Butusov on his meeting with Blinken: Americans are interested in war, situation in energy sector and fight against corruption
During his visit to Kyiv on September 11, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with representatives of independent media and civil society. Yurii Butusov, Editor-in-Chief of Censor.NET, shared the details of the meeting.
Good afternoon. The day before yesterday (11.09 - Ed.), I had a meeting with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken in Kyiv. The meeting was initiated by the US Embassy. I would like to thank Ambassador Brigitte Brink and all the diplomats of the US Embassy who pay great attention to the events in Ukraine. They are watching, analyzing, monitoring and preparing their vision in order to further implement American policy and help Ukraine. I think the best way to reflect the meeting in terms of diplomacy is Ambassador Brink's post:
'Secretary Blinken also met with independent media and civil society representatives Yurii Butusov, Svitlana Musiiaka and Vitalii Shabunin to discuss reforms in Ukraine. A strong civil society and free media are the foundation of democracies and vital to Ukraine's aspirations to join the European Union and NATO.’
Let me tell you that the purpose of this meeting was announced to me in exactly the same way. Of course, the events in Ukraine are of fundamental importance to our Western partners and allies. No matter what happens outside Ukraine's borders, one might think that there are some shadowy puppeteers somewhere who are allegedly influencing something, doing something. But this is not the case. The fate of the war and the fate of the entire 21st century of security, not only in Europe but also in the world, is now primarily decided on the battlefields of Ukraine and in the corridors of the Ukrainian state. Because the outcome depends on our efforts, on the organization of our government, civil society and defence forces. And all global politicians plan their actions based on the state of the war in Ukraine, how defensible the Ukrainian state and the Ukrainian nation are.
We see that the Ukrainian authorities, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, monopolize the media space, have taken control of all the largest television channels, finance them, and allocate billions of hryvnias from the state budget in order to monopolistically tell Ukrainians only one position, the position of the authorities in terms of PR, some completely incomprehensible interests. And to keep silent about the real problems that we have in the war, in society, in the state, to keep silent about systemic corruption, which is simply destroying the state from within. And, of course, our allies, the democratic countries that are allocating tens of billions of dollars to support Ukraine at this time, I would like to remind you that the support of the United States and the support of the European Union is not just about weapons, which are really lacking, but it is primarily about financing the Ukrainian budget and the huge deficit that exists in it. So, of course, taxpayers all over the world, who have an impact directly in democratic countries, where there is competition between media and political parties, they have an impact, and of course, there is competition in the United States as well. And in order to demonstrate the transparency of Ukrainian politics, the effectiveness of Ukrainian politics, of course, the Americans are interested in having competitive free media, in having competitive politics. And when the government tries to monopolize this, certainly in the West, in Europe, in America, this is an incomprehensible approach. Unfortunately, we still have feudal traditions, clan traditions in power, and they continue to rule the state. And the fact that our state is not developing institutionally, outside of institutions, but is decided by a few people, 5-6 managers in one office on Bankova Street, in Andrii Yermak's office, I mean. The fact that everything is decided in one office does not inspire confidence in anyone. Neither in Ukraine nor in the world. These are obvious things. As for business, I talk to embassy staff and see that people are analyzing almost the entire media space of Ukraine, including telegram channels, YouTube, basically everything that is important. And, of course, monitoring, analysis, reports.
What were the motives?
