Snowman BREAKS DOWN: Zelensky’s meltdown. NATO gone rogue. Strikes on Western Ukraine – Bondarenko “https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flOXCMdKYVo“

Click for: Synopsis

Q&A

Comment by Abrogard

Synopsis Parts.
Part 1 Pressure and Negotiations
Part 2 Nato and the Baltics
Part 3 Ukraine & Front Line Politics
Part 4 Mobilization Chaos
Part 5 Q&A Session

Снеговичок ЗАПЛАКАЛ, УСТАЛ: истерика ЗЕЛЕНСКОГО. Злыдни НАТО. Налеты на Запад Украины – Бондаренко
https://www.youtube.com/watch/flOXCMdKYVo

[Alexander]: Greetings, dear friends, distinguished guests, and subscribers to my channel. Koz Bondarenko, as always, a live broadcast on Wednesdays. Konstantin Petrovich, greetings. Hello.

[Konstantin]: Hello, Alexander. Hello, dear viewers.

[Alexander]: Konstantin Petrovich, you’re as white as a pie.

[Konstantin]: Yes, yes. Today, some of my friends were wondering if this kind of joke is appropriate, for example, in Africa or in certain states, like the United States. Well, you know, in our, as they say, sanctioned circles, anything goes, as long as it’s not green, you know, that’s the most important thing, friends. And thank you very much for your support. There are several ways to jump into the conversation.

[Alexander]: Well, first of all, yes, leave your questions in the closed Shelest viewers’ club on the Telegram channel, and in the YouTube community, we’re completely open to your questions, we’re already collecting them in advance, and we’ll work with them. And the same goes for, um, chat broadcasts. You’re welcome at the end, watch to the end, and don’t write right away; it’s better to vote on the question. Well, then, yes, as they say, uh, basically, ask your question. A QR code, if the service is working, the ability to display it on the screen. Without waiting for anyone, support the channel. I invite everyone to Kostya Bondarenko’s Telegram channel, as well as his YouTube page. And stay tuned for the latest news about the Joker and the latest educational courses. It’s very interesting, informative, and remarkable that you, dear audience, are devoting time to this, and in this seemingly, well, simply crazy period, yes, in the world in general. Not to mention the rest of the world, people still find the strength, the opportunity, the time to educate themselves. So let’s learn, and if we’re going to learn anything, let’s learn from the best.

[Alexander]: Konstantin Petrovich, we’ll start our broadcast today with the question of who’s putting more pressure on whom. This is the key question of our conversation today, because we’re hearing all this back-and-forth from Zelensky. Trump is swinging from one pole to the other, Zelensky from one to the other. That seemed to be the opinion, but now it’s different. Zelensky says: “Iran, we need to get a grip on it.” Then he says: “No, we need to finish this immediately.” Zelensky says: “The US is putting pressure on me.” Then he says: “Russia is putting pressure on the US.” So, it’s like a Russian doll of pressure. Well, let’s figure out who is putting more pressure on whom. Options. Again, there could be many options, but choose from those who, well, the ones you like, the ones I suggested. The US is putting pressure on Ukraine, Russia on the US, the US on Europe, Ukraine on Europe. Who is putting more pressure? How do you rate it? Please vote, and we’ll sum it up at the end. Let’s start with that. In my opinion, this is a very fundamental question now. Who is Europe putting pressure on whom? Well, let’s put it this way, another question would probably be appropriate. Is Europe putting pressure on Ukraine?

[Konstantin]: So, it’s only in Newtonian physics that action and reaction are equal, right?

[Alexander]: Newton’s third law, I think.

[Konstantin]: Yes. Regarding this situation, there are a large number of participants, a large number of players, and the pressure is, so to speak, cyclical. Russia isn’t pressuring us yet. Russia is saying there’s no rush. We said everything we wanted to say in Anchorage, Alaska. Last summer, our position didn’t change, and you’re still making your own arrangements. So, you make your own arrangements, and then, when you’re ready, you’ll return to the negotiating process. The United States, naturally, is pressuring Zelenskyy, saying, “Come on, decide.” Zelenskyy is starting to resist, saying there’s still gunpowder in the trench, and we’ll continue to fight. Especially since Europe is also putting pressure on him. Europe is pressuring Zelenskyy, saying, “Fight, fight, fight, fight to the last, and so on.” So, go ahead and fight for at least another year, two and a half, but fight in Europe—it’s very important that you fight. Zelenskyy believes that Europe is a more preferable partner for him than the United States. The United States is pressuring Europe, so it’s your Zelenskyy there, and you have to influence him. So, this kind of circular pressure is happening. And as for Russia, Russia has conveyed through its channels to the United States that its proposal regarding the war being ended by Grija, that is, Ukraine cedes the entire territory of Donbas, withdrawing from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, is not valid. Its troops, uh, Europe, uh, accordingly, Russia is stopping along the line of combat in the Zaporizhia and Kherson regions. And so on. This will be in effect until the end of spring, that is, until the end of May, so to speak. There are still two months, you can think about it. So, will we continue military operations during this entire time? As for Kyiv, Kyiv believes that Russia is bluffing, that Russia will not be able to do anything further. Fedorov, the Defense Minister, promised Zelenskyy that he will now establish a defensive line such that no Russian will advance further than he has already. Zelenskyy already, uh, understands that he has no more than a month, a month and a half, to see how effective Russia’s actions will be at this time. But Russia has warned that if these demands are not met by June 1 or May 31, then, accordingly, Russia will change its strategy, and Russia will set higher prices, uh, higher standards. That is, uh, it will lay claim to Kharkiv, it will lay claim to the Dnipro River, it will lay claim to the entire territory of the Zaporizhia, uh, Kherson regions, as well as the Mykolaiv and Odesa regions. So. Uh, the United States understands this and understands that there is no bluff here. The United States conveyed to Ukraine that Ukraine must agree to the conditions that were set out back in Anchorage. So. Uh, the only thing Zelenskyy has been able to offer in exchange to the Russian side so far is what he proposed through his own channels, that we stop attacks on energy facilities. You stop attacks on Russia, stop attacks on Ukrainian energy facilities and infrastructure. In exchange, Ukraine undertakes to cease attacks on, uh, energy oil and gas enterprises and on ports in Russia. So far, Russia has not responded to this offer.

[Alexander]: Yeah. And what’s with the Easter ceasefire game? And who benefits from this? Because, excuse me, it’s not entirely clear. It’s truly not clear. Why does Russia need this ceasefire now? Why is Zelenskyy talking about it so early? It’s clear he’s trying to be the first, well, the first to propose it, because last year, exactly a year ago, he was thrust into this ceasefire and thrust very hard. But then there are the arguments, well, listen, it’s not exactly pink ponies and goopy fish. There’s still some memory. We remember how it was slowly moving forward, but then I remember Bakhmut, yes, that silence in Bakhmut was shown from the other side. Odessa, people were going out to the beaches, Easter, blessing Easter cakes, yes, all that, and somehow everyone breathed a sigh of relief for those, well, a couple of days, yes, although there were some provocations, and Kiev was against it then, saying that Russia would take advantage, redeploy, and it would be, well, to its advantage. So who benefits now? Razlensky says, “Oh, calm down, no one’s going to change anything significant in three days.”

[Konstantin]: Well, you see, in this situation, the question is who’s initiating the ceasefire. Now, if only Russia itself had considered proposing a similar gesture of goodwill, as Putin usually does. In this situation, if Russia decides to seize the initiative from Zelensky, Putin can say, “Our gesture of goodwill.” So, we’ll stop. He won’t even remember Zelensky’s initiative.

[Alexander]: Yeah.

[Konstantin]: But for now, judging by the statements coming out of Moscow, Russia has no intention of establishing an Easter truce there. Uh, why would Zelensky need to once again demonstrate that Russia is showing, and again, showing that he’s not as much of a war enthusiast, not as bloodthirsty as they’re now trying to portray him as. Will there be a ceasefire, what do you think? I think that by default, perhaps, there won’t be any serious shelling on Sunday, April 12th. I think it’s a bright holiday, after all, it’s a holiday for both Russians and Ukrainians. And, well, I’d like to believe that something human still remains in both peoples.

[Alexander]: Well, it’s difficult here, because I know they’ll write to me now that Ukraine has been completely dehumanized and so on.

[Konstantin]: No, excuse me, please, the war has dehumanized many. The war has dehumanized. I think it’s still necessary to take into account that it’s necessary to remain human in any situation. Well, again, regarding the celebration. Look, here I’m also getting these kinds of comments, and that’s it. It’s also very important to note which Easter Zelensky is referring to. There’s the Catholic Easter, which is about to become Orthodox, right?

[Alexander]: No.

[Konstantin]: Catholic Easter, Greek Catholics, Orthodox, and, well, of all denominations in Ukraine, they recognize the Eastern Paschalia. In this situation, these holiday transfers, which, as people say, are celebrated annually at the same time, don’t apply to Easter. Orthodox Greek Catholics, Orthodox of all patriarchates, of all denominations, they will celebrate the holiday on April 12th.

[Alexander]: So, it’s clear that we’re not talking about Catholic Easter, right? But no, no, exactly. Well, the Americans would like to achieve a truce with the Catholic Easter.

[Konstantin]: Well, the Americans also understand certain specifics. They understand when someone celebrates.

[Alexander]: Yes, Catholic and Protestant Easter, yes, in principle, are celebrated a week earlier, yes. So yes, but we are talking specifically about the Orthodox Easter now. Can this ceasefire develop into peace?

