heard the accusations of Russia

interfering in the US electoral process,

which is not confirmed by real evidence.

There is a court decision.

Moreover, this court decision established the illegitimacy,

but it has also been established

that the actions of these individuals

as citizens of Ukraine caused significant harm

to the foreign policy of Ukraine.

- So, in the spring of 2016,

Alexandra Chalupa goes to the Ukrainian Embassy

in Georgetown and she's introduced to Andrii Telizhenko.

And he's introduced to Alexandra Chalupa

by the ambassador, Chaly,

and Alexandra Chalupa tells Andrii Telizhenko

that she's trying to dig up dirt on Donald Trump and Russia

and trying to dig up dirt on Paul Manafort and Russia.

- She actually did want to use this information,

not for some intelligence purpose or legal purpose.

She did wanna use it to interfere in an election.

- From what I saw, yes.

- Alexandra Chalupa admits this

in that article for Politico.

She doesn't deny that at all.

She also tells Telizhenko that she doesn't want him

to coordinate or help the Trump campaign in any way.

Now, Telizhenko, he's a loyal Ukrainian

who'd been part of the Maidan.

He doesn't like this.

He thinks it's illegal and he thinks it's stupid.

And he thinks it's stupid

because if you bet on the wrong horse,

this could come back to haunt you.

He turned out to be exactly right.

He went to the ambassador, Chaly,

and said, "This is illegal."

"I don't wanna be any part of this."

Chaly yells at him.

He gets in trouble.

He leaves the embassy about a month later,

goes back to Ukraine.

Cut to Trump gets elected--

- I've just received a call from Secretary Clinton.

- Now, Ken Vogel and David Stern of Politico,

they've caught wind that the Ukrainian government

had colluded with the DNC

to intervene on behalf of Hillary Clinton

and they start to do a very well-researched story.

The talk to Andrii Telizhenko.

They get denials from Chaly.

But the story's reported once

and then it's completely forgotten,

and you'd think it would be significant.

There was one key piece of evidence in the Politico story.

It's the most important piece of evidence

in this whole thing

is the email that Wikileaks would publish,

and this is an email from Alexandra Chalupa,

the DNC operative, to Luis Miranda,

who is the comms director of the DNC.

Let me explain why Luis Miranda's important.

Very significant.

The Hillary Clinton campaign

had actually taken over the DNC back in 2015.

So, when you see Alexandra Chalupa

reporting directly to Luis Miranda,

that means she is reporting through one layer of separation

to the Clinton campaign itself, not just to the DNC.

In that email, Alexandra Chalupa brags

that she has arranged to speak about Paul Manafort

and that she's gonna have this Ukrainian journalist go back

and dig up dirt on him.

Now, that completely violates what you're supposed to do

with the Open World Leadership Center.

The Open World Leadership Foundation

is a part of the Library of Congress.

Because they're part of the Library of Congress,

they're not supposed to be involved in election issues.

And it was confirmed to me by the people

at the Open World Leadership Center

that they had in fact warned Alexandra Chalupa,

"Don't do that."

The other thing that's significant there

is that Chalupa reveals

that she was with reporter Michael Isikoff.

Now, Michael Isikoff is legendary in Washington, DC.

He's well-known as a bulldog investigative journalist

who worked on the Monica Lewinsky story, for instance,

and he is hanging around with Alexandra Chalupa

throughout the entire 2016 election.

In fact, right before the election,

when everybody thought Hillary Clinton was gonna win,

he publishes an article where he names Alexandra Chalupa

as one of the most important people in the 2016 election.

To me, the most interesting thing

about that group of journalists

was those journalists were chosen by the embassy in Kiev.

In other words, those journalists were picked by

and sent by the US State Department.

And that's part of the evidence

that the State Department was involved at the deepest level

in this election collusion and interference.

In December of 2018, both Leshchenko and the head of NABU

were convicted in a Kiev court of election interference.