I want to emphasize that in November 2021, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy invited me to a press conference and used everything to insult me with impunity, to be rude, to throw accusations that, over time, as we see, the authorities are not even trying to confirm. And Zelenskyy is trying to avoid responsibility for his lies. There is a war going on and, of course, it is impossible to sue the president. And using this scandal, which Zelenskyy himself provoked, he did not answer my question. I would like to remind you that at that press conference, I asked Zelenskyy why he kept a Russian agent in his office and appointed him to a high position. He appointed Ruslan Demchenko to the position of head of the Intelligence Committee under the President of Ukraine, which controlled the activities of all Ukrainian intelligence services and all activities against the Russian Federation. I would like to remind you that Ruslan Demchenko was Yanukovych's first deputy foreign minister, and he was the author of the infamous Kharkiv agreements, by which Yanukovych in 2010 gave Crimea to Putin, gave Sevastopol for use as a military base and went along with all Russian whims. Of course, such a person is a Russian spy, he was appointed to leak all information about Ukraine's activities in the Russian Federation directly to Moscow. And I asked the question in November. Well, the reaction, I think you all remember, I won't go back to it now, everyone saw this complete inadequacy of Mr. Zelenskyy. What did it lead to? Instead of apologizing, Zelenskyy simply stopped inviting me to any further press conferences. And without even explaining. He is the president of the country and he should have done this, because I am not personally concerned about Volodymyr Zelenskyy's creativity, but he is the president of Ukraine, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. During the war, it is his duty to answer questions from the media. He does not do all this, he evades responsibility and questions from me, he is afraid because he will see me again and there will be a question about Russian agents whom he himself brought to the country's leadership and through whom Putin received full information about our defence forces and planned offensive actions, as a result of which we lost a significant part of our country's territory.
And this inadequate reaction of the authorities, I am very grateful for, is receiving a lot of support from fellow journalists and is receiving support from Ukrainian civil society, which also disagrees with the kind of oppression of freedom of speech that President Zelenskyy is implementing. And I'm honoured that maybe Ukrainian leaders are afraid to invite me, but I was invited by the French Ministry of Defence to report on the situation in Ukraine. And now I've had a meeting with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and he is, of course, one of the top 10 people who are determining the course of world politics in general and the war in Ukraine in particular. So it's a great honour for me to be at this meeting, to present my views on some of the issues and to answer some of the questions that Mr. Secretary had.
I would also like to say that my colleagues, representatives of civil society, Svitlana Musiiaka and Vitalii Shabunin, were there. They are known as people who implement anti-corruption initiatives. And, of course, Vitalii is the main voice of our anti-corruption policy along with his colleagues from the Anti-Corruption Action Centre. This is one of the most influential anti-corruption initiatives and an important achievement for our civil society. So, of course, his presence is important for Americans. He is a regular participant in various events and prepares reports on various issues of anti-corruption policy.
Briefly about the meeting itself
First question: What is the American leadership interested in now? What are the main issues that arise at the meeting?
There are three strategic directions, three issues that the American leadership has and that are in the focus of attention of American representatives and leaders who are dealing with the situation in Ukraine. The first is, of course, the war. The war and the dramatic events that are taking place on the frontline, the Russian offensive that continues and every day we are losing, losing and losing our land and we are losing the lives of many Ukrainians. This, of course, is a matter of great concern to our allies, and they would like to understand, they would like a clear vision of what is happening, what measures can be taken, what proposals are available to be implemented immediately and what needs to be done in the future. Such thoughts are gathered not only, of course, from me, but these are just three questions that are asked to many experts, many people on whose opinions the position is formed.
The second issue is the situation in our energy sector. Energy as the backbone of the country's capacity and vital activity, our economy, the ability of the Ukrainian people to endure these constant brutal attacks on the energy sector by Russia, power outages and restoration measures. For Americans, this is of fundamental importance, because this is also one of the areas where Americans, the United States and the European Union are investing billions of dollars to help Ukraine quickly restore what has been destroyed, to protect those energy facilities that the Russians are trying to knock out.
The third area is the fight against corruption. That is why we saw both Svitlana and Vitalii at the meeting. The fight against corruption and transparent, targeted use of foreign aid funds - and these are tens of billions of dollars that are provided to us annually on a non-refundable basis - all of which must be accountable. And there should be no doubt about the intended purpose, about the actions of anti-corruption bodies in Ukraine, because such huge funds allocated to us by other governments require respect and accountability, transparent reporting, and the logic of their use so that taxpayers, the opposition, or opposition media, or free media that oversee the use of public funds, could not accuse the governments of the United States and the European Union of spending money in Ukraine in a way that is not transparent, that it is used for some corrupt purposes, that it is stolen by some local hucksters. Of course, this is a big problem and it should be treated with great respect. That is why any details of anti-corruption scandals, any details of investigations, any details of misuse of funds are very seriously studied by our partners. And, of course, any personnel decisions that are aimed at enabling, for example, someone to steal money or appointing some dubious figures from the Yanukovych era, there are a lot of them in the government who are associated with corruption, who simply have dirty hands and to whom public funds stick. So these are the three issues: war, energy, and corruption.