[Konstantin]: I doubt it, because the parties have not yet achieved their results in the war. Therefore, this ceasefire, if it takes place, will be short-term, uh, it will not last even three days. I think it will be determined in a day at most. That’s the maximum. That’s only if they agree. And, uh, then the fighting will resume because the parties are not ready for peace today.

[Alexander]: Yeah. The situation on the front lines is generally quite ominous. Few people are talking about any progress or successes. They are simply bombing Slavyansk-Kramatorsk, heavily attacking the rear. And now we are seeing again how they are using the same tactics in broad daylight. And not to say unsuccessfully, that is the question. Uh, they’re using the same tactics with strikes and drones. The Russians are launching them at Western Ukraine, well, basically, all over Ukraine, but with an emphasis on the western part of Ukraine. And then Zelenskyy comes out: “We proposed a ceasefire for Easter, and they’re hitting us with drones.” Well, yeah, they’re making a point and kind of playing into Zelenskyy’s hands politically. Where do you think the war is going? And indeed, it’s just continuing, let’s say, it’s continuing, the war.

[Konstantin]: Uh, it would be strange if there were no bombings during a war. It would be strange. That’s the first point. The second point is that both sides are bombing each other today. And the third point is that, naturally, Zelenskyy uses any excuse for propaganda purposes. So, let’s say, according to the principle: “And why us? Yeah. Today was a very significant moment, an episode. Lukashenko went to the military, to his own. And, well, let’s listen, watch a short excerpt. They tell him there that, like, peacetime, peacetime, uh, kind of peaceful, yes, not peaceful. There can be no peacetime, Pavel. We are preparing for war. And in this audience, and not only in this one, people should understand. We are absolutely against war, especially our officers, our soldiers, the armed forces, because we know what war is. We don’t want war, but that’s what the army is for. If suddenly someone decides to talk to us and look at us through the sights of a gun, we will respond. That’s what we are preparing for. Lukashenko is preparing for war.

[Alexander]: Preparing, what kind of war is Lukashenko preparing for?

[Konstantin]: Look, I’ll say, well, let’s say this way, Lukashenko himself proceeds from the fact that war has now become a given in the current We currently live in a situation where a significant portion of countries on the planet are at war, in a state of war, either undeclared or declared, but still, a significant portion are fighting today. And it’s clear that no country remains indifferent to these wars. To one degree or another, it is drawn into the conflict. Some feel the consequences, some use it as part of their, uh, economic strategy. Some are directly involved, suffer, and so on. That’s it. And Lukashenko proceeds from the premise that this is already a given. The second point is that Belarus is currently under particular scrutiny. There are currently Russian military bases in Belarus, at least three military bases. Russian nuclear weapons and, uh, the latest missiles are deployed on Belarusian territory. Uh, Belarus. Today, Belarus is in conflict—a cold conflict, thank God, with its neighbors, NATO states. NATO is openly preparing various plans for Belarus, for the overthrow of the Lukashenko regime and for the possible participation of NATO states in certain operations on Belarusian territory. Belarus is a member of the Union State. Russia is at war in this situation today. And Belarus, at any moment, has been balancing—for several years, basically—on the possibility of, well, entering into hostilities at any moment. Any aggressive actions against Belarus by the Russian Federation will be perceived as aggression against the Russian Federation. Vladimir Putin stated this last year, the year before last. So, it’s understandable that Belarus is testing its armed forces. Incidentally, let’s say this: many underestimate Belarus’s military potential, but it is much greater than the combined military potential of the Baltic states. So, that’s what the Baltic states are all about. Uh, and in this situation, Belarus has very serious airborne assault troops, special forces, and so on. I mean, it has all that. Belarus produces its own weapons, for example, its own Polonaises and so on. So. So, in this situation, Belarus shouldn’t be underestimated as a factor.

[Alexander]: You mentioned NATO. And what is NATO? Just during our broadcast, the news came in. So, Comrade Whitaker, the US representative, uh, yes, to NATO, the permanent representative, is saying that Trump is reconsidering everything related to NATO, including support for Ukraine right now. Trump himself also stated a little earlier this evening that, ah, he is absolutely considering the possibility of leaving NATO. I quote: “Absolutely without question.” But wouldn’t you consider it if you were me? And could Trump really withdraw the US from NATO? I analyzed it on Sky News today. Well, it’s something very interesting there. According to Article 13 of the NATO Treaty, any country wishing to withdraw may do so one year after submitting notice of denunciation. And the notice must be submitted to the US government, so it’s unclear how this will work. It turns out they’ll be asking for permission to leave themselves. Incidentally, US law stipulates that no president can decide to withdraw from the alliance without Congress. Is this empty talk and fear-mongering, or whatever, behind this rebellion against Trump, the closure of airspace, and all these demarches that European NATO members have staged against the main thing?

[Konstantin]: Well, look, formally Trump can’t withdraw the United States from NATO without Congress, but he absolutely can cease cooperation with NATO for a year or two, putting everything on hold. And then, for example, Vincent comes in and continues the same policy. For example, so far in NATO’s existence, in all 70 years, how many years now, uh, 77 years, yes, NATO has been in existence, uh, uh, yes, well, if I’m not mistaken, April 10th will be 77 years. So, in all this time, only one state has left the military-political bloc of NATO. From the military NATO bloc, while remaining political. That was France in 1966. Uh, in the 1990s, it returned. That was the only case. Now the United States is questioning the existence of NATO. Why? Incidentally, this same question was asked back in the 1990s, in the 2000s, by the United States itself. Back in his time, Bush Jr. proposed transforming NATO, transforming NATO from a defensive military-political alliance into an energy one. He had that idea. Then, when the events of 2008 began in Georgia, they decided that NATO, after all, should be preserved as a military-political alliance. Regarding the current situation, the United States, after Trump’s arrival, has very seriously raised the issue of NATO countries stopping using the United States as a donor. Yes, of course, it was very convenient throughout these seventy-odd years, when the United States simply supported, fed, and acted as an umbrella over European states. They said that if any European state were to become the target of aggression, the United States would immediately join in as a NATO member. The implication was, That all states, according to Article 5, would perceive an act of aggression against one of them as, well, collective, an act of aggression against the entire bloc. But everyone understood that this primarily concerned the United States. The United States spent the most money on NATO. And Trump, even during his first term, asked the question: “Should we really be feeding freeloaders?” To be fair. I’ll say this isn’t just Trump’s bluff, but at one time, if I’m not mistaken, there was a meeting in Mexico, if I’m not mistaken, Los Angeles, one of the NATO summits, at which the first conflict occurred between NATO states and European NATO states and the United States. This was during the Obama era. That was the first, you could say, conflict. Then Trump effectively began to exacerbate this conflict. And now the Europeans may find themselves in a situation where the United States says: “Now we’ll handle it ourselves, now we’ll handle it ourselves.” That’s it. And we’re simply washing our hands of it. Uh, and I understand that in the United States, many people, even Trump’s opponents, will view this position quite positively.

[Alexander]: Look, this whole thing with the attack on Ust-Luga, in the Leningrad region, is a real test right now. On the one hand, it’s kind of testing Russia, so it’ll snap and make a mess. On the other hand, they’re kind of showing, Trump, you’re not going anywhere. You can say whatever you want, but, well, it’s under your umbrella, so to speak, yes, so this is also a test for both Trump and Putin. And so, if you look at this situation and look into it, Russia isn’t responding, yes. Well, of course, they’re making statements, but what they’re saying is that in a military sense, the military will sort it out. On the other hand, many of those who criticize the Kremlin are saying, like, look at the weaklings, Koridzha, and so on, but here we have a completely different task, a military task. That is, we need to do more than just do something in response to the Baltic states. I’m considering both a ground operation and missile strikes, yes, but we also need to prepare and, for example, assess the enemy’s next move. Well, everyone understands perfectly well that setting the Baltic Sea on fire is, well, it will be difficult. It will be a very serious blow. This is a serious matter. We need to approach it very carefully and rationally, so as to know where to go. However, forgive me, but without the United States, this will be impossible. It turns out that someone is planning this without the United States, authorizing it with the Ukrainian side. Well, Trump has been betrayed again, it turns out. That’s understandable. This is British policy, the policy of Britain, which today does not coordinate its actions with the United States. Moreover, the United States and Great Britain have ceased to cooperate in many areas. For example, they do not cooperate today in the area of intelligence sharing within the framework of the so-called Five Eyes group. That’s the first point. Uh, last year, British experts were already talking about the so-called Northern War 2.0. According to this, they would like to close the Baltic to Russia. They would like to present the Baltic as an internal NATO sea, which is inaccessible to Russia, or as the passage of Russian ships through the Baltic under the control of NATO states. This is what is called in Britain, Northern War 2.0. This is precisely why Britain lobbied for Sweden and Finland to join NATO. This is precisely why a whole series of actions are now being provoked in the Baltic region. This is precisely why the Nord Stream pipelines were blown up. And this is precisely why, well, let’s be frank, these drones were launched, flying towards St. Petersburg and towards ports on the Baltic Sea. They, these drones, did not fly from the territory of Ukraine. They were launched. They did not fly over Belarus, they did not fly over Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and so on. For some reason, they fell in Finland, for example. They were launched from the waters of the Baltic Sea. They launched from the Baltic Sea. Clearly, Ukraine couldn’t do this without the approval of its NATO partners. Today, the Baltic states, as well as the Scandinavian countries, are under the influence of Great Britain. It is the UK that sets the tone for these countries’ foreign policies. And they are acting in this direction. Today, they are Britain’s closest allies. And from here, you can just, uh, just speculate about who benefits from this. Well, it’s clear, it’s already obvious that two plus two equals four. The only question is, you see, when is the Russian side really calculating that Zelenskyy will be bent, and he’s not bending over. But this is also thanks to Britain. At the end of this month, here we are now on the first, and there was also such an incident, relations between the US and Britain are very tense. It’s visible. It’s clearly visible even from Zelenskyy in the Middle East, who went. And the Americans didn’t like that. And this Starmer, in full swing, right? I mean, Trump likes to remember him, basically, Starmer. But there’s another thing. At the end of this month, Charles II is leaving for the US. It’s a visit of a few days, he’ll visit New York, then he’ll go on an outing to some territory of his own. Well, to an island, yes, some kind of in the American region, yes. So, basically, he’s going to see Trump. It’s America’s 250th anniversary. They spent six months preparing, they didn’t say anything, and then they said, “We won’t tell you the date, we won’t tell you the date.” And then the American country just went and wrote something like April 27-30. So, it turns out, I’m just logically thinking, there’ll be a whole month of turmoil. Well, until they come to some kind of agreement. Or, basically, we saw that Trump visited King Charles II. Well, and it’s been turmoil since then.

