National groups, that is, it is still difficult for us , well, the prosecutor, except for khan, defined three ways in february, three crimes against which now the International Criminal court is working, it is the illegal deportation and transfer of ukrainian children , it is the shelling of the energy infrastructure, and it is the filtration camps and torture committed by the Russian Military and against civilians and with regard to the prisoners of war received by the Russian Federation, will hunger and the use of hunger as a method of warfare be added to this . Perhaps, but it will be difficult to understand and the International Criminal court must also have such iron proof that the attack on the place near the delivery of humanitarian aid is precisely on that to cause a headache, here, this, and the mental aspect, yes. What exactly was recruited for the attack, it is quite difficult to prove, you need a mass, you understand that in different cities in different parts of ukraine, this is how the russians carried out attacks on elevators, e. E. , they carried out attacks on Critical Infrastructure that contains Food Products and so on, but i am sure that our colleagues from global racing line will continue to work, will develop this project and we will see what evidence they will present to the International Criminal court itself 78 and the session of the un General Assembly, this week was very important for us in a diplomatic sense. Volodymyr zelensky spoke at the un, and he went there with our peace formula, and he went there with a proposal to reform the un itself, primarily us. Of course we prefer to deprive the Russian Federation of the right of veto so that the Russian Federation is not a permanent member of the general Security Council of the United Nations. It is very difficult. It is possible. Found a response, and he proposed to expand the representation of permanent members, he proposed to add germany, japan, brazil, and india to it, we see that for now this also remains at the level of the initiative of only the United States , why well, the point is that the member state is a permanent member of the un Security Council has a huge pile of powers under the charter of the United Nations, and it is obvious that such a state does not want to give up these powers , you see, even the United States says that lets expand the representation in order to see and hear and take into account the position of other states that will be equal to the current member of the un Security Council, but to give up the right of vesting. Now they can do whatever they want and they wont get anything for it, because the Security Council resolution will be blocked, and everything here is really showing the readiness to play by the same rules. At the moment, i dont see such a readiness of the state, permanent members of the council the security of the un thinks first of all about their own interests and not about the interests of the whole world, this was said at the beginning of the 20th century, and you can see that as a result of nothing being done about it, we had two world wars. Now we have the biggest Armed Conflict in europe since the second world war. That is, it does not work. Ukraine proposes that the General Assembly of the United Nations will have the opportunity to overcome the legal situation in the Security Council if the situation there is blocked by one member of the Security Council. Yes, uh, we have a lot of resolutions of the General Assembly on our situation, because the united for peace mechanism has been launched, so when the Security Council cannot make a decision because one of the permanent members of the Security Council is blocking such a decision, the General Assembly can start a special session and adopt resolutions on this issue, but the resolutions of the General Assembly are not binding, they are important because we are talking about the fact that 141 countries of the world condemn the aggression of the Russian Federation precisely because we have a resolution of the general stamp, but everything further, the General Assembly cannot use force against the Russian Federation as an aggressor state or a business state, frankly speaking, i have huge doubts about this, you correctly said that we it is not possible to deprive the Russian Federation of permanent membership in the Security Council, the occupier is not mentioned in the article. Yes, it says the union of soviet socialist republics, but the other four permanent members of the Security Council did you know the Russian Federation as a successor state to the ussr and ukraine, unfortunately protested against it only 30 years later. This problem exists , at least to restrain the Russian Federation, not to remove it. And at least the United States wants to restrain it. I think that this will be the subject of further discussion on the next broadcasts. Thank you very much roman edr International Lawyer associate professor of International Law of Taras Shevchenko university, a second ship with ukrainian grain was sent to turkey, which used a temporary transit corridor in the black sea. This was reported by the french tv channel frantz 24 on a bulker and a 17. 5 t wheat cargo that ukraine sent to for egypt, this is still the second one that went through the temporary corridor, their opening was initiated by ukraine, first of all, for those foreign vessels that were blocked in ukrainian ports from the beginning of russias fullscale aggression, the International Maritime organization recognized ukraines right to free commercial shipping and called on russia not to threaten ships in the black sea. We remind you that the fullfledged grain corridor ceased to function in july when russia unilaterally withdrew from the grain agreement and began bombing ukrainian ports. Gennadiy dubov, candidate of Legal Sciences together with us on the air. I congratulate you, i congratulate you, mr. Gennadiy, all the same. I understand that for now it all remains a lottery when ships leave our ports and head to the country of destination. It is clear that now what has been happening in recent weeks is that the Ukrainian Defense forces methodically destroyed the black sea fleet of the Russian Federation. The very blockade in the black sea organized by a terrorist country, but how long can it last in this format well, the fact is that the format is not very good for today and in the sense that we we export millions, then they are grains, and if we transport 20 thousand tons there sometimes for several days, then we can multiply millions by 20,000 and we will have our own drop, after all, on the order of the actual volume of exports, besides this, a fullfledged grain corridor and the possibility of our export is when there are no military threats at all, including the possibility of export from parties to the sea of azov, which unfortunately does not exist today, so one way or another the risks remain as long as the actual troops are there of the Russian Federation on the territory of ukraine, which they illegally occupy, including in the autonomous republic of crimea, and in this sense, yes, unfortunately, there is no report that the largest british insurers, in particular, have renewed insurance specifically for ships that transport grain from ukrainian ports, this is one or two times, we are not quite to the end as far as great damage was caused to the opposite infrastructure, because we understand that millions of tons of something are transported with shovels and, accordingly, or there with buckets, if it were impossible, how many elevators, how many we cargo cranes and other necessary mechanisms survived after the actual russian redactions that took place for weeks on the park infrastructure, which is also unknown to us today, so at the moment it is really food safety, food safety for the whole world, as Volodymyr Zelenskyy