When I spoke, I spoke primarily about issues that are focused exclusively on the war. This is the key. Until Ukraine organizes a system of strategic defense, not in words, but in deeds, which will be tied to some properly constructed, at least in some places, at least partially, but constructed defense lines, where it will be possible to destroy the enemy due to the presence of favorable, tactically advantageous positions for our troops. If the technical means are properly organized, then we will stop the Russians, and then there will be prerequisites for political pressure on Putin and Russia. As long as the frontline is moving in our direction, as long as the enemy is capturing Donbas and approaching central Ukraine, Dnipropetrovsk region, Zaporizhzhia region, Zaporizhzhia, no peace talks with Putin will be effective. These will be negotiations from the very beginning from a position of loss, from a position of failure, and the enemy will impose absolutely painful surrender conditions on us. That is why stopping the enemy, stopping the front is a key issue for Ukraine's survival.
And it is important to say what I said. I spoke about the situation where an offensive is underway in nine directions. I said that 12 Ukrainian cities are now under the threat of being captured by the enemy, with fighting taking place either in these cities or on the outskirts of these cities. This is a huge threat: if we don't reorganize, if we don't start some qualitative changes, the enemy will have the opportunity to capture 12 Ukrainian cities at once this year. Earlier this year, the enemy managed to capture the cities of Avdiivka, Novohrodivka and Krasnohorivka in Donbas - three cities. This is an additional 12. Of course, we cannot allow such a critical development of events. And I said that we cannot stop the enemy's advance in three areas, there are big problems. We discussed the reasons why this is happening. I stated my position on a personal note.
Why are Russians seizing Ukrainian cities?
The first is the problem of command and control, in English, the problem of command, organization and planning of troops: organization, management, and planning of combat operations. And this is the main thing. That is, the problems at the level of command, the highest military command, the Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, operational and tactical and operational and strategic groups. Well, first of all, of course, this is the problem of Headquarters. According to the Constitution, the Headquarters is the highest body that manages all resources and determines the strategy. There are problems at this level.
The second is the problem of training and use of troops. That is, the proper use of people. There are big problems with this. In order to protect people, they need to be properly trained systematically and properly used, taking into account their physical and psychological capabilities, and ultimately their qualifications. This is a huge problem.
And the third problem I have identified is the problem of drones. Proper use of modern, high-tech, high-precision weapons, systematic, comprehensive use of drones, anti-drone systems of all kinds and electronic intelligence systems. These high-tech weapons must be used in a coordinated, centralized manner, in a single loop, and they must interact with each other, not interfere, as is still the case at the front. That's why I mentioned these three aspects. It aroused a lot of interest, and I clarified the details of what I meant.
I said that, unfortunately, at the highest level, at the level of the management of the organization of combat planning, and at the second level, which is the planning and use of people, there are no prerequisites for change now. It depends on the state, on the authorities, and we understand that neither Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Rustam Umierov, nor Oleksandr Syrskyi are going to carry out any reforms in the army, neither in the use of people, nor in management, nor in organization. They probably like everything in the course of combat operations, so they believe that everything is fine, and the government is not introducing any changes. Therefore, we should not hope for this. Everything that depends on our government, it will not do. Because these things are banal, they have been repeated for the third year of the full-scale war. I don't believe in hoping that there will be any changes now. I hope that perhaps it will happen in the near future under pressure from our allies, under pressure from public opinion, and under pressure from the enemy, who now has an advantage at the strategic level of government, and that is why he is capturing our cities. This is the first reason.
