veiling our kids, we have a mass surveillance state here with top that says um, okay, we add a say 5 on every thing. we do this a go here, and upon this day it's no different than me and go here and batler named biden, who probably ever been running our government. we don't need to have good war 3. we did actually work with china. did you know that we work with china now we got the chance to speak to jose vega himself, who said that the collective west is pushing a confrontational policy, but he expressed his hope for just for a change in the future. the west, as we like to call it doesn't want peace in the world. we know that boris johnson has sabotage. the peace talks that happens in april of 2022 but could have stopped the. busy or in ukraine,

we know that the nato has no intention of staffing any of the 3 front world mores. whether it's e's real or whether it's taiwan or whether it's brain they wanted more students and you and anybody who present any kind of alternative or threats to that and to start talking about these is going to be silent during my case chokes out of the rooms they want to criticize, you know, china or russia for being authoritarian, but i live in the united states with, you know, has free speech supposedly. and that's how we get treated for using our 1st amendment. right. so what i believed in the american people mean that's why i'm running for congress. i believe that the american people, if they are presented with the right, not just information but the right truth, that we can work with the chinese and the russians. and that we can actually cooperate and not have this and tag in this to grow. i genuinely believe we can make something happen where people decide, but stop or let's work together or? well, that's the update this alice, you can get further details on all the stories. well, following on our tea,

just come by now the, the russian states never as tight as i'm one of the most sense community best. most all sense of the

speed. what else holes question about this? even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin media mission, the state on russia to day and split the ortiz full neck, even our video agency, roughly all the band on youtube, the payment services for the question, did you receive a twist, which is the the

hello and welcome to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter lebow. zalinski says camp does not want to prolong the war and make it last for years. is even suggested using intermediaries to achieve that and at the same time, can please for greater nato involvement. as usual, zalinski is steps between a rock and a hard place, the cross knocking ukraine. i'm joined by my guest, den cabal look and pittsburgh. he is a professor of law and the author of the plot to scape goat russia and kills, and we cross the pascal last task. he is an associate professor at kyoto university, a gentleman cross type roles and effect. that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciated, pasco, let me go to you. here. we've had a flurry of comments coming from the former president of ukraine's zalinski. he's

no longer legally the president and even under the constitution of the country. but you know, he's talking like, just want a prolonged war. he doesn't want to have it last for years. looking for intermediaries, possibly another, a piece summit after the failed, 1st one, which could include russia. but the same time he wants a no fly zone over a western ukraine. obviously the always a asking for more aid, all kinds of a particularly um, financial aid, ukraine is facing international default immediate. it's very soon now they're in very big financial troubles here. well, is there an attempt to change the narrative? uh, is there an attempt to change course on how to end this conflict? how do you read it? because it's kind of all over the place. pasco, honestly like when you reached out to me yesterday with that article, i tried to find the original source. i have trouble to locate it. and what i found

was, uh so let me see this. elaine skis explanations of how they still want to the feed . russia and how the, oh the, the on the right piece is, is it just peas according to the ukraine, your piece formula. and that, that's something that can be said 2 or 3 days ago. at the same time, it is very much possible that these kind of talk from him, these rhetorical chase gets older. so oh, happening at the moment with me with mr. savanski, i just don't know what is the case and who is currently in charge of what he is saying. he has being consistently talking out of both sides of his mouth, which is very different from what we've heard from. let them you put in who in a rush has had a very consistent narrative to get back to you with what they wanted. so the one thing that i'm waiting for is for either mr. lensky or joe biden, or somebody in the west to actually actually start picking up rochelle. and it's

all 1st for real peace negotiations, which would at the end, we know that by now that we know that for 2 years, the main pillar of that would be ukraine neutrality. so as soon as somebody starts saying, we are again serious about contemplating you printing and you try that, she has missed this last. it was 2 years ago during the eastern border negotiations . then then i will start believing that something is really moving until and unless that happens, i do think it's just more rhetoric out in the east there in order to, you know, satisfied the demands of newspapers in different parts of the western world. yeah. and, and to keep the ukraine story. uh, at the top of me keep it as a headline here. yeah. you know, 10, it's interesting when task outside, you know, because the legitimacy of, of zalinski in ukraine is quite questionable. but after the dimension debate,