- The unindicted co-conspirator there

was Petro Poroshenko himself.

Poroshenko was so worried

that the Trump Administration would pin stuff on him,

he started to throw Leshchenko and NABU under the bus.

It was a form of misdirection.

He didn't want the Trump Administration

to realize his direct involvement.

- Will your relationship with the US change

now that President Donald Trump will be in the White House

come five days from now?

- Look, Ukraine, during the last three years

gained very strong bilateral support in United States.

- Trump gave a photo opportunity to Poroshenko.

- It's a great honor to have you, Mr. President.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Trump did not like Poroshenko.

Why/why not?

I think, first of all,

because Poroshenko had his own position

during the US election campaign.

He supported Hillary Clinton and he did it openly.

Why openly?

Because the ambassador of Ukraine to the USA, Mr. Chaly,

openly supported the representatives of the Democrats.

He acts as the guy

who's got the economic experience, the governing experience.

You need Biden for an attaboy

and to get the deets to stick, so Biden's willing.

Okay, great.

Mr. Yatsenyuk,

whom we recalled spoke frankly.

And in these words of Trump's assessments,

there were insults.

He stated that the USA as a powerful country

deserves to have an intelligent,

intellectually developed president.

In other words, he doubted these qualities

as inherent to Mr. Trump.

Mr. Avakov, a representative of the same Yatsenyuk party,

the minister of the interior,

stated that Trump is a marginal politician.

This altogether meant the one-sided position

of Ukraine in the US elections,

which is exactly what should not be done

by any country in the world.

When what happened happened,

Mr. Donald Trump won the election.

It was a shock for the Kiev authorities

and for those individuals that I listed.

They were confident that this victory

would never take place.

I think that if what you are saying is true

that Trump thinks badly of Mr. Poroshenko,

then there were real reasons for this.

- So, Mr. President, may God bless you and your colleagues

and the people of Ukraine,

and may God bless the United States of America

in being able to continue to help you in your efforts.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you, Mr. Biden.

- I came about this by accident,

investigating Ukrainian collusion with Democrats

to affect the election.

And over the next three to four months,

you're gonna find out all about that.

So, I've decided I'm not gonna go to the Ukraine.

You're not gonna go?

- I'm not gonna go because I think I'm walking into

a group of people that are enemies of the president,

in some cases, enemies of the United States,

and in one case, an already-convicted person

who has been found to be involved

in assisting the Democrats with the 2016 election.

I'll give you his name.

Gentleman by the name of Leschenko.

After two years of ignoring this news,

ignoring the fact of Ukraine's interference

in the elections in the United States,

Ukrainegate began to attract the attention

of political heavyweights.

- I will step back and I'll just watch it unfold.

In 1997, a man who did a lot

to determine US foreign policy, Zbigniew Brzezinski, said,

"Ukraine is a new and important spot

"on the Eurasian chessboard.

"It is a geopolitical center because its very existence

"as an independent state helps to transform Russia."

In the book, The Grand Chessboard,

he wrote a lot about Ukraine, but always in the same way.

Ukraine is a means of pressure on Russia;

no more and no less.

The border between Ukraine and Russia

is 2,300 kilometers.

Any destabilization in Ukraine

affects the interests of Russia.

And the external influence of Washington in Ukraine

makes it possible to manage the processes of destabilization

that directly affects Russia.

If you look at what happened to Ukraine

in the 21st century, there is a feeling of deja vu.

It's as if we are part of that well-known legend

about the pied piper

who led the charmed children to go nowhere.

Millions of people were deluded

by the sweet promises of rapid prosperity

with the help of the United States and Western Europe.

Very little time passed

after the so-called Revolution of Dignity,

and all expectations have collapsed.

Instead of prosperity, there is the collapse of the economy,

mass exodus of people from the country,

and the death of now thousands of people.

And the most important thing,

Ukraine is in confrontation with Russia.