The key role of drones in the army
But I would like to address the US leadership, the leadership of our allies, on how they could help us so that we could stop the Russians and defeat the enemy, even though our government is incapacitated. I said that there is one key technology that is a game changer, i.e. high-tech weapons. Ukraine still has an advantage over the Russians in the quality of people who run our drone units, electronic intelligence units, electronic warfare units, anti-drone systems, and this is what we have to use. Yes, our government is not capable of coordinating from the top. But drones give our defense forces unique capabilities. Drones can be used to destroy the Russians, even though the generals do not understand and do not learn the new doctrine of high-tech warfare. To this end, I said that it would be very appropriate if our allies took the initiative, and in addition to funding - this year, $60 billion was allocated to finance our budget and various needs - if a small part of the funds relative to the overall budget that are allocated to help Ukraine were allocated directly to targeted assistance to high-tech drone units, in combat brigades and in drone units. What is the logic? The government cannot take strategic large-scale actions. High-tech weapons require constant monthly improvement. Frequencies, control channels are constantly changing, the enemy is countering, technologies are changing. You cannot react to all this slowly. I said that when contracts are signed for a year for the production of FPV drones, these FPVs start arriving in the army six months later, and the equipment mounted on them is long outdated and needs to be retrofitted at the front at their own expense. That is not how it works. Technologies change instantly. And our troops at the front should react just as quickly. However, it is not necessary to fund each military unit separately but to fund the best units, the best brigades, the best, most capable drone units, electronic intelligence units, electronic warfare units that give the best results, confirmed by photos and videos. Photos and videos provide an absolutely objective and adequate comparison of who is fighting how. Everyone has their own specifics. Someone is in the forest, where it is more difficult. Someone in an area where there is no such intensity has less intensity than the neighboring one. But the main thing is that you can always measure the ratio. How much money we spent on weapons and what results we achieved. How many enemies were killed, how much equipment was destroyed. A simple, understandable logic for all taxpayers. And that is why I said this could be the game changer of this war. We can win it. I said that now the problem of destroying Russian infantry is not a problem of military art alone. At the moment, it is primarily a technological problem. Destroying the entire Russian army in Ukraine is a technological problem. This is a problem of having high-quality operators, units, R&D centers that quickly introduce and quickly modernize weapons, quickly order new technological weapons. And the problem of the number of drones and other precision weapons that knock out Russian infantry. With funding, Ukraine can acquire enough drones to destroy all Russian infantry in general. Assault groups will be knocked out 100%. They will not go anywhere. And even if we continue to have such not entirely adequate management actions, nevertheless, drone units, if we have a sufficient number of reconnaissance drones of all types - including mavic, autel, drones that are used with drops, wings, FPV of various types, this is already on different frequencies, fiber optics, long-range and short-range, night drones, bombers of various types. That is, a large number of drones, interceptor drones.
All of this gives us the opportunity to destroy anyone Putin finds in Russia and wants to send to Ukraine to attack. This is an absolutely technological issue. And in many parts of the frontline, we see how our best drone units, where there is engineering development, where there is a quick order of quality components, constantly high-quality operators, command, they hold some parts of the frontline exclusively with drones and destroy all attacking Russian units, that is, the main damage is inflicted by drones. And this is with limited forces. That is why I told Mr. Secretary of State that, please, we need targeted funding. I don't think it should be a lot of money. I personally believe that for one or two billion dollars a year of dedicated funding exclusively for drone units, our best, I'm not even saying all of them, in brigades and drone units, if our allies were to allocate just two out of those huge packages of tens of billions to support our drone units, it would be enough to kill the entire Russian army trying to get closer to our positions. The enemy simply would not have had a chance. Because what is happening now, when the state does not provide mavics or autels to the front, when there are just miserable supplies of FPVs and they still need to be finalized. When there are no night bombers, everything has to be bought for money. It's just absurd... We need to have targeted direct funding for all the needs of individual units. This is what I see can be done immediately. Of course, we can talk about many other details, strategies, what to do, how to do it, how well to do it. We can immediately make the changes I mentioned in management, organization, planning, but there is no political will, no one is doing anything.