one has to wonder who's running the show in washington, d. c. i mean, a more ambiguity going, i was going to, you know, i, many times and this program called the biden's war and things like that. i mean, well, i don't know if it is his war, but i don't know whose words it is at this point here. i mean, again, it gets more and more convoluted. we, if this is vitamins policy, well we saw from the debate, we really don't know what he's talking about most of the time. and so who in the administration is deciding these things it's gets there's one layer of a mystery after another. go ahead, dan. yeah. well, i think certainly anthony, blinking is a big player and all of this victoria newland had been i guess she's gone now to the administration. i don't know, but she may be lurking behind the shadows. uh but yeah, no, you raise a good point. i mean, the guy who, i guess has his finger on the nuclear button is completely absent. you know, they,

they say that he's just not, they are no ones inside that body, you know, and it's a very sad and, and again, but it's very dangerous because it means there's on elected officials for sure. like a blank and who are really in charge and these are near cods who want more . and really i, i've said before, you know, every president, since world war 2 is seen, one of their main tasks as preventing nuclear holocaust, you know, protecting americans from world war 3. if they did anything else, right. this administration seems to want one or 3, and i think part of that is that you do not have a chief executive as a functioning cheap, cheap executive at the helm to check these crazies at the crazies are in control. and you know, it makes me very afraid and it makes me very afraid to pan. you're absolutely right

. ever since the 2nd world war was the primary mission of the chief executive, the united states is to avoid a new killer holocaust here. but posts go, we have with this administration, they seem to have rejected the idea of deterrence, of new killer deterrents. and this is what, you know, they, they talk about who is a saber rattling, but it's really the west that is doing it because they no longer play by the rules of deterrence. i mean, they nodded states and the soviet union were ideological opponents. okay. and they kept the peace. there is no ideological difference here, except for i would say the west as far more ideological. but if you don't play by the rules of, of deterrence, that's the nightmare scenario pass. go. they don't believe in deterrence anymore, or they belief in the thing, one way deterrence, they do not for cease russia as somebody who has a legend legitimate reason to do with the terms the to me,

the west is so full of it's set off at the moment that it has lost a capacity for strategic empathy. it trying to understand what the world looks like from your opponent's viewpoint is a basic necessity of any saying foreign policy make. and the last 30 years off, up there, really polar of the pull above and has taken that away. and so people like mister blink and all of us, they are literally not able to perceive any more the world from the viewpoint of the russians. and therefore, they don't fact does that and therefore they think constantly rationalize puffy. they do not think it's really, this is a super huge problem. and it might london in a nuclear on a nuclear holocaust, if it continues, because the russians are not the last thing. i don't believe groceries bluffing well. then because from the brushes point of view, this is ex essential. i mean, we have an incoming for and affairs are for the european union call us and she

wants the breakup of the russian federation. i was pretty, ex suspenseful. don't you think? i mean, and the russians do believe in deterrence, and if you don't, if you have all of this ambiguity and decision making, it's gonna make you apprehensive at the very, very least. go ahead den to. yeah, no, i mean, the russians do have an extra essential, a threat. you know, the fact that these radar systems in russia were packed by ukraine that have nothing to do with defending against you credit. right. they were created under the soviet union at, as you know, so that they could perceive strikes from intercontinental ballistic missiles from the united states. so of course watch has to say, are you destroying these radar system? so you can have 1st dried capability against us. i mean, that would be a rational conclusion to be drawn. meanwhile, yeah,

a bite and saying ukraine can use us in western weapon rate to attack russia deep within its territory. you have this attack on crimea and criminal crime, e and civilians recently, which may have used us weaponry and re cognizance. um, how could you know if she were on the other foot, if, if cuba, and, you know, during the cuban missile crisis, this was a possibility, was using russian technology to attack targets within the united states to kill beach doors in miami. and the us would immediately respond. i mean, the, how do we know that john kennedy said that that's what we would do. so obviously russia is under x is the central threat and frankly rush, it has to be applauded for it's incredible restraint in the face of all this. well, that's go, that's, you know, we, we know that, um, the defense minister here spoke to the secretary of defense in the united states

for the 1st time, i think in 16 months. and we don't, we don't know what the read out is, but i can well imagine is that get your drones out of the black sea and of course not threatening, but saying there could be consequences if they stay. ok, again, being very restrained pasco, that's maybe the only also to follow the space that it seems that for the 1st time these casualties at the beach is of us, the full, i actually manage to worry people in the us in the highest levels. the, the secretary of defense to actually say like, we need to signal that this was not the intended. and that's actually something i believe probably this is something that, at least from the us side might not have been intended. and maybe i'm being too gracious here. maybe it was, but it looks to me as if though based might have been a genuine kind of accident,