[Konstantin]: Well, you see, British politics is actually multi-layered, because British politics isn’t just about visits by the king or visits by the president to the king. British politics is also a complex multi-party system, and, accordingly, there are political games there, around the government and parliament, the Conservatives, and so on. British politics is also about the very serious activity of the intelligence services, especially Mishesh. Let’s say the intelligence service, the British intelligence service, is the main resource, the primary resource that Britain has, thanks to which Britain is still Britain. If the British intelligence service is destroyed or its power undermined, then from that moment on, Britain can be considered to be turning into a mere player, and so on. But Britain, thanks to its networks, its network capabilities, its spy networks, especially in the Middle East, especially in Central Asia, especially in the Hindustan region, Indochina, it maintains its reputation as a major player. So. And Britain is about transnational corporations. Transnational corporations that surreptitiously influence the situation in the world. This is the money of the Rothschilds, this is the money of major, major stock market players, and so on. Therefore, British politics is a multilayered process; in this regard, it sometimes, like a visit by Charles II.

[Alexander]: Well, maybe just a visit.

[Konstantin]: Mm.

[Alexander]: Konstantin Petrovich, if we’re really going to talk about geopolitics, let’s get back to Ukraine. There are a lot of interesting statements and developments there, too. And what’s going on with Trump? He says he’s defeated Iran. Then he says everything’s going well, negotiations. Then he says Iran asked for negotiations. Iran says, “We didn’t ask for negotiations.” Then he says, “I don’t need this ormus for 300 years.” Fuck this ormus. Come on, Europeans, you want to avoid these problems, but the problems are starting now. And the scale of them is actually very, very serious. If the carnage in the Middle East isn’t stopped now. The carnage, I mean, of energy facilities and tankers and all that. That is, just today, a tanker was attacked again off the coast of Qatar. True, it seems nothing leaked, but still. So Europe won’t be able to fly. Well, that means kerosene, aviation fuel, and there’s a terrible shortage. Some flights have already been canceled, and various companies are already predicting, calculating, and looking at what will happen next. And then Trump says: “Buy aviation fuel from me, or gather your forces and send troops, and unblock the Strait of Armuz by force.” And everyone kind of threw up their hands and said: “Oh, that’s what Trump has said.” But a day passes, and Trump says: “We will bomb Iran until it unblocks the Strait of Armuz.” And today, Iran itself is responding that, in general, it will not give in. Khamenei writes, or at least they write on his page: “I firmly declare that a consistent The policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, following in the footsteps of Imam Hamei and the martyred leader, is to continue the resistance against the Zionist-American enemy.” Netanyahu is picking up Trump’s rhetoric that Iran no longer poses a threat to anyone. And what will they use air pistols against there? And the soldiers are shaking at their bases, meaning the strikes continue. That’s the picture. And it’s absolutely mosaic-like and incoherent. Can you assemble something more or less sensible from these puzzles? Where is this going?

[Konstantin]: There’s no need to do it, because Trump, all of him, all his statements, the entire history of Trump’s presidency, shows that Trump is essentially acting as a generator of random phrases, phrases that don’t explain Trump’s plans, strategic objectives, or actions. Therefore, one must judge solely by Trump’s actions, by actions in the United States. But under no circumstances by statements in the United States. Pay attention to Trump’s statement – This is, well, actually, not quite, let’s say, a worthy occupation, because they mean absolutely nothing. He can make several mutually exclusive statements in a day. Uh, and he simply demonstrates that it will be as he wishes. At his, uh, wish, he will not coordinate with anyone. At the same time, the institutions in the United States continue to act. They act regardless of what Trump says. They, uh, act, uh, according to their, uh, planned, uh, rules. That’s it. And Trump is simply creating a certain verbal informational curtain over the activities of these institutions. The fact that his message to the European leader, uh, regarding the Strait of Armuz, can be deciphered as follows. Yes, I created a problem. I created a problem for you. If you don’t like this problem, you can solve it. You can join in solving this problem. If you don’t like solving this problem by military means, you can buy oil, oil products, and so on from me. We have enough oil. The United States could actually reopen oil production at any moment. That’s it. And then, well, I’ll be the one setting the price. That’s Trump’s message to the Europeans. And the Europeans don’t like either of these options. Okay. Where is this all heading? It’s all heading toward Trump being able to say at any moment that we’ve won. Especially with Netanyahu’s statement, which essentially provoked Trump into war, into military action. Netanyahu’s attempt to act as the one who’s already decided that the job is done, uh, could also play a role in this situation. Look, Trump would very much, obviously, like to appear as the winner even before the king’s visit, and certainly before his visit to China, which he’s scheduled for mid-May. Trump certainly wouldn’t want Iran, the situation in Iran, to turn into a second Vietnam for the United States, or a second Afghanistan. Trump certainly wouldn’t want things to get to the point where, uh, let’s say, things could seriously hurt Trump himself and his position. The Republicans, so to speak, have seen a collapse in Trump’s standing today. And Trump is only saved by the fact that the situation in the Democratic Party is even worse. The Democratic Party, yes, everyone is saying that Trump’s ratings have plummeted to 36, a record 36. No one has ever demonstrated such an anti-record, but excuse me, neither Newson, nor Kamala Harris, nor anyone else in the Democratic Party can even come close to this level in their ratings.

[Alexander]: Well, what we have is what we have, but everyone understands that this is an unnecessary war, right? And of course, of course, and therefore its end could, in principle, lead to certain advantages. Plus, there will be Trump’s 80th birthday celebration in June, then there will be the 250th anniversary of the United States, and so on and so forth. Accordingly, Trump can still make a lot of gains in terms of PR, in terms of PR, including for the Republicans. The situation with, well, the standoff with Zelensky, how will it be resolved? Trump. He talked about money being laundered. Trump’s son is interviewed by a journalist on a podcast and says, “Guys, Witkof has screenshots of correspondence with the US, showing how it was all laundered, how it was all manipulated. There are specific people, specific people who are willing to testify in Ukraine. Well, here, of course, I think it’s a rip-off.” There will be a bucket of these if Trump’s America really needs them there. But let’s be honest, why hasn’t this happened yet? And is it heading in that direction? Because Trump doesn’t throw all his cards, all his trump cards, away at once. That’s why I think it’s the same thing: like in Ukraine, everyone knows that the Mindich tapes could be released at any moment. Well, uh, various documents related to the IS could also be released in the same way. What do you think, Zelenskyy? Well, he’s a figure there. They’re saying here that, well, there are rumors again that they’re going to go after Shefir. And the one who’s Zelenskyy’s former aide. Well, it’s entirely possible, again, but where is Shefir now and where will they go after him, because it’s entirely possible that he’s in the lands from which there are no extraditions. You know, they used to say that there are no extraditions from the Don, right? Now there are two more rivers from which there are no extraditions. The Danube, and that’s true. A pig won’t eat you, a dan won’t give you away. Ah, but good.

[Alexander]: Has the election issue been completely silenced? It’s been pushed down to the bottom. Postponed. Why postponed?

[Konstantin]: The latest sociological data provided to Zelenskyy shows that Zelenskyy’s election picture is bleak. Zelenskyy could beat several candidates, he wins if it goes to the second round, but he definitely won’t win in the first round. That’s especially true if there’s serious oversight from the international community, yes, especially the United States. Uh, and the modeling of the second round of elections shows that Zelenskyy is winning against only two, potentially two main candidates. That’s Petro Poroshenko and Beletsky. So. Uh, he’s losing to Zelenskyy, uh, excuse me, he’s losing to Zaluzhny, he’s losing to Budanov. So, in this situation, he’s losing to Budanov by eight points, and Zaluzhny by 12 points. Even under certain scenarios, he might make it, or he might not even make it to the second round. There might be a situation where Zaluzhny Budanov makes it to the second round.

[Alexander]: Yeah. How does this relate to me being transferred to the front again, right? There was an interview recently, the day before yesterday, with Syrsky. He’s absolutely utterly unbearable. And the mobilization department says, “I’m against these methods.” But he’d certainly look the draft dodgers in the eye. And Russia is so strong. I mean, we’re not just messing around like this right now; of course, they have the upper hand there. Why this interview at all? Is it a sign of what? The end of the war or not?