PROBLEMS IN THE STRUCTURE OF THE UKRAINIAN ARMY
We still have these absolutely useless, absurd structures that control the troops in the form of the OTG, the OSGT. It is a complete failure of the Ukrainian leadership that they still exist. And we have no divisions or corps, like the Russian army, by the way. We are losing in the quality, we are laughing at the Russians and we are losing to them in the quality of the organization of operational and strategic command of troops. In the twenty-first century, the Ukrainian army is the only one, friends, in the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries, in the era of mass mobilized armies, the only army that wages war on a 1200-kilometer front, in separate brigades. This is just absurd in general. All the armies have all the experience of world history, all fight in well-coordinated units of the operational and strategic levels. These are divisions, corps, armies, all fighting. Look at the structure of the NATO army, look at France - corps, Poland - divisions, corps, look at the United States - divisions, corps. Yes, there are brigades and regiments everywhere, but there is a higher level. Only Ukraine does not have it.
Let me remind you that the corps in Ukraine were destroyed by Viktor Yanukovych's decision in 2012-2014. And that was it. Since then, for 10 years, Ukraine's leaders have been showing their complete ignorance of military science by inertia set by Yanukovych, and our generals, no matter how many chiefs of the General Staff have changed, are still unable to create divisions and corps to deploy in Ukraine. It's just absurd. And we have corps at the front, but they are the same rear structures, exclusively of an administrative nature. And at the front, neither divisions nor corps are engaged in combat operations. They do not control the troops, they are not responsible for the people in the first place. This is the problem.
On the use of soldiers in the army
The second problem is training, the use of people. It seems obvious that if you grab people off the street, you have to give them quality training anyway. If you are calling people to the army with advertisements, we have to give them quality training. They should not feel like victims of war, but people who are ready for the conditions that they encounter on the battlefield, who act with confidence. These are obvious things. And to use our soldiers when they are sent to positions, sometimes for 30 days, is just a horror. People stay for 10, 20, sometimes 30 days. I know examples of even 40 days in the field. And there are no changes. This is just absurd. This is no way to fight. A person cannot perform combat missions like that. Why? It is because of this ineffective use that we have a huge number of tens of thousands of those who left the unit without authorization. We have large losses, absolutely unjustified. And all this is happening because there is no responsibility.
So I believe that only one thing can stabilize the front and destroy the Russians, and bring us victory in the war. We need funding for those intelligent, smart people who have taken the initiative and created drone units in all branches of the military. They are efficient, competent, they have a connection with civil society, they are respected, they have modern technologies. It is they who must receive significant funds at their personal disposal, under their personal responsibility, and use them as efficiently as possible for one purpose: the complete destruction of the Russian infantry. Ukraine can solve this task and win the war.
Answers to questions from the audience
Did you talk about Russian agents in the government?
This topic does not correspond to the level of the Secretary of State: the Secretary of State certainly did not talk about it. Let me emphasize: the Americans have this information about Ukraine, but America is not some kind of party committee, and it is not a policeman who is watching us. The American leadership communicates with those leaders who have been elected by the Ukrainian people. If this person is in office, legally elected, then there is communication with him or her. And, of course, this communication is public, meaning that no one there is fighting against Zelenskyy or trying to create any obstacles for him. The invitation to me is solely a reaction to the restrictions and oppression of freedom of speech in Ukraine, which really exists, everyone sees it, the whole world sees it. And, of course, that's why I was invited, but not to figure out who Volodymyr Zelenskyy is and how to create more problems for him there. America is committed to institutional cooperation with Ukraine, and they support institutions, not individuals. Not Yurii Butusov in particular. America supports free media and wants to have its own rules, and for the government to respect our media. It respects not just people in the media, but also respects and responds to the information that journalists publish. Now there is no such reaction from the state. And this is a cause for concern for everyone. All our allies who finance us.
Did you discuss with Blinken the fact that you and other patriotic media outlets are not allowed to attend Zelenskyy's press conferences, as well as the discrediting campaign that is being waged against Shabunin and you personally?