like real collateral damage. and if the us for the 1st time on the stuff that they might have cross the line, then maybe we are getting closer to a point where the strategic empathy as i just said, is again on the table, which is the minimum. yeah, but why don't you go get us go, discuss, i won't be so generous because it will have drones are being shot down over the black saved in the united states is going to have to reply and do they really want to go? i will go up the escalation ladder that's it will be the ball will be in their court pest go quick. before we go to the break. recently we have seen that the united states when push comes to shop, they actually walk back from the brink as with the wrong, i do think the same still goes for russia. our 3rd world war is not in the interest of the us and they do walk it back sometimes. and i hope it's the case also the start. well we have to keep our fingers crossed here. gentlemen, we're good to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on ukraine state without the

same rom just don't have to see power is the economy and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves will depart, we choose to look so common ground the the welcome back across stock were all things are considered computer lavelle to manager were discussing ukraine. the

let's go back to dan in, in pittsburgh here. dan, it's been reported that of a foreign minister, a lot better off had a conversation with the us in bass that are here in moscow. and the read out is pretty simple. we are no longer at peace, very interesting statement. how do you interpret that? well, 1st of all, he's stating the obvious that the u. s. is engaged in a proxy war against russia. um, there's no way to interpret the situation any differently. so 1st of all, i rob is simply stating what the world you know recognizes. but obviously what he also is saying, and that is a warning he's saying that look, we're not gonna sit around and continue to not respond to this. and, and that you, the united states is going to be a target. if you continue to attack the rushing heart land and you continue to

threaten rush ex essentially, we will have to respond. we haven't responded so far against any united states targets, but that they may be coming soon. and i do hope the us gets them as well. task out, i mean to see what, obviously the nato is beating, rushing into responding in a way that they can point the finger is that the russians are escalating. the russians haven't taken the bait thus far, but there's a wide variety of things that can happen. so satellites being destroyed, drones being destroyed, i mean, it's good. it'll be hard to make the argument, you know, article 5 has to be invoked. okay? so i mean, this is the, this is what makes it very, very tricky is we, we see both sides in parlaying. that's absolutely true, which is why this is such a dangerous moment that this is something that a lot of people have warned about, including mr. law girls who said, if this keeps spirally, then you know,

a, an accident might be interpreted as a publication or a pro vocation is next it and then we don't know anymore. what's happening i'd, i do not believe, but the decision makers in moscow in washington. and even the, the satellites in key if and, and process and so on, that they, that all of them are on the same page. this is why it is imperative, absolutely. imperative to get back to the coach, the ations. now, because we are rubbing closer and closer to a, a gulf of tonkin bowl and, or, or a, what, a lot of these issues, one of the sparks that can really cost another general european war or a 3rd. well, yeah, well and then, you know, when, when a president of united states, even if he's a candidate for re election, finds himself in a very deep trouble. i have to watch my language here of focusing the worlds that i think the public attention on foreign policy is always one of those things you can

do here. it, it, it really bothers me very much a can in including everything we have said here. is it, there is a path forward, i mean, the russians have said this, we have a starting point. now you may not like the starting point. i get that. okay, i got it. okay. it's called the ghost base of it, where you draw the line in the sand here. let's start from that point. okay. the west refuses even to put up anything except for this ridiculous zalinski program. go ahead, den to yeah, i mean we have to be reminded that back in march of 2022, there was a deal on the table that apparently zalinski would have been willing to accept which would allow the ukraine to keep all of its territory. that the u. s. u k blocked. you know, the truth is that deals off the table. they're not going to get back. well, they'll never get back right be, and they won't get back to don bass certainly. nor should the, in, in, in, in my own view. and the us and the west, you're gonna have to wake up to that, you know, but you mentioned that yeah, that the, a president,

that's in trouble and dimes and trouble. they liked to focus elsewhere. so to, to try to, to be able to win. but you know, one way to focus else. why, how about bringing peace to somewhere? you know, now you've got a start of who are the win is ridiculous. the american people, the polls show they want peace, they don't want to keep supporting you credit. they want the us to stop to stop supporting israel's war. in does it, you know, why can't the administration wake up to the fact it may be making peace could be a winning a winning strategy for them? well, i mean pascal, i mean, if we look at the recent elections in, in europe, the, a piece of proposal is something that is far more positive. i mean, we, when we see a political party after political party supporting the american position on ukraine, they suffer at the polls. okay, badly. and we're going to see one in the u. k this week as well. that will probably