[Konstantin]: No, no. In this situation, when Syrsky starts, when the clouds start gathering over Syrsky, he starts giving interviews. This has happened several times already; remember, when Maryana Bezuglaya started demanding Syrsky’s resignation, and Syrsky suddenly started giving interviews left and right. As soon as the Sorosites started saying, “Let’s replace Syrsky with someone else,” they started using Fedorov as a battering ram. Syrsky immediately started giving interviews, too. Interestingly, Syrsky praised Russia, saying it’s a strong country, a strong army, and so on. Meanwhile, I read that in Russia, from time to time, people start saying, “Yes, the Ukrainians know how to fight, they’ve shown they’re a strong force, they can’t be left alone, are they all from the same barrel, or what?”

[Alexander]: Well, no, that’s actually how it works.

[Konstantin]: No, in fact, both armies have shown they’re ready to fight. And what’s most interesting is that in Europe, they’re increasingly saying that we can’t allow Ukraine and Russia to simply make peace in the next 10 years after the war, but to create some kind of military alliance, because then, excuse me, Europe will be in big trouble.

[Alexander]: Well, that’s if, of course, we launch drones and try to fight Europe.

[Konstantin]: Well, you see, everyone here seems to be saying that this is some kind of crazy idea, but when Korchinsky comes out and says, “Let’s take out loans like a dog blogs, and not pay them back, we’ll declare default.”

[Alexander]: Ha-ha-ha, how cool. Yeah. Well, you know, I haven’t commented on Korchinsky for a long time. There. Because for the sake of hype, you can, you know, come up with anything. There. Uh, uh, Korchinsky is a well-known performance artist and provocateur, intellectually and not only intellectually. So, it’s very interesting that fresh, let’s say, reports, or calculations, are coming from the front, Yes. Yes. In March, Russian troops seized 27% more territory than in February. They’re reporting 160 km. Ah, while the overall number of attacks remained virtually unchanged. The difference was about 2%, but their effectiveness increased. The report notes an increase in the number of attack aircraft, well, attack aircraft operations, which allowed for an increased pace of advance. The main burden of attacks continues to fall on the Pokrovskoe sector. 29% of assaults, another 20 on Konstantinovskoe, 19 on Gulyai-Polye. Combined, these three sectors account for, yes, two-thirds of the attacks. The greatest advance was recorded on the Gulyai-Polye sector, 24%. And others, let’s say, ah, well, like, these percentages. Ah, look how this doesn’t jibe with Zelenskyy, who spoke about it at the Bucha summit yesterday. 89,000 dead, nothing achieved. Avada is inappropriate when you look at the numbers. If you really look at the situation on the front, who is more inclined to be more accommodating?

[Konstantin]: The point is that Zelenskyy doesn’t acknowledge what’s happening. He’s demonstratively refusing to acknowledge it. In February, there was indeed a slowdown, but it was caused, as military experts say, by weather conditions, abnormally cold weather, and other factors that prevented progress. On top of that, there were fogs and other factors that prevented any significant advancement or any successes for either side. February was essentially a dead season. The offensive really began in March. Yes, indeed, in March, there was a regrouping of forces, the arrival of new personnel, new faces, new personnel on the Russian front line. And indeed, slow progress began. And as the forests turn green, as the Earth dries out after winter, this offensive could intensify. That’s it. But Zelenskyy doesn’t want to admit it. It’s clear that the numbers are being manipulated, that we have almost no losses. Russia has suffered the main losses, that we lost 30,000, Russia has lost a million there, yes, as he says, and every day they are losing some incredible number of people there. This is all purely a propaganda statement, one that shows how great we are, what potential we have.

[Alexander]: Konstantin Petrovich, well, the potential is something you can chew through, but it’s really a lot. Take Gordon alone. A short excerpt from his conversation with the director of Fire Point. That’s beautiful. These missiles, that’s Ukrainian ballistics. Lubyanka should simply be wiped off the face of the earth. The Ministry of Defense General Staff, the Moscow Oil Refinery, Almaz-Antey, what else is there? Some Khrunichi-designed star, arrow. You’re smiling, you know something. Yes, they’ll learn to intercept ballistic missiles someday, but that will be sometime. The first ones should go in like kids going to school. That is, well, look, it’s clear, there’s a fragment, and there’s a joyful Gordon saying: “We need to erase the Lubyanka, no one can shoot down those Russian ballistics there. Our first 850 km-range missiles will be in now, very soon. Here. Moreover, flamingos, everyone was having fun and laughing, but they piled up hazelnuts in a cabbage ravine. They just fired and piled up hazelnut parts there. Can you imagine this success? They talked about this too, right? It turns out it was him, what’s his name, Stillerman, well, basically, the director of Flamindic. Ah, and they’re showing all this there, showing it. Konstantin Petrovich, a violet beam, yes, a violet beam.

[Konstantin]: It’s the violet beam in this situation in its purest form. It’s the violet beam and, uh, it’s also an absolutely absolutely natural propaganda trick that is used in any situation. You know, at the beginning of 1945, information was spread in Germany about the existence of weapons V-3. The V-1 and V-2 were well-known. They started spreading the idea that Germany had created a certain weapon called the V-3, which we’re now really going to use. Even at the end of April 1945, Hitler believed he had the resources, under the command of General Wenck, to not only liberate Germany and not just liberate Berlin, but to take revenge and, accordingly, to cause a turning point, a radical turning point in the war. Hitler said this a few days before his suicide. Yes. So, as far as, yes, Here, Rus even drew a sketch. The Order of the Savior of the Fatherland for General Wenck, not knowing that Wenck was surrendering at that moment. Well, as for this situation that is currently developing to maintain morale, fighting spirit, to maintain certain patriotic sentiments, Dmitry Ilyevich Gordon is ready to spout any nonsense, pseudo-scientific or some semblance of truth or something else that cannot be verified. Yes, we destroyed the hazelnut groves, we struck the hazelnut groves. And is there evidence? No. What evidence? We just destroyed the hazelnut groves or that we are now going to strike Moscow. And for four years he has been presenting everything exactly like this. There you go. Uh, I don’t know. So, the other day they were saying that all of Budanov’s former advisers, of which Igordon was one, were taken away from them. And these, bros, who, yes, are on the island, so that everyone’s property is taken away by force. Everything is handed over to the force. On the island now, look, Epstein is popping up in many people’s minds now.

[Alexander]: No, no, no. I mean, the island in Ukraine isn’t Epstein, it’s Ivashchik now. That’s it. What, who has nothing to do with Epstein. It needs to be clarified that the island is located on the Dnieper between two cities. In fact, it’s a peninsula, they just call it an island. The Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine is located there. That’s why the common people call it an island. There. Uh, so as not to confuse it with the Foreign Intelligence Service, which is called a forest. Yeah. There. And this isn’t a code word, it’s common people’s name. The island is a forest. That’s how it is on the island, yes, on the island, they’re taking everything from Budanov’s former advisers. They’re not needed. And now these advisers to Vashchenko, uh, some are saying they’ve already gone off to war, uh, they’ve already been mobilized. I won’t say whether it’s true or not, but that’s what they say. Uh, and as for Gordon, I think he’s gained a different position in some other departments. Yeah. So, what’s going on with Budanov? Wait. Budanov heads the presidential office. No, wait, this is a very, very important point right now. I want to point this out now. Especially Konstantin Petrovich, and Budanov tells us that he returned from America with something. Well, Umerov, admittedly, didn’t return to Turkey; he went there to, uh, negotiate exchanges, contacts. Well, Umerov is more needed in Turkey. Uh, let’s say, more so than in Ukraine. He’s the secretary of, uh, national security, yes, and defense. But Budanov says that, in principle, we’re going there, the process is ongoing, almost everything has been agreed upon there. Uitkov writes: “Fantastic.” A week goes by, Zelensky comes out and says, “We haven’t agreed on anything. America is demanding we give up Donbas.” Why is he setting us up like this? Okay, the Americans are understandable there. And Budanov, they all kept reporting how great our meeting was. I literally just a few minutes ago said that Budanov’s approval ratings are approximately 8% higher than Zelensky’s. And this is the reason, of course, Zelensky’s appointment of Budanov as head of his office. By appointing him, he wanted to eliminate Budanov as a potential competitor, a political rival. That was his primary motive. I don’t understand why Budanov did this. Especially to agree to be limited in his actions, because Budanov didn’t become Yermak. Budanov wasn’t given the opportunity to appoint a single one of his deputies. He wasn’t even given the opportunity to sit in Yermak’s office. He wasn’t given the opportunity to influence domestic policy. He can’t, let’s say, secure the appointment or dismissal of this or that governor, the head of the military administration, excuse me, and so on and so forth. His main task, besides document flow and the approval of documents, is negotiations. And even then, the approval of documents most often takes place without him, because he’s always away. Uh, but, uh, that’s the first point. Uh, as for, uh, Budanov himself, yes, I already said at the very beginning of the program what Budanov came with. Budanov came with the fact that the United States said that if you don’t agree to Russia’s conditions regarding the transfer of Donbas to Russia, then Russia will withdraw from the negotiation process and, accordingly, in a year you will lose Odesa, and Mykolaiv, and Dnipro, and Kharkiv. That’s it. That is, this was said to Budanov. Budanov conveyed this to Zelensky. This is what Budanov arrived. Plus, the Ukrainian side proposed another energy truce. So, you don’t attack our energy facilities, we don’t attack ours, or your other oil refineries, ports, and so on. That’s what he came back with. Zelenskyy’s statement shows that Zelenskyy rejected this ultimatum. You see, it just seems like the parallel might not be obvious. The news is coming. There’s been a lot of chatter about this on social media, but there’s already photographic evidence. Deepstate is publishing a story about how they burned a convoy. This skeleton, this rock, yes, a unit. And in the direction of Pokrovsk. It’s very interesting that the convoy, uh, was burned by the Russians, basically, on the approaches. They have information from Deepstate that they didn’t even reach Pokrovsk. And, well, in short, it’s a terrible, terrible story. This means the Russians are actively pushing into Grishina, adjacent to Pokrovsk, and are attempting to consolidate their position in the northern outskirts. The public also writes that the Russian army has complete dominance of FPV drones around Pokrovsk in this direction. The result: two infantry fighting vehicles and one Abrams tank were lost. This is specifically written by Deep State. Look, this is what is generally considered more or less verified information. Then I have a question: look, this is supposedly a 425th-generation skeleton, but they’re throwing it forward. Some kind of column. Let’s go. I mean, absolute chaos. And then Syrsky tells us how he wants mobilization to improve. Do you understand? It’s complete chaos. Chaos in approaches, chaos in understanding what you’re doing. If you’re defending yourself, where are you throwing this column? They’ll burn it down. It’s as clear as day. But they do it anyway. If you know the negotiations are unsuccessful, well, let’s bring in Budanov, Budanov, but what about Budanov, right? Well, I mean, Umerov, Sumerova, they’re like water on a duck’s back. So, you understand, absolutely all this force is being thrown not at war, not at any decisions, not at defense, not at any particular moments, not for the country, but at destroying these forces and reserves.

