in most cases, they just simply wanted to raise awareness about the topic without pushing for any sort of binding resolution. where it says that between you and envoy, dimitri poly on skate, explain more to my colleagues even though now. so once again, our discussion of the security council on nato was actions in yugoslavia. they've been blocked. why are western powers in your views so reluctant to, to even reflect on not episode of their military intervention? i think they, they, i, phrase they, i free the tools that we will come out. they don't want the world to least some, once again to the details of a, that's a horrible new trick on pain. i'm totally unlawful. new to the company in the, the conductance against against yugoslavia. but they also don't want us to highlights the responsibility of their leaders at the time of need to leaders. that's why they want to, to shut the miles of everybody. they are not interested in the spot the, in the reality, we started to every meeting of the security council,

the ordering this week with highlighting these procedural rules. so follow french colleagues and the 14th of the votes of the agenda of the meeting. and we also squeezed the phrase or 2 about nato's aggression. i guess you guys live here. so instead of having one meeting on monday of church, they actually had the whole week. okay. people in serbia just to pick up and something you said people in the country who survived the, the 78 days of nato bombing. and then of course, the aftermath were many more people died. and they said, we will never forgive. and we will never forget. but you think that you and you've mentioned some of the countries involved, that the western powers that took part wish that they could for a guest thought it was just essentially put under the rug. exactly. that was uh, behind uh, the reasoning french and best of the cleans that's of serbia,

was not aware of the fact of the meeting. so we're actually able to consult with serbia. and this was a belief and flight because so that was very much interested in the holding. these meet you as well. the west, profess to sweep the story onto the rock, will be bringing you more of the legacy of the nature of bowman. give you this love you, which was it a peak 25 years ago. we've got more special coverage lined up throughout the week here on o t. the company or not the international. we always appreciated with us with more of the latest news updates in 30 minutes. the then the, [000:00:00;00]

the mr. plug into you're most welcome to the program. us. thank you. so once again, our discussion of the security council on nato is actions and you can slow here, they've been blocked. why are western powers in your views so reluctant to, to even reflect on not episode of their military intervention? i think that they are afraid. they, i free the tools that will come out. they don't want the world to least some once again to the details of a, that's a horrible military campaign that's totally unlawful. new to the campaign that the conductance against against yugoslavia. they also don't want us to highlights of the responsibility of their leaders at the time of need to leaders.

that's why they want to, to shut the miles off. so everybody, they are not interested in this, but in reality we 1st um ask for the before this meeting on monday and differentiate presented to you for using proceed procedural whose is locked uh, i will be. but in reality, we stopped at every meeting of the security council during this week. with highlighting these procedural, russo follow a french colleagues and 14 for the vote of the agenda of the meeting. and we also squeezed the phrase or 2 about nato's aggression. i guess you guys live here, so instead of having one meeting on monday, just they actually have the whole week. it's worth pointing out as well, isn't it fed? russia simply requested a discussion regarding the nato bombing a, not the adoption of any kind of formal resolution on the monitor. something as basic as that on the 1st real, significant down there for history,

all of the bombing 25 years on. it's an important date. it was that are opposition from a specific countries. you mentioned france, there was, it wasn't one we're using. do you think a certain reason or where there are various reasons why why those countries did not? why that was so such opposition to having a discussion of the debate. this is something that's a usually is not happening. uh, the, the un and the security council because there is an article, a number 2 of the provisional rules of procedure of security council, which implies that the current president of the council goals are meeting up on the request of any council member. usually these equals some kind of freedom of speech and freedom of expression and nobody questions such beats. but in this and this time at this time, we really looks like we really have shipped the nerve of our west and colleagues,

especially the french calling. there is nothing extra ordinary, not request, and we said that the consequences of nato aggression, i felt until this date and actually all the problems that we have on the ball comes specifically in the relations between serve and it seems like robots costs of a. we're also 3 goods by need to address them. we can say that this is right here. elements. we can say that this is historic. for fact only. there are a lot of historic situations that on the agenda of the call. so that's a mets or even today, how can we discuss me the east, for example, without discussing the consequences of the last of the 1973 or 9 to 6 to 7 or even 1948 is absolutely impossible. so this is ridiculous. the last of all to yesterday, there were 6 countries altogether, and actually it was a clear divide between the west, some countries along with some countries and the security council. so the west counsellors, the rest of the countries,

they acted in line with the block discipline and they supported each other. but it was absolutely clear that their way behind these attempt to impose the sounds so shaped and security council, which is a very difficult to conceal from from world public. yeah, there are 15 countries, 5 permanent members. so we got just below the threshold without, without the 2nd number, the 6, if we adopt these very, promote is french logic them of but in order to hold a meeting, we should have got a 9 volts for the meeting. so we will have a short sale, zeroed shorts of these 9 volts, but according to our logic, as french questions, not the agenda items that we used about the meeting itself. they should have uh, they should have updates uh 9 volts, but the president uh japan. also blaine, just like bleed into the hands of, uh, west some countries for obvious reasons. and so she didn't want to formulate the