The function that its real owners left for Ukraine

works flawlessly.

- Anybody who actually looks at the facts

of the Ukraine coup in 2013 and 2014

can see how the US was directly involved,

but it wasn't just an end in itself.

It was a means to an end,

and the end that they were going for

is a way to antagonize Russia.

They've stirred up aggression against Russia

right at Russia's border

and then blamed Russia for anything that happened.

But it's always interesting.

Do puppeteers understand

that sometimes puppets begin to live their own lives?

The fact of Ukraine's interference

in the elections in the United States

is the first wake-up call.

And then, war between Ukraine and Russia.

Yesterday, it was unthinkable.

Today, it is a probable scenario.

It doesn't matter who starts first.

It is important to note that the shockwave

from the first explosion has spread too wide

and affects those who prefer to wait out on the side.

Does the pied piper who leads those who believe him

further and further to nowhere understand

that Russia will never accept

a hostile state near its borders?

- Sounds like you've had a tough few years, sir.

A hard time.

The following years will be difficult

and I would say that especially 2019

will not be easy for Ukraine.

Are you afraid of something?

- Yes.

The world blowing up.

One day, that gunshot could be heard.

For example, Ukrainian military boats

could again try to break the borders

that Russia considers its own

and thereby provoke response fire

from the Russian border guards.

It's the Russian military

going head-to-head against the Ukrainian military.

There will be victims.

Russian President Vladimir Putin

blamed the Ukrainian government for the crisis.

And then the war begins,

in which Russia will naturally be declared the aggressor.

- Fighting has intensified.

Russia set off an international crisis.

- In Ukraine, Russia's now at war there.

Ukrainian tanks will move to the Donbas

in order to destroy

the unrecognized republics with one blow.

- Will President Trump finally confront

Putin's act of aggression against Ukraine?

And in order to save citizens,

Russian troops will come forward to meet them.

The Hungarian army will defend the Hungarian citizens

living in the west of Ukraine.

The mayor has declared a humanitarian crisis

and has appealed to the United Nations for help.

Poland will announce

the mobilization of reservists.

There will be a real chance to return the lands

that were torn off by the Soviet Union in 1939.

The UN Security Council

will hold an emergency session on the Ukraine crisis.

And what the whole world feared

during the Cold War will happen.

Moscow's, Brussels', and Washington's bad dream

will come true.

- We wanna return now to some breaking news this morning.

We're just learning about the movement

of the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and four other ships.

No one wants a full-scale war.

For those who are still in control in Kiev,

the only way to avoid defeat and destruction

is to organize a provocation.

The armies of Russia and NATO

will come into military conflict.

This will be the beginning of a withering Armageddon.

Only scorched earth will remain in place of Ukraine.

The world will be engulfed in a giant flame.

Probably the last war for humanity,

just because someone in Kiev

really wants to remain in power.

So, nothing good will happen.

- Well, does he see this historically as,

does he see these two countries coming together again?

Ukraine will have two election campaigns

that predetermine the country's place in the world

and, most importantly, power in Ukraine.

That is, new opportunities are opening up for Ukraine.

The new president of Ukraine,

Volodymyr Zelensky,

won because he promised to stop the war in the Donbas.

One order of the commander-in-chief

is enough for the war to be ended.

And thousands of human lives could be saved.

No one can prevent him from giving such an order,

but the days go by and there is still no peace.

The hopes of Ukrainians for the new course

are fading with each passing day.

The opportunity to improve this situation

is to elect politicians to the parliament of Ukraine

who are able to fulfill their promises

to the people of Ukraine.

We have a parliamentary presidential

form of government, and therefore, having won

the parliamentary elections, holding a faction

that can influence all processes in the country.

- Yeah, well obviously you do.

We use the life principle with Oksana.

"Do what should be done

"and everything will be as it is supposed to be."

I think this is the right way of life,

the right life principle,

and we have to implement it.