[Konstantin]: Of course, of course. Budanov is thrown into the negotiations with a dual purpose. If only Budanov, if the negotiations fail, everything is blamed on Budanov. An inexperienced negotiator, he botched everything, got nowhere, and so on. So. And Budanov is removed from office. If only Zelensky decides to give in to Donbas, and he does so at the last minute, everything is blamed on Budanov. You see, it was he who surrendered Donbas during the sentencing. And they could have not surrendered. Although Budanov acts exclusively within the framework of directives determined by the presidential office, determined personally by the president. So, uh, he can’t sign anything on his own or deliver anything on his own. He works exclusively within the framework of directives. But it’s very convenient to take a whipping boy like that. Make him one.

[Alexander]: Yeah, right. Mm, let’s say it’s a real disgrace, ah, in terms of approaches, because it seems like everyone should be united here. They keep telling us that we should rally around the idea of defending the homeland, but this homeland is simply being dismantled piece by piece for their own interests. Do you remember the words? I very often during this war recall the words of the Swedish playwright August Strindberg, who back in the 19th century said that if the state wants to take your life, it begins to call itself the fatherland.

[Konstantin]: Well, yes.

[Alexander]: And that means it’s important, uh, I want to discuss one more topic with you, yes, and then we’ll move on, we’ll summarize the survey results, we’ll move on to questions from the audience. There are many. Thank you, friends, for writing. Please, don’t forget to like this live broadcast. So, this topic of mobilization. It reached some kind of critical point in the last week, while we weren’t on air. It’s terrible, of course, I don’t want to repeat myself, but every day is something new. And they’re beating up the mall workers, beating up the mall workers, shooting, cutting, stabbing. Basically, everything’s happening. There’s chaos and chaos on the streets. And this chaos and chaos are being produced specifically by the authorities. Specifically, the authorities. Here’s a story from today, which went viral in Odessa. So everyone understands: a white car, it’s trying to leave. One van on one side, another van blocks its path and attention, rams it. And the mall worker hits this with a stick, well, He’s literally smashing. That’s not even a word for it. Right at this car with a bat. Of course, there’s no car involved, no pity, nothing, but it’s the shop workers doing this. They’re wearing masks. They can get on a work bus and drag you by the arms and legs. And so on. But the cynicism of this situation, Konstantin Petrovich, I’d like to directly assess with a whole series of questions those who represent the Ukrainian, yes, and, let’s say, the authorities, and the intelligentsia. Here’s Veslavsky, who came to Vlashchenko. Two key tasks are being achieved in the near future under the reform of the mobility system. First, there are going to be conflict situations. Then we can’t violate people’s rights, we can’t go beyond the boundaries of representatives of the UCSP, we can’t have a situation where they end their actions from notifications, there is a summons without body cameras. Because in the 24th century we adopted a law that requires all representatives of the TCCSP to be equipped with body cameras in order for such conflict situations to be seen in their entirety, and not to be taken out of context, as It happens quite often. And in another way, so that the mobilization was fair, so that it would not be considered to be a success, which is still an unfair act, if every village of Western Ukraine does not lose a thirsty person of positive century, and in the places of Kiev, Odessa, Kharkov and there in other places of great Ukraine, life proceeds peacefully and every day it seems that the war is on a full scale among rich young people, like potentially There’s no military connection, no. What?

[Konstantin]: Well, of course he is, forgive me, forgive me, an idiot. Just now we had Odessa, and he says: “There’s not a single village in Western Ukraine where, well, the villages were left without men. And in Odessa, Kharkiv, Kyiv, in the big cities, look how many men there are.” Like they’ve already cleaned everyone out there, but here they’re not bothering anyone. Here they’re not bothering anyone. And no one there, Vlashchenko, is waving their mane, everything is fine. The deputy, he said the right things before. This generally reminds me of this, well, I’m a journalist by training. We were taught propaganda, how to mold it. Well, mold it. That is, the teacher came straight in, took two different plasticines and molded it. Look at 20% here, this, and now come on, this. And you mold this. He molded this from above. Well, it was like a practical training, yes. Well, it’s like some kind of training, yes, they showed it to our students, that’s how it is. He says: “No, you can’t mock all this balaclava stuff, but like, and then he says that in Odessa, you see, all the men in Dnipro, Kharkiv, and so on feel at ease.” Ah, well, what’s most striking is the elite. Ella Lebanova came out, Ella Lebanova, a person who deals with demography. Mobilization is an absolutely normal process in the country, which isn’t just fighting, it’s fighting for its own survival. Liberation is an absolutely normal process, which continues in a country that is fighting for its existence. Let’s provoke first. Friend, would you like to fight for many years not to fight? Will you fight? I’m afraid so. I would like my grandson to fight for eight years. I wouldn’t want to. Will he fight? I’m afraid he will.

[Alexander]: Konstantin Petrovich, we have no one to fight back, legislatively or intellectually. And as for individuals, how can they cope with this disaster? Why is that?

[Konstantin]: I’m asking myself this question. Because, you know, even if sensible forces wanted to come forward with a platform, a statement, an ideological position, they have nowhere to speak. In Ukraine, not a single publication publishes them, their voice. Not a single publication in Ukraine will dare to take a sharp stance against the government. The war party has occupied everything, practically every platform. Those who advocate for peace today have no chance of making any statements, except for Telegram and YouTube. Here are two spaces where they can speak out, but they’re still being stifled there, they’re still trying to suppress their speech, they’re trying to restrict them somehow, impose certain sanctions, block them. So… Uh, I’m telling many oppositionists, if you don’t like what’s happening in Ukraine, unite and at least create a specific platform, a specific venue from which you can broadcast, so that people can hear an alternative position. Like… Dozhd TV channel.

[Alexander]: No, at least make one, at least make a website. Dozhd TV channel is, well, excuse me, it’s, uh, it’s an example of how not to act.

[Konstantin]: Why?

[Alexander]: Well, you’re saying this because the efficiency, excuse me, the efficiency of Dozhd is 0, 0.

[Konstantin]: No, really. Look, let’s look at it from this angle, from this perspective. Wait, there are many people who are upset with the Ukrainian government, who have fled, emigrated, there are some abroad, but there are some oligarchs there who created all this for them, and what kind of people are they, that’s a different question. There, the Vyros or those white people who fled, well, they compare things differently now, but wait, is there at least some infrastructure there? They, of course, are kind of funny there in this rain, well, but well, but nevertheless, you understand, well, at least something has been created there, and what has been created in Ukraine? And if, and if nothing has been created, I’ll just finish the thought, if nothing has been created, then it turns out, then everything is fine. And who fled? Cowards, pro-Russian traitors and scoundrels. So let’s unite, let’s gather. Zelensky is the best president.