question maybe in the right way. that's happened sometimes unfortunately. and this curious across the people in survey just to pick up and something you said people in the country who survived, they the 78 days of nato bombing. and then of course, the aftermath were many more people died. and they said, we will never forgive. and we will never forget, but you think that you and you've mentioned some of the countries involved, that the western powers that took part wish that they could for a guest thought it was just essentially put under the rug. exactly. that was behind their reasoning, french and best of the planes. that's uh survey. it was not aware of the fact of the meeting so rational didn't consult with serbia. and this was a belief in flight because certainly it was very much interested in the folding. these meeting up to everything. prime minister, even so that just came specifically to new york to be brought to this meeting and run the friendship presented. he was thinking she was teaching him default

listening to his beasley explains that certainly it was not the way of freshman requests. so actually, to a survey who was even more interested to spell that through spell out the truth about what has happened then to remind that the consequences of this aggression i still felt they still felt by people leaving their hands. we had to reverse the whole mind, very thankful for their readiness to participate in these reverse whereabouts to explain in detail what are the consequences for certain population, medical, ecological, interest, structural whatever that i felt even right now, 25 years after these aggression. so these would have been a very, very important discussions, and of course it gave our western colleagues hold seats and they wanted to avoid it at any price. and that's why the really stakes the, for the ability and there they all started to in the council asking for the so the

degree did a procedural a votes and trying to conceal the fact that they were questioning the effect of the meeting and not the item on the edge of the beast was very shameful and pathetic to which there may be people watching, sir, wondering why 255 years old. that of course, the anniversary is so significant this week. but why the offense of what happened in you? then you can slow, i'll be a why are they so important? know for russia that they are important not only for us and they are important for the whole world. and we see that there are still open holes in the ball comes. not only is serbia but elsewhere, and especially when we speak about the relations between billed rate increase to now there are a lot of the full outs that's really offensive as, as a substitute for them right now. in serbia and around and uh,

the cost of assorted is defining international community have defined security council resolutions. the relevance of 1st and foremost, foremost, 1244 recently were shows that the elementary assembly of the council of europe recommended the mission. of course of all uh to the council, which is a clear violation of resolution $1244.00. so all these things are happening because of a need to aggression goes through gus lobby because of the fact that the national war was absolutely devastated tons of rapes by west some countries. they bypassed security council. the moments the this to the pressure china will not support such an action. uh some uh, some scholars believe that this was a turning points in the whole system of international relations because this was kind of a different uh,

the freezing or for the free for the freezing of the contradictions uh that frozen off to the cold war. so that it was kind of a resurrection of, of, of cold was searching for. and i think that there are a lot of reasons for that. so we, we believe that these presidents are, when the nato, a blog, attacked an independent country and actually sees part of it starts at it. and them declare it's uh, the independent clause, the independent states there of always imposing on everybody to recognize these states. this is likely a precedent when the post war, a post cold war system was chapter and the helsinki act was chapters at this moment . and of course, the west doesn't want to acknowledge it. they, they say that doesn't matter very much. they are now referring to the ones that have them in 2022, but they are absolutely authentic in trying to conceal the truth about this

aggression and its role in international relations and the they're all of which fall out and that the national relations here is a lot of fab big topics there. i'll return to something a little bit later if i can, but just returning to 1999. what was your assessment? what is your assessment of russia's stance on the nato bombing campaign after time on? has most schools position shifted at all over the years since then? well, that was the turning point. i remember it's quite well that was already a young people who much in the foreign service. and the very many people remember as well. that's uh, there was these famous, so you turn over the atlantic by the russian, by the russian federal government. so you're getting, you pretty. my goal was going to washington to sign. so it's in agreements about financial assistance from the states and the international money into the funds. so what that i don't remember exactly,

but people that decision i want to learn to about the aggression, to make a u turn ends get. it turns out to moscow, this all was a very symbolic and so i think that was the right move to make because it was absolutely clear at this point. that's the only problem is this of the west. all the, all the hopes that there will be a fair international system built up to the dissolution of the soviet union out that the west will keep the problem is that where you want to, to solve you attend the russian leaders at that moment. all these hopes are absolutely useless and baseless the west is having its own agenda and it's implies these, these time. and that is implies a doing away with us live in serbia who knows what will be next time. so the moods right them where kind of a shock, because people really where hoping that this going out, this would never happen. that way hoping that where there were certain openings in the relations between the russian and the west. they were hoping that the,