You do realize that the mere fact of an invitation and support shows that there is an objective assessment of events in Ukraine. But America wants to emphasize that American politicians are not Ukrainian politicians. They do not and should not take responsibility for the events in Ukraine. They are not trying to, say, somehow discuss our internal problems and indirectly influence it. They collect information and analyze it. But, of course, the Secretary of State, who keeps in mind the entire palette of world politics, all conflicts from Taiwan to Ukraine, did not go into such details. But they certainly know everything that is happening in our country. They monitor all telegram channels. The US Embassy employs quite competent analysts who proofread almost all the media sources that are at least slightly top-rated. And this information is analyzed and evaluated.
Has the SSU already interrogated you?
I can't say any details. I have not had any problems with the SSU. The only thing is that there is someone walking around, some people trying to install some equipment in some places I visit. I sincerely hope that maybe these are not the SSU employees, but some other Russian agency that is following me for some reason.
Ask Mr. Blinken what the United States' outlook is for the end of the war in Ukraine? Are there any plans to preserve Ukraine in the long-term prospects?
Friends, there is no hidden American policy that is not, in principle, obvious. America's position is clearly declared. They have invested large resources and all their political influence to support Ukraine. And they have united dozens of countries around the world to support Ukraine as well. I want to tell you that we have shells on the frontline, we are armed, from dozens of countries, whatever you can find. We have Indian shells, Pakistani shells, and shells from so many other countries that I won't even mention on the air to avoid scandals. But all of this is supplied to us because there is a general policy of the United States and the European Union in support of Ukraine. And all this is not done by itself, but by specific people. That's why there is an American position, and it is at the end of the war, and now the whole world policy depends on what we do in Ukraine. There is no foreign backstage that can say, "Putin, stop, one - two." Putin wants to destroy Ukraine. And how can he be stopped when he has nuclear missiles? Who in the West will do it? They don't want to engage in direct combat themselves. So we should not think that America will end the war by itself. America would like us to create conditions at the front, what I understand, so that we stop the Russians. And then the political pressure that America and Europe are creating around the world to fight Russian aggression will start working much more effectively. But stopping the Russians at the front depends on us, on our government, on our society, on the Ukrainian nation. It is we who are now determining the future of the world.
What did you ask him about?
I didn't ask him, it was a conversation, I was asked. There were no such discussions, but in principle, it was a conversation that is important to people. They receive information about certain key events in Ukraine from various sources, including journalists.
Will strikes deep into Russia be allowed?
I think it's an absolutely obvious step, we can just see from what perspective. I hope it will be very quick.
Is it possible today to partially demobilize the military, raise their salaries to 200-300 thousand hryvnias to enable them to provide themselves with cars, electronic warfare devices, drones, etc.
I don't think the government will hold a partial mobilization today, because partial demobilization requires training of combat-ready reserves. And they have not been trained to change the front. That's why I don't see the government preparing for partial mobilization. It seems to me that they are not planning to do this at all and are not even discussing it. The main problem with demobilization, in my opinion, is that active military personnel have no other way to take a break from the incessant fighting than to demobilize from the army, either for medical reasons or for family reasons. The army does not allow people to rest properly. This is a problem of the use of troops. There is no recovery. At least in such intense hostilities, a person should have several months of vacation a year. They have to constantly recover. And you need to constantly monitor your physical and mental health. And our army uses people for one time, and then, until they are discharged or go to our hospital, or are wounded, they cannot leave the army otherwise. And the army guarantees 10 days of vacation a year. This is absolutely not enough. This is the main problem that makes demobilization such a critical issue.
Military salaries are up to 300-300 thousand hryvnias. Well, frankly speaking, I think the state cannot do this for everyone. But, of course, there should be a salary increase for those who are most at risk and experience the greatest exhaustion. First of all, it concerns the infantrymen. These are the main people in the war, the main people at the front, and their support should be different from all other military professions. Those who hold the frontline in the trenches are elite troops. These are the real elite. These are the most privileged people. So, of course, for this category, we need to consider raising the allowances. And for the other categories, I believe that the support should be allocated, although to the extent that it is currently provided for by law. That would be great. Without any unclear deductions or underpayments. And the fact that people need what they are supposed to be given, fuel, clothes, all of this needs to be purchased.