[Alexander]: Yes. Yes, yes. See, what’s the problem with Rain? Rain regularly talks about how bad Putin is and how bad it is to live under Putin. There you go. But they still haven’t created a concept of Russia without Putin. What will Russia be like without Putin? Only in general terms. For everything good against everything bad. I even watched some of the programs there at first, trying to find the core of it. Yes, criticism, criticism, criticism, but criticism can’t just be sweeping; it has to offer some other proposal. But there wasn’t a specific concept, a conceptual vision of Russia’s future, well, excuse me, even if something did slip through, it was very vague. As for Ukraine, this is the big problem for all those who consider themselves part of the opposition: they’re also ready to talk about how bad Zelensky is. That’s it. But they don’t want to think about what Ukraine will be like without Zelensky, what Ukraine should be like without Zelensky. Incidentally, this is one of the main goals I set for myself, for my courses: to work together to achieve an understanding of what to do, what tomorrow should be like. These meanings that I’m talking about are precisely the meanings for Ukraine of tomorrow. That’s it. But I don’t want to engage in advertising right now. Self-promotion is especially important because I’m not Smipya, not a volbu. And it’s clear that collective wisdom is needed, essential in this regard. Yes, friends, let’s sum up our discussion today. And look, I’m just drawing parallels that suggest themselves. I understand that there’s no need to write here, that it’s clear that rain is slush somewhere. Well, I understand that, it was a good joke from Comedy, a good skit. But you see, like a distorted reflection of a large mirror, a small one in each other. That is, yes, we also have people coming out and saying, “Those who left don’t have the right to vote, those who are something else.” Well, they’re all talking nonsense here, right? Those who are against Zelenskyy, right? Because read the constitution. Issues of discrimination, on any basis, are fundamentally unacceptable according to the constitution. And also, if we’re talking about rain and Ukraine, then if we’re talking about the Russian position, the Ukrainian opposition, the main goal of the Russian opposition is to play along with the West, to play along with Western transnational corporations, globalists, and everyone else in their fight against Putin. The Ukrainian opposition’s goal is, or rather, not the Ukrainian opposition’s goal, but the West is preventing the Ukrainian opposition from speaking out against Zelensky. There, you can bite, criticize, and so on as much as you like. Here, the goal is in no way to harm Zelensky. Okay. So, let’s summarize our question today. They are as follows. So, who is putting more pressure on? Russia 6% on the US. That’s what Zelensky blurted out at the Bucha summit. The US 23% on Ukraine, the US 29% on Europe. Can you imagine, according to the audience, the US is putting more pressure on Europe than the US is on Ukraine. Well, and 42% that Ukraine is putting pressure on Europe. Money, money, give me money. Oil pipeline, friendship. We’ve already reached that point. Listen, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the Ukrainians are wiretapping for a meeting with Lavrov, if it’s all this. Yeah, well, wait a minute. Why aren’t they letting the European Commission in? They’ve been on a business trip for a week, like they’re going to a university, because, well, they need to go and see how friendship works, and Ukraine isn’t showing its friendship to Europeans, its allies. What are they hiding, why are they hiding it? And Ukraine is squeezing them. Give them time, when will we join NATO, the EU? Give them more, give them money, give them a loan. Ursula, right before our broadcast, literally, look, they’re allocating 1.8 billion from Russian money. Well, not 90, of course, but they allocated a little something, threw in some money. Everything is fine. You know, regarding wiretaps, regarding wiretaps, Hungarian isn’t the most widely spoken language. It’s clear that they communicated in Hungarian. But if we’re talking about, uh, where are the largest number of specialists who can eavesdrop on the Hungarian language, then the question arises: it’s either Serbian Voivodeship itself, or Ukrainian Transcarpathia, or Romanian Transylvania. There you go. So the choice is limited: where can they eavesdrop on the conversations of, uh, the top officials of the Hungarian state? Oh, excuse me, please. Uh, dear viewers, uh, one more news item now, and then we’ll move on to your questions. Oh, so, so, so, so, so, so, so. Uh, so Zelenskyy, I had a good conversation with President Trump’s representatives Witkoff and Kushner. Senator Gramm and NATO Secretary General Rutta also joined the call. We agreed on ongoing contact between the teams to strengthen the document regarding security guarantees between Ukraine and the United States of America. This is precisely what could pave the way for a lasting end to the war. Thank you. What guarantees? Last week, he also said that if Ukraine isn’t given nuclear weapons, then there are no guarantees. That’s it. So, in this situation, it’s hard for me to even imagine what guarantees he was given. I just, you see, they’ve been putting us through this for months now. What a great conversation, what a good agreement we reached, we’re in constant contact, we’re partners, we’re having fantastic negotiations, a fantastic round. And then, one fine day, he comes out, blurts out, and says, “Oh, that’s it, they told us to give up Donbas, the negotiations are unsuccessful.” Those were his words, too. I’m quoting Zelenskyy just the other day, well, yesterday, I think, or even today, uh, in some interview. Ah, let’s move on to questions, dear viewers. Thank you very much for leaving them. Let’s start with the YouTube community. Ah, here we go. Ah, here’s a question. Let’s start with Alexander.