the 30 minutes of the cold war has gone forever. but the west with his actions proved otherwise. and we are where we are. i think that a lot of things that happen easily, also route back to these very unfortunate to the criminal decision by anybody need to lead us just to point out what the russian leader has said subsequently, invalid were put in stating at the bombing of belgrade was a turning point for moscow itself on one of the defining moments between east and west since the cold war a do you agree that it was significant? how's that? it's absolutely. absolutely. i would like to say that. so this is a, this is a ethics ethics of, of these time and ethics of international relations. and of course, this is a benchmark, a hallmark that we all remember and this will forever stay in our memory. and no matter how old the west tries to,

to consume attempt to put it in the shade they will never succeed. in doing so. the western refusal to discuss the events come shortly after serbian president alexandra boot church warren, that quote difficult days lie ahead for his country. what do you think he meant by that? well, i may be mistaken, but it looks like she was mentioning this decision. that's a reference to the decision of 11th or assembly on the council of europe to meet the customer as an independent states. this is of course, total violation of international law for you guys to give it to counselors illusion . absolute lawlessness places. the police on the example of these rules based international order that the us on this allies promoting where they are formulating the rules and they are asking and demanding that all the artists of each of these rules. it says nothing to do with international. and you mentioned costs of warily

or the self proclaimed authorities there, or how they choose most good trying to use the issue of the nato bombing of deepest lobby as some sort of justification for what is now happening in ukraine. how would you respond to that? as well is difficult for me to comment. so what's the, what's on the mind? i think they'd better think about how to manage the problems that they have. great, it's in relations between christian and build, read. we recently discussed in the secuity call. so, of the issue of the banning of the circulation of serbian deena in the northern parts of, of casa, which means the life of tolerable for thought for certain population of these, of these the area. there are a lot of other things that's cost of lead has promised to build right in the framework of the brussels discussions under the use of the european union. but the gaps,

no single problem. the problem is out of this and things are further being complicates . it's by these uh, the prospect of, of course, so uh, being admitted to the council of europe. this up to so been friends to formulate their reaction. but this is absolutely disgusting, frankly, what the west is doing in these so called solicitation. so i think that the uh, possible defect i started to distribute to think about this events and lots of mentions, something else happening in the other. but, you know, you can solve an ukraine, have both become focal points in the re shaping of borders in europe. however, while the west was quick to back, the self proclaimed independence of the cost of a rapidly quick. i remember when that happened, it's refused to recognize rushes, re unification, to try me. and more recently, for new regions, can i get your, your, why such an inconsistent approach to this?

it just seems to be an opposite different levels as well. the, the absolutely, uh, shameful ends of the blades and double standards. we discussed this issue repeatedly with the rest of the colleagues, but they pretend to be absolutely deaf blind. and now when we raise these issues, we, for example, points out to them that you know, the costs of independence was brooklyn's by the problem. whereas the decision on the crimea was taken as a result of the financing. so if you speak about democratic procedure, so then they way absolutely observed in case of, of russia, but they were absolutely disregard as in case of closer. so of course these are, these are believed on the double standards. so this is the, the cornerstone of these, um, a double stand that sound the policy of rules based international order that the west is trying to impose. i think this is all just for everybody,

for every unbiased scroll up for every unbiased diploma is absolutely clear or what has happened. impossible. and what are the for a lot, what does it fall out of? it's uh on, on all of us, if i can turn away from the uh, you can stop the underbrush tree for a moment or 2 and talk about the un security console itself. so to what extent is it still relevant able to fully function when it comes to conflicts like your brain on gaza? some critics say it's turning into another league of nations which became the funds that had of the 2nd world war. how does the time come to reform the u. n. s. c, and what sort of changes are needed there in your if you well, frankly, i don't think that the skillets across the security council is the relevant. and the, i don't think that it's a price comparison between the u. m. and the league of nations. the big difference is of the existence of,

of the permanent members of the security council who have the rights of each of these is a very important function which x actually should be viewed as the key incentive to find and negotiate the solution. and that's how it usually works. for example, recently a restaurant china to use the veto when you yes, tables resolution, which was actually the green light for you. so to continue what it does in gaza, which reference to the ceasefire, which was actually the main demands of the international community, only as determined determines the imperative of immediacy is fine. so i really felt on the stand, what does it determines to imperative on how it would have been implemented practically. so when he told these draft, and immediately after that there was another draft prepared by a non permanent members of the security council,

which demanded ceasefire. and these dropped was adopted, the bulk of the situation was on the agenda of the security cause of those where there are no deep differences among the 5 permanent members. and so they are, the council is very efficient. forget the council works together. i specifically have in mind for example, that frequently issues or like columbia know some other crisis situation so. so these 2 issues, they are very important. they are very loud, but they do not to present. the bulk of the agenda will disagree with the cause of the counsel, of course, needs to be reformed. everybody agrees that it's needs to be before, but the positions of the cancer has a very different they have anybody for example, acknowledges that's a security council. it should be the compositional disagree with your council should reflect the situation in the world and of that there should be