Yurii, if Blinken meets with journalists who are uncomfortable for the authorities and people who prevent them from stealing, is it bad news? Is this bad news for us? Does it mean that there is a lack of trust in the actions and reporting of the authorities?
First of all, I don't think this is bad news. If people support us, I want to emphasize that I, Vitalii Shabunin, was not invited to the meeting because someone in America is simply very much in love with our work. This is, I emphasize once again, an exclusively institutional step. America, the American state, is effective because it relies on institutions, on the media, which control the government and report to society what is really happening, on the fight against corruption and anti-corruption structures that do not allow people to break the rules and steal, and just plain steal freely, and make money from public money. This is the only reason why.
It is in Ukraine that Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has effectively monopolized power, usurped the media space, is simply destroying freedom of speech and restricting it. It's only under him that it's bad. Because Zelenskyy does not know how to govern through institutions. He destroys all institutions and everything that exists. He just says: I need 5-6 managers. 5-6 managers run a country of 40 million people, run the war, the economy, foreign policy. And why? Because these 5-6 managers are 5-6 cash flows that go through the pockets of Yermak, Tatarov, all the other Sliusarevs, all the other "supervisors," Pavliuk, all those whom Zelenskyy appointed to rob customs, to make money on smuggling, on public funds, even now they are distribution a billion eight hundred million hryvnias at the National Memorial Cemetery. It's hard to imagine the limits of cynicism. That is, falsifying the competition for the National Memorial Cemetery is possible only in societies where freedom of speech does not work, civil society institutions are weak, and there is no full responsibility on the part of the state and state leaders. That is why this seems bad in Ukraine. Because in Ukraine, democracy is very, very limited. We have freedom within the framework of civil society and the people. But we don't have freedom and democracy at the level of government, and there is complete irresponsibility and chaos.
So the situation at the front is the same. Go to the army, see how the fighting is going on in many brigades, where people are writing critical posts on Facebook. And you will see a model there of how the state is governed from above, in Kyiv. That's why I see it as simply respect for the Ukrainian people and support for civil society in Ukraine. Believe me, this is not some kind of political game. This is a recognition that there are important factors in Ukrainian society, fuses that force the government to change. These are the media and civil society institutions.
As for the distrust of the government's actions and accountability, the government must always be accountable. Even without my personal or any other critics of the government. The problem of what Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his government are doing is not a problem of their personality. All leaders, any power, any government must be accountable and controlled. They should not seek applause and expect everyone to praise them, and think only about their rating.
How did you feel when you received the invitation? What did you think about? Will this influence the rhetoric on Bankova Street regarding their attitude and pressure on independent media?
I felt that it was a great responsibility and that I had to be prepared to answer the questions that the US Secretary of State was interested in. That is why I first of all learned the agenda of the meeting, what I had to say, what issues were of the greatest interest, the greatest curiosity. The responsibility is that at this level, the attention of the American leadership means to me personally that America plans to continue to systematically support Ukraine and increase the scale of support. And in order to further add to our military and financial assistance, the Americans wanted to strengthen the influence of civil society and the media. For me, this is the main thing that I felt in this invitation, and this is the main mission that I am trying to fulfill. And I am fulfilling it, first of all, friends, thanks to your support.
2500 sponsors of the Butusov Plus channel allow us to work. As we see it, our work is visible enough to ensure that our opinion, my opinion, is heard and not only heard by you and me on the air. It is analyzed by our partners abroad, it is analyzed by the leadership in various countries of the European Union and the United States. This is a part of our public opinion, of Ukrainian society, which is waging such a terrible war. Therefore, for me it is a responsibility and I feel trust. I was invited to this meeting solely because you are watching me. You are my audience that supports me, that finances my work, the work of my team. And it is only thanks to you that I can receive such support at such a high level. So, dear friends, thank you all once again, thank you for your attention, thank you for your support. And today, more than ever, I am confident that Ukraine will definitely win this war. Thank you for the broadcast! Glory to Ukraine!