emphasized in particular in his speech to the un General Assembly. It is located under threat and it continues to be hit by enemy troops on the ukrainian territory for quite some time. Therefore, it is not as if the solution to the problem it is rather to a certain extent symbolic tin, another one who demonstrates the inscrutability of ukrainian business in this sense, which , despite certain such military threats, despite the fact that i have been mined, continues to trade with the outside world, in particular, trying to have a positive influence on the issue of Food Security that is relevant for the entire planet earth to you as a lawyer International Maritime organization its jurisdiction extends to everyone the fact is that which will be which International Law all actions decisions in corruption as a result, in the Security Council of the United Nations organization, that is how the architecture of International Law has been built in us since the 45th year, in essence, from the yalta conference , therefore, here we can talk about the fact that ukraine itself submits to the courts in arbitration, but one way or another, the specifics of International Law provide in fact, the absence of coercive mechanisms outside the borders without the un, and yes, we will return to the fact that russia and china have the right to veto, multiplying by zero all efforts despite possible positive decisions in our favor, that is, more than just it is not capable of expressing condemnation, warnings, this is an organization in essence, yes, you do not take it to an International Organization , the biggest sanction there is the exclusion of a statement , well, if this is not the case, it does not immediately affect the relevant violators of International Law , especially when it comes to russia she actually came up with the initiative of charging the states herself. Well , they are like one more, one less , and we are fine here. About the passage of ukrainian ships through the kerch strait, when there were also claims to maritime arbitration, when there were preliminary decisions to release everyone, and so on, they all continue to be unfulfilled. In fact, these institutions that regulate shipping in the black sea basin, in particular, so i think that counting on something operational and ineffective here, i probably also understood that they do not have an Effective Date for us, and you have already mentioned about the fact that the un without the un needs to be reformed with this thesis, the president went to the 78th session of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Somehow the wording was expressed by the president. He talked about the need to expand the seats of permanent members of the un Security Council. He proposed uh, germany should become like japan , brazil, india, on the other hand, so far the initiative has remained an initiative. I want to ask you why germany is resisting because there were statements from the head of the Foreign Ministry of their analino berbok and she says that they are against the and the Russian Federation to exclude permanent members and they do not want to, they refuse to be a permanent member in place why well, the fact is that it is essentially a sister of haltization because changes in the Security Council essentially mean its complete reboot of what has not happened since 1945 because if a decision is actually made regarding the exclusion of russia from the rambes, it will mean at least that china and russia did not vote at all and were adopted without them , respectively, outside of the procedures of the United Nations charter, this is de facto will mean that the un in the form in which it exists ceases to exist and Something Else appears, if it ceases to exist then russia is conditionally thrown into the new un and is unlikely to get in, and in this case analina says that it is possible that today we are not very are ready in order to fully form a new world and order without these two states of which we are permanent members today, that is, the reform that is currently being proposed is essentially such a cosmetic thing because today there are independent members, respectively, without the right to see them they save themselves all the time and in fact, if there will be a permanent presence of brazil, germany, japan, what kind of cream and other countries are there, by and large it does not change anything, because usually the decision to fight against is blocked precisely because of the veto but because of the lack of votes because it does not happen as a rule , for example, these five permanent members remain neutral and refrain from voting on any of the most important issues, there is either a consensus of all five states or someone blocks it, so basically when we we are talking about the exclusion of russia, we are talking about refounding the un and actually probably one of those positions is that they do not want to play these games because they are afraid, including the possible third world war, because actually the league of nations is approximately thus and from the channel and in due time and in fact we had what we call the second world, this is the logic spread in western politics, and i think that not only the germans adhere to it, the United States has also repeatedly stated that this issue is not currently in order, so what do we we are counting on when we talk about it time and time again if you talk about the fact that it is somewhat utopian because without it it turns out that without russia and then there will be no un itself well, we count primarily on drawing attention to the situation because in fact today russia is demonstrating the following that any of the permanent members of the un council can allegedly annex the territory of the neighbors and declare it their own , violating the principle of the oun statute. Is it unacceptable, by the way, mr. Danilov wrote about this recently in his column on ukrainian pravda when he said that you, our dear partners, with all due attention to you, we and you, should determine the criteria with the criteria by which we evaluate if someone it is allowed , then you answer it directly, if after all the un institute means something, then it is necessary to take more fluid and effective measures in order to restore justice in our case, it is the territorial integrity of ukraine, thank you for your explanations gennadiy dubov, candidate of Legal Sciences, the armed forces of ukraine are receiving longrange american attack missiles, the heart is on the air of the tolomarathon, the only news was confirmed by the spokesman of the air force, yuriy hnat, before that , a number of authoritative American Media reported that the us president , joe biden , decided to provide ukraine with attack missiles, about this weapon capable of destroying longrange targets were requested by kyiv for a long time during president zelenskyis visit to washington. Biden informed him about the attacks, but that officially did not divulge, they did not divulge, so as not to warn russia, more and more attacks will be built, there is more and more news that this will happen not only atakams, but other weapons, we understand that the taurus missiles of german production are also very much needed by us , the Army Tactical missile system, or abbreviated in english, attacks, this a Short Range Ballistic Missile developed by the United States. It is capable of hitting a target at a distance of up to 300 km with high accuracy. Attacks are launched from mobile platforms of wheeled aimers or tracked m270. Let us recall these ukraine has already received the launchers and is successfully using them on the battlefield. There are several options for attacks with a cluster or monoblock warhead, options for guidance systems, etc. , the cost of one missile is about one and a half million dollars, according to the