a correction officer. started can justice was the every come continental issues, numerous and we sure it presents a lot of items on the agenda of security council. so everybody's in favor of adding a african members to the security council. same of all different kinds of age in america. but they are, there is also understanding that's such an important issue as a form of disagree with your call. so uh should i come through a solution which would be. busy ideally consensual or close to this because this is something that can be imposed by a majority to minority, for example, is a vote in the general assembly, this is too important, and this will never work if it is the case and they are comp some diverse, you'll see that version says on the representation, for example, it all shot and some other countries clearly saying that the rest is over representative. and i think that the recent situation that we just talked about discussion, ways in the, in the us live am using clearly shows this,

the western countries, they use blog discipline and the defect to block uh, security costs are from discussing the issues that they don't want to discuss, they have these kids on the beach, so sometimes united states and its allies, they don't need to devote against them. this doesn't count as a veto power because because um, we simply do not have enough votes to proud to remo. the decisions definitely want . so the west is already presented various of the international or arena, you know, they're all of the west is declining, best buy the clear and the voices of, uh, african agent ways in the american countries, uh, sounding loud in loud. and they are not codes in the security call. so either way they should be sure. and just finally, and i hope i don't paraphrase you wrongly but, but earlier you're saying that if you don't have an understanding of the past, you're doing to repeat the mistakes in the future. not if we go, if we look at certain things in the recent past, the past 100 years or so,

you've got the san francisco conference in 1945 famously annual at the post world war 2 order of international relations. the most to summit in 1989, the us and the soviet union, the current, the end of the cold war, essentially paving the way for a unique port of world order. know that the world is again going through a huge change. the next lunmark peace conference b as world offering is there. is there a bill? it's that you for that to happen on where could that happen? well, it's difficult to speak about through this stage because we are not there yet. i think that at this stage the west is still trying to breakdowns that's nothing is happening. that's the world is not changing in the way it is changing and they are trying to degree and the grass that's there waiting position in the world. but this is the process that we, we negatively come to the point where then you,

then you will to really manage the multiple world. and we will of course, have to discuss of the foundations of this world. by the way, i could say maybe some people will not agree with me about the u. m. b. and shouldn't be very helpful in these exercise because the chapter of the item is the basis for international lawyer as you're on the is in itself. it's the, the cornerstone of multi polarity is the question of interpretation. not the fact that the now for example, the shots that needs to be corrected seen in the so that way it's not necessarily so. so why don't you have there when we could discuss the next conference where it should take place and make some traveling arrangements for these so far the way to so just varies, step stubborn. it doesn't want to dialogue, it still has some hoops to inflict to my country strategic defeats or at least a week, and it's significantly, but it's quite obvious from what we see in reality. that's um, this is

a really wishful thinking. i'll follow with some neighbors and they will inevitably come to the understanding that we should talk. we should speak about the root cause is not, that's what happens in 2022 is the for them that this is the uh, the only thing that we can discuss and what we should discuss a lot of things, including gus, lot of you including needs are in large amounts, including the uncapped promises of uh, what's the latest to, to the target and the address and lead us at least a lot of issues. that should be a very frank discussion and we are ready for these. we already, we always the cold for the west foundation side discussion. you know, that we made the proposal proposals on european security and in the, in late to 1021 which with understandingly rejected by the us and by need. so there are a lot of things to be discussed on that. i'm sure we will find a time and place provided the west a takes away,

so rosie glosses and looks at the reality, which is quite green for some transfers right now. well, thank you for having a dialogue with our tea. you've been more than good with your time today, sir. we've been speaking to rest as deputy and foster to the united nations, dimitri pol against the good to see you. the look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except we're so shorter that conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about visual intelligence as the point. obviously is to create a trust rather than fit the job with artificial intelligence. we have so many with the in

the a robot must protect this phone. existence was on the that's the big the band list on the assumption. i'm assuming i should, but have 2 thirds of the georgia dental, the somebody, even if i video are students teaching them to check on board is showing that envisioning here, and then we left ship them to fax. the movie a beautiful solution accessible was in your approval for

the elizabeth the us statement, sound way out of line. that's new delhi slamming washington's wheel locks on the rest of the k opposition. the, the one lot of people in the is national election. so it has the 5 people killed during an age delivery s. as in dog though, while the is wally department assistance is 12 security officials to egypt on costs for negotiations with a lot. the death toll from the low tire attack rises to $144.00. with the media focuses on the heavy handed, the rest of the suspects. we look back at the notes for is torture of christmas,