[Konstantin]: Konzi Petrovich, good evening. Many Ukrainian historians consider Danylo Halytskyi the founder of the first Ukrainian state. But his biography contains some rather interesting facts. 1240. Prince of Kyiv. He abandoned the city to the devastation of the Mongols and fled to Hungary to enlist the help of Western partners. Several years later, having assessed the forces, sides, and prospects, he went to the Golden Horde to look Batu in the eye, kneel, and negotiate peace even with the devil himself. The agreement with the devil himself worked, allowing Danylo to retain his power, his lands, and the majority of his population. Danylo Halytsky’s name is shrouded in glory. Chronicles have been written about him. The question is, why doesn’t Zelensky follow his example, instead of the loser Petliura? Because Zelensky doesn’t know history, first of all. That’s the first point. Secondly, we shouldn’t transfer the realities of the 10th century and its political traditions into the 21st century. That’s the second point. Well, to say that Danylo Galitsky, the founder of the first Ukrainian state, would probably be an exaggeration. He was, uh, still an appanage prince, who, according to some sources, received a crown from the Pope, uh, and became and was called king. Uh, but, uh, to say that he could be an ideal role model for the 21st century, well, you know, yes, he was an outstanding figure, a century for the 20th century, an outstanding figure. Just as his younger contemporary, Alexander Yaroslavovich Proznenevsky, was an outstanding figure. There were several other figures, one could also mention Mikhail of Chernigov. These are the three pillars around which the history of the first half and middle of the 10th century revolved. Uh, but in general, to say that non-critical activities should be carried over into the 21st century, well, well, it’s clear that this is not entirely correct from both a historical and political point of view. So, Nebenzya in The UN explained that Russians and Ukrainians are one people. In response, Melnyk recounted how, a thousand years ago, frogs croaked on the territory of Moscow. Afterward, a representative from Mongolia spoke and reminded his esteemed colleagues that for 200 years, both the Moscow frogs and the Kyiv princes paid tribute to the heirs of Genghis Khan. What do you think of this version of the meeting, Von? Yes, you know, regarding that common meme, started by Alexey Goncharenko back in the day, about frogs croaking on the site of Moscow, when Kyiv was already a huge, uh, capital, and so on. Well, you know, I think you could tell it to, say, residents of New York or Washington. They’d be understanding, too. Uh, so what’s all this? We shouldn’t boast about our antiquity, but rather about our capabilities, strength, and influence, which we see today. Andrey, where do geniuses like Plato, Dicartes, Tesla, Archimedes, and others come from? Can the legendary King Solomon be called a genius? Who among those living today would you call a genius, or are philosophers right in saying that thinking is dead? No, thinking is not dead. Geniuses are born. Geniuses who know how to concentrate their thoughts, who can generate new thoughts, new visions—they are, in principle, born in every century. Today, there are a large number of people who produce ideas. Another thing is that these ideas are always accepted by a minority. The majority simply lives outside of these ideas. Ideas are usually discussed in a very narrow circle, and then, after 100 or 50 years, grateful students begin to build a pedestal for their teacher and create a legend around them. So, you see, in 50 years, some people living today, who are thinkers, will also be exalted on pedestals. So. And they talk about how brilliant people lived at the beginning of the 21st century, but you see, at the end of the 21st century, there are none. Uh-huh. Ah, so that’s the question. Many, including Alexander and Konstantin, Nikolai writes, are talking about the end of the war and are waiting for it. But if we assume that some agreements are indeed signed in the near future, the fighting ceases, but Zelensky himself remains in power or is replaced by someone else, but his regime and ideology remain essentially unchanged. Will Ukraine realize the idea of military revenge against Russia? If so, then how long will it take? And will Ukraine be able to find military allies willing to take the battlefield during this time? With respect. Finding military allies willing to take the battlefield will be quite difficult. There will be a military rematch in any case, as we saw after the First World War, as we saw in other conflicts. There are always those who are not ready to accept defeat. They can form militant, terrorist, and other organizations that will work not only against Russia but also against the Ukrainian leadership, which will accuse them of collaborationism, compromise, and captulism. So all of this will happen, all of this will have to be endured. That’s it. And as for ending the conflict in certain stages, when there is no clear victory, then, excuse me, there will also be a large number of people in Russia who will be dissatisfied with this kind of outcome. There are a lot of them now who, after each of our programs, when we talk about peace, say: “What are you babbling about? What peace? Fight, fight, fight, until we take Uzhgorod, until we reach Chop, and so on.” Yes. So, the next question. Good evening, Konstantin Alexander Petro Konstantin Petrovich. Alexander Alexander Petrovich. And Ukraine does not give Russia the lists of those killed in Bucha, because it is not so clear-cut,” asks Alexey. Because it is not so clear-cut. Because Bucha should be a symbol, and not uh, uh, and in which there should be a lot of uh, unsaid. Bucha is a tragedy, on the one hand, and on the other hand, it is a myth. Today, the myth of Bucha benefits Ukraine, that is, and not dotting all the i’s and crossing all the t’s in the Bucha tragedy. Well, basically, here is a question from Yuri from Germany, you answered it too. The sides blame each other. There are many inconsistencies, such as the many victims hands were tied, many were lying along the roads, Strange poses, all sorts of oddities. And, Yuri writes from Germany. Well, you know, a lot, but I’m just like… But Maidan, it’s exactly the same. So they published this “Heavenly Hundred,” opened it, looked closely, focused on it, and someone died there, a Maidan supporter, a Maidan supporter, being run over by a tractor. Another one got drunk on the other side of town. A third one was given some kind of anesthetic for something, yes, and then he kind of died. So, well, this isn’t the “Heavenly Hundred” that everyone was running around with, remember? Well, you see, they needed a myth again. So, yes, there’s a tragedy, and then there’s a myth surrounding this tragedy. Why was the government that came after Maidan the first thing they did was destroy all the evidence related to the shooting of the so-called “Heavenly Court”? Elena, hello. Alexander Konstantin, please tell me, in your opinion, what resources is Europe going to use for the war? Will the Europeans fight themselves, or are they counting on refugees, of whom they have many? But the refugees sort of fled their own wars. Why should they fight for Europe? Why are Europeans counting on this? Usually, it’s citizens of a particular state who fight. Refugees are not citizens of, for example, Germany, France, Lithuania, Latvia, and so on. They are refugees, yes. There is a certain mechanism for creating foreign legions, like in France, but other countries don’t have this mechanism. Therefore, most likely, this process will simply be streamlined if, God forbid, the war is streamlined, an attempt to attract, let’s say, some refugees as mercenaries. Hello. Why isn’t the democratic factor being taken into account in ending the war? Doesn’t our government care about this? Or maybe this is intended to limit the population size to fit the new reality? Well, these demographic issues, issues related to limiting the number of people in a given territory, they smack, on the one hand, of certain experiments in Europe in the first half and mid-20th century, and on the other, of outright conspiracy theories. But somehow, you know, as time goes by, any conspiracy theory becomes almost unrealistic. We call conspiracy theories what we can’t prove with documents. Uh-huh. So, Konstantin Petrovich, Elena Morozova asks: “Is there a struggle for fossil resources?” Question. They’re already quietly talking about a water shortage. Water prices have risen sharply here. The struggle for fresh water is still ahead. With respect, from Germany. Back in the 1990s, the 1980s and 1990s, some Western experts were saying that in the first year of the 21st century, the issue of fresh water would become acute, and the issue of, well, a global confrontation over pressurized water resources. So. So, well, you see, some prophecies are starting to come true. Today, a user writes that the OCU announced ownership of the UOC-KP brand. And while ruling St. Volodymyr’s Cathedral as a second cathedral, deputies of the Volyn Regional State Administration are inspecting UOC-KP Sunday schools, uh, initiating inspections of the original Holy Ascension Church in Demeyevka, Kyiv, and preparing for the authorities’ illegal transfer to the OCU. As a historian, Konstantin Petrovich of the KP could draw historical parallels with the Bolsheviks and modern Ukrainian nationalists, but this also amounts to anti-church terrorism. And if I may, regarding Filaret’s legacy, everything is very sad, especially the disregard for his last will. You know, the OCU, regardless of my affiliation with any particular denomination, has been observing for the past eight years, uh, seven or eight years, how the OCU has been acting in a completely hostile manner, not only against the UOC-KP, but also against the UOC-KP. Questions of legality, ethics, and so on simply don’t arise for the hierarchs of the OCU. That’s it. And this concerns not so much Primate Epiphanius himself, who, excuse me, never became an authoritative spiritual father for his flock. Other people are in charge there, completely different people, some of whom came from other faiths. They treated Patriarch Filaret with a certain respect. They understood that they couldn’t touch the old man. That’s it. But, excuse me, I don’t think anyone waited for Filaret’s death to continue their corporate raiding activities as long as the representatives of the OCU. Almost like Pushkin, then, almost like Yevgeny Odegin awaited his uncle’s death. So, Konstantin Petrovich, here’s another interesting question. According to Lyudmila, “Zelensky, Pyshny, and Marchenko Budanov lent money to the Ukrainian state and bought the HVAC.” And Konstantin, tell me, do these senior officials work for our country, or does the country work for them? And besides, they all took advantage of winter support. Isn’t there a conflict of interest? Thank you, take care. But who would… But you know, in reality, investigations into these kinds of conflicts of interest only occur after a change of power. As long as people are in power, they are immune from investigations by law enforcement agencies. But as soon as power changes, as soon as someone else comes to power, they’ll immediately start investigating existing and non-existent issues. Remember how Yuriy Lutsenko was accused of somehow illegally registering an apartment for his, uh, driver, and so on, etc. There were many such instances. The current government provides more grounds for future persecution than previous forms. And Svetlana from the Cherkasy region writes: “It seems that Putin unexpectedly helped Zelenskyy ascend to the pinnacle of fame and stagnate there, and it can’t be undone. It’s a shame he got into trouble. What do you think? Putin’s role in Zelenskyy’s rise to power and how Russia helped Zelenskyy turn into a dictator, perhaps beyond Russia’s own wishes, should still be studied. Zelenskyy copied Putin in many ways, and Lukashenko copied him at one stage or another, and then decided, ‘Why am I any worse?’ Overall, I think Zelensky isn’t just the result of a certain amount of popular disillusionment with the Maidan and post-Maidan activities, but also the result of, let’s say, shortcomings or certain illusions among the powerful outside of Ukraine. Mm-hmm. Okay, so. So, here’s another question. Look, Yuri writes: “Why don’t we, fraternal nations, join Putin and Lukashenko in a joint appeal to the Ukrainian people with at least five to ten points about a post-peace Ukraine, a post-peace Ukraine?” Not about the TCC, but about the economic distribution of countries under common autonomous jurisdiction, joint security, social support, amnesty options, participation in the war, for example, suspended sentences issued in the event of hostility even after peace. In general, they should focus on the concerns and guarantees of childhood, the development of the younger generation, sports and recreation, educational excursion programs, and other things about life. It’s clear that post-war Ukraine won’t survive without support and guidance. The West won’t offer any development whatsoever. That’s why Putin and Lukashenko need to be given a sort of “walkie-talkie,” hope, and projected development within the three countries. Plus, I’m sure that such a message, regularly repeated, would accelerate the reset from anti-war to co-creation. What do you think about this? In the current circumstances, rationality is completely ineffective in Ukraine. Appeals to reason, logic, or common sense are simply ineffective. In the current circumstances, emotions, populism, and slogans are in effect. And Zelensky is exploiting this. What the reader, listener, or viewer offers can, in this situation, be considered rational. This is what works for a maximum of 10% of the population. Most people will simply ridicule it all, spit on it, basically say, well, yeah, who can you talk to there, yeah, what is this, and so on. That’s it. And Ukraine today is still a product of a postmodern, postmodern, uh, Ukrainian society. Common sense doesn’t work there today. Let’s take a look at the chat broadcast. Igor, hello, Konstantin Petrovich. Why isn’t a single city or street named after the Kyiv kings who defeated the Persians and Macedonians? They fought for our land. They are unworthy. Why is their memory forgotten? I already joked about this, that since they were all Iranian-speaking, and Iran is today considered an enemy of Ukraine, they will all also be classified as occupiers. How is this de-ironization? In fact, it’s Iranian-speaking. Northern Iranian dialects, which are now more characteristic of the Ossetian people and so on, and not of Persia or Iran specifically. There you go. But still, no, in fact, history is quite an interesting thing. We use history, uh, in its applied form, where what’s needed is not a real historical background, but a certain interpretation, a certain, let’s say, a certain rethinking of history in order to win it over to the side of politicians. And the closer history is, the more it is attracted to this. For these works. So, these are very interesting questions. Thank you, friends. We’re trying our best to answer them, but I invite everyone to Kostya Bondarenko’s channel. He periodically does this Q&A column, and therefore, well, it’s important, because, of course, it’s impossible to cover everything. But thank you very much for writing. Let’s add a couple more. Today, the news broke that Zelensky was nominated for the Peace Prize. Is this an April Fool’s joke, Roman asks. Most likely, an April Fool’s joke. But as for the nomination, dozens of people are nominated every year. Dozens of people. So. Um, in principle, why didn’t Zelenskyy appear there back in the day? In 2012, for example, Yulia Tymoshenko was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Yes. Yes. In 2012, she didn’t win. She was the second person in prison, but the peace prize went to the president of Liberia. So that’s it. Well, Yulia Tymoshenko was among the dominant figures in prison. Oh, yes, among the dominant figures. So, the Donbas Krevo-Rozh Republic was proclaimed one month earlier than the Ukrainian People’s Republic and then became part of the Ukrainian SSR. On what basis is Ukraine demanding anything? Plus the decommunization of gifts. Well, I didn’t understand about the gifts. Well, I understand. Well, basically, it’s clear. So, look, we take the Ukrainian People’s Republic as the foundation, well, as the state-forming, projecting history, Petliura, Onr, in short, you can treat all the participants differently. Krushevsky actually became a Soviet academician. Okay. Oh, but the truth is, the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog, the Donbas-Krivoy Rog Republic, it was like a month earlier, right? Well, in 1917, a large number of state entities were proclaimed on Ukrainian territory. A large number. The fact is that Moscow later decided that the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Republic should not develop as a separate state organism, but that the United Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic needed to be strengthened. That was a definite decision. Ukraine, as Lenin believed, did not have a sufficient proletariat. Therefore, the Donbass proletariat could have strengthened proletarian sentiment, the proletarian base in the future Ukraine. And so on, this was the starting point. Uh, as for the other republics, you know, today practically no one remembers the Galician Soviet Socialist Republic of 1932. Yes. And what happened, by the way, right? And how many other such republics were there? That’s why, yes, thanks to, uh, the Kornilov brothers, uh, people know about the Donetsk-Krevo-Rozh Republic today. Especially thanks to Vladimir Kornilov, who wrote a well-known book about the Donetsk-Krevo-Rozh Republic. They know about it. How many more were there without… I don’t speak about Kornilov, I speak about… I studied history. Sorry. There you go. Yes. I just… Vladimir Kordilov… he actually published a monograph in Kharkov back in the day. But look, I know what Dani was like and what she was like, that is, because we learned about her in school, you know. By the way, that same Artem Sergeev, uh, he, being an ardent supporter of the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Republic, literally a year later began talking about the need to support Ukrainian… There, those, those, those Ukrainian tammenias, because, uh, they’ve started a katsapism here. So, that’s it. Vlad is interested. Please ask Konstantin Petrovich what date will be on the ticket for the next Kiev-Moscow train. It’s clear you don’t know. Give us an approximate figure, and we’ll remember it and remind you later. I don’t know, I don’t know. But, you know, it’s not such a simple process, because reconciliation is one thing. For example, they proposed a truce. Then, accordingly, the ceasefire should be followed by the resumption of consular work between Russia and Ukraine, that is, diplomatic services. Next, Ukrzaleznytsia needs to begin negotiations with Russian Railways, and so on, in order to resume this service. But this resumption of rail service is possible only after intergovernmental negotiations on normalizing relations have taken place. Therefore, this is not such a simple or speedy process. What kind of sentence is this, a 50-year entry ban? Through Sheremetyevo. Why are they keeping quiet about this? This is a tragedy for people. Moreover, I have a friend who is a native of Donetsk, who lived in Donetsk, who is completely apolitical, absolutely apolitical, was banned from entering Donetsk and Russia until 2050 without any explanation simply because her brother, well, let’s say he takes a position there that is not to my liking, and, yes, he does not fight on the side of Ukraine. Well, yes, friends, thank you all very much for our conversation today, for today’s communication. And I thank everyone who wrote, who responded, who liked, who joined. Konstantin Petrovich, I thank you too. Not just for the fact that your back is not green, but for your time and thoughts.

[Alexander]: Yes. Thank you very much. And I wish you all the best.

[Konstantin]: All the best, and a good mood, no matter what.

[Alexander]: Spring. I’m already longing for spring, yes, such a worthwhile one, somewhere crazy, well, in the good sense of the word. And we’ve survived March, well, a third of it is behind us, April, May are ahead. The key months of this spring. And many hopes for it. May all your dreams come true. F.

SYNOPSIS: Bondarenko Live Broadcast

Host: Alexander | Guest: Konstantin Petrovich Bondarenko

---

PART ONE: PRESSURE AND NEGOTIATIONS

Who is pressuring whom? — The central question. Bondarenko describes a “circular pressure” system:

• US pressures Zelensky to make a deal
• Europe pressures Zelensky to keep fighting
• US pressures Europe to handle Zelensky
• Russia pressures the US indirectly, signaling it can wait

Russia’s position — Demands Ukraine cede Donbas by June 1. If not, Russia will escalate claims to Kharkiv, Dnipro, Kherson, Mykolaiv, and Odesa. Russia is not bluffing, according to Bondarenko.

Zelensky’s counter-offer — Proposed mutual ceasefire on energy infrastructure attacks. Russia has not responded.

Easter ceasefire — Zelensky proposed it early for PR advantage. Bondarenko doubts it will last more than a day if it happens at all. Both sides are not ready for peace.

---

PART TWO: NATO AND THE BALTICS

Trump and NATO — Trump is threatening to leave NATO. Bondarenko notes he can’t formally withdraw without Congress, but he could freeze cooperation. Only France has ever left NATO (1966, returned 1990s).

Trump’s real message to Europe — “I created a problem (Iran/Strait of Hormuz). You can solve it militarily, or buy oil from me at my price.”

British role — UK is driving anti-Russia provocations in the Baltic (drone attacks, Nord Stream sabotage, pushing Sweden/Finland into NATO). UK intelligence networks keep Britain relevant as a global player.

Belarus — Lukashenko is preparing for war. Belarus has significant military capability (airborne troops, Polonaises missiles) and hosts Russian nuclear weapons. Any attack on Belarus is an attack on Russia.

---

PART THREE: FRONT LINES AND UKRAINIAN POLITICS

Military situation — Russian offensive accelerated in March (27% more territory seized than February). Main pressure on Pokrovsk, Kostyantynivka, and Hulyai-Polye sectors. Russian FPV drone dominance around Pokrovsk.

Zelensky’s propaganda — Claims low Ukrainian losses; Bondarenko calls this denial. Compares to German V-3 weapon myth in 1945.

Gordon’s claims — About Ukrainian ballistic missiles hitting Moscow are “violet beam” propaganda.

Elections — Postponed because Zelensky would lose. Polls show he would lose to Zaluzhny (by 12 points) and Budanov (by 8 points). He only beats Poroshenko and Beletsky.

Budanov — Appointed to head presidential office to neutralize him as a rival. He has no real power. US told him Ukraine must cede Donbas or lose Odesa, Mykolaiv, Dnipro, Kharkiv within a year. Zelensky rejected this.

Syrsky — Gives interviews when under threat of removal. Recently praised Russia’s strength.

---

PART FOUR: MOBILIZATION CHAOS

TCC (draft officers) violence — Beatings, car rammings, masked men dragging people off buses. Odessa incident went viral.

Veslavsky’s hypocrisy — Says Western Ukrainian villages are empty of men, but big cities (Kyiv, Odesa, Kharkiv) are fine. Bondarenko calls him an idiot.

Ella Lebanova — Says mobilization is normal for a country fighting for survival. When asked if she would fight, she dodged.

No opposition platform — Bondarenko argues no publication in Ukraine dares criticize the government. Opposition only exists on Telegram and YouTube, and those are being suppressed. Contrasts with Dozhd TV (Russian exile media) as ineffective.

---

PART FIVE: Q&A SESSION

1. Danylo Halytsky as role model for Zelensky?
Zelensky doesn’t know history. 13th-century politics don’t translate to 21st century. Halytsky was a prince who bowed to the Mongols to keep power — Zelensky refuses similar pragmatism.

2. Frogs in Moscow vs. ancient Kyiv (Nebenzya-Melnyk exchange)
Moscow’s later founding is irrelevant. Bondarenko: “Don’t boast about antiquity, boast about current capability.”

3. Are geniuses still born?
Yes, but ideas are accepted only by minorities. Thinkers today will be pedestalized 50 years from now.

4. Will Ukraine seek military revenge after a ceasefire?
Yes. Defeated factions always form militant groups. There will be terrorism against both Russia and any Ukrainian leadership seen as capitulating. Many in Russia would also be dissatisfied with an inconclusive peace.

5. Bucha lists — why won’t Ukraine release them?
Because Bucha is a myth, not just a tragedy. The ambiguity benefits Ukraine politically.

6. Will Europeans fight or use refugees as soldiers?
Refugees aren’t citizens. Foreign legions exist (France), but most countries lack that mechanism. Mercenaries are possible.

7. Fresh water wars?
Predicted since 1980s-90s. Water shortages are emerging; prices are rising.

8. OCU vs. UOC-KP (church conflict)
OCU is acting hostilely, ignoring legality and ethics. They waited for Patriarch Filaret to die before seizing property.

9. Zelensky, Pyshny, Marchenko, Budanov buying war bonds — conflict of interest?
Investigations only happen after power changes. Current officials are immune. The current government provides more grounds for future prosecution than previous ones.

10. Did Putin accidentally help Zelensky become a dictator?
Yes, this should be studied. Zelensky copied Putin; Lukashenko copied both. Zelensky is a result of post-Maidan disillusionment and foreign illusions.

11. Joint Putin-Lukashenko appeal to Ukraine with post-war guarantees?
Rational appeals don’t work in Ukraine right now. Emotions and slogans rule. Only 10% of the population would respond to such logic.

12. Why no streets named after ancient Kyivan kings (who defeated Persians and Macedonians)?
They were Iranian-speaking. Iran is now an enemy of Ukraine, so they’d be retroactively labeled occupiers.

13. Zelensky nominated for Nobel Peace Prize?
Likely an April Fool’s joke. Dozens are nominated every year (Yulia Tymoshenko was nominated in 2012).

14. Donbas-Krivoy Rog Republic proclaimed before Ukrainian People’s Republic — why does Ukraine ignore this?
Moscow decided to strengthen united Ukraine by absorbing the Donbas proletariat. Many short-lived republics existed in 1917; only this one is remembered thanks to historian Vladimir Kornilov.

15. When will Kyiv-Moscow train run again?
Not soon. Requires truce → consular services → railway negotiations → intergovernmental normalization.

16. 50-year entry ban to Russia for a Donetsk native?
Bondarenko knows such a case — a completely apolitical person banned until 2050 because her brother holds an anti-Ukraine position.

---

CLOSING

Bondarenko thanks viewers. Alexander notes spring has arrived — April and May will be decisive months. Hopes for positive outcomes.

Abrogard Comment

It is interesting that throughout this piece the people are generally ignored.
They would claim to be patriots, without a doubt, these two. But you cannot be a patriot if you don’t care for your ‘compatriots’, your fellow people.

So all ‘patriotic discussion’ should be in terms of the people.

But it is not, not here nor anywhere we look today. It is all in terms of ‘the State’. We are to assume that the welfare of the people is inherent in that somewhere. That somehow preserving the State preserves the People and their welfare.

I think a simple survey would show this to be untrue.