go. both parties are very pro war, but we've seen this in the, in the european elections. that there's a lot of anxiety about where the european union is going. always towing the american line pascal that is true. on the other hand, unfortunately, it's not the not yet. i mean, the centrist parties that are basically pro bore in, across the board in europe still have something between 50 to 60 percent of, of support. the 40 percent that they lost is pretty huge compared to where they are coming from. but it is not huge enough in order to be aligned slide to kind of take them out of power, which is what we're seeing in the u. k. like you've changed from one pro war party to the other one. and while support is roading it the, the, the, the nurse shelf, the system is still strong enough to keep the, the people who actually want to push forward the war in power. and that's, that's, that's a tremendous problem. and i would hope that at some point, they understand that they need to change the narrative and didn't need to be come

pro peace in order to remain there. but this, you know, it's a ship, it's a ship and it's below course. and i don't know if we can avoid the iceberg on time, although it seems as if though, the general public wants to is, there is theory. it was to continue your metaphor, post going. i mean, we all see the iceberg. it for everyone can see it just like we saw during that debate. everybody can see what's going on here. then you just said moments ago that the dog bass should not be returned to ukraine, explained. well, i've been to the dom bass peter 3 times in the last year and a half. and i can tell you that those folks don't want to go back to ukraine and why? because ukraine began attacking those people began attacking their own people. they were their own people at that time. they were part of ukraine and they attacked them because they were russian speaking people, and 14000 people died in that conflict between t as in the dom, best even before the special military operations began in 2022. i think, you know,

once ukraine went down that road attacking its own people in the dog bass, it's seated any right to have that as part of ukraine. in any case, these are historical parts of russia. these the, you know, the john bass was the backbone of the russian revolution of the civil war and, and frankly, of the soviet union and of russia. you know, it was the industrial hard land. and uh, you know, if they're not going back, they never want to go back in the their way. she should be respected. yeah, well, self determination is something that we hear a lot about here. let's go, what country threatens ukraine more russia or the united states? russia, as the russia is the one that, that bombs, the ukrainians, and the united states is the one that drives the ukrainians into the russian by on it. so if i was ukrainian, i would say,

i would probably hate both of them. i mean if i was a very new that's their that's fair. yeah. keep going. now it's it's, it's an absolutely horrible thing. i mean the ukrainians are the greatest lakes victims. i mean every day ukrainians have a great this victims update. the 2nd victim is the russians. the, the, the ones that i wish were more humane would be the warmongers video collins in the united states. so actually on the stand that know we're playing with human lights here, but that's something that i think does not cross their minds because they still see this as a strategic victory. which in all fairness it 8 us has never been in a better place into european theater off of geo politics than now. even in the last 30 years, i mean switch over to your strategic competitor check, get the europeans all behind you, even to what you want to do in, in china check. i mean, this is a huge us like 3, but it comes with a lot of the premiums. yeah, well then i agree with pascal, but i,

even though the united states has gone through the check check, check that pascal the. i don't think that's necessarily good for a year a, but i think the a lot of european voters are beginning to realize that, dan, yeah, well, i mean, europe lost its lifeline, which was natural gas from russia. i mean, and that's what the partly, what do you guys wanted to do in this conflict is to cut them off from that so that they depend on us natural gas, which because of transportation costs will be a lot more expensive. if i were a german in particular, i would be just absolutely furious that my economy had been wrecked, not by rupture, but by the united states. and look, the people in europe are waking up to this. the elections in france show that, i mean, i think the elections turned out the way they did in large part because of frances, a terrible foreign policy in regards to both russia and, and israel, and a,

you're going to see more governments fall in your is they realize they've been sold a bill of goods by the united states. pascal, what is next year between now and the election? because everybody uses that as a benchmark here. you know, we have to wait up until the election, but what, what happens after the election in the united states? nobody talks about that, go ahead bus, go ideally, something would change, right? ideally, we would move towards toward final reconciliation with ross showing the escalation with china. but to me, i think it's, that's probably my inner fairy tale. and um, because what we have seen coming out of previous elections in the united states is that the permanent states carries on. so i have no objectives or, oh, judging from from past elections that something is fundamentally going to change. maybe in the best case, we will see you at the escalation with a rough shot, but that would probably mean the re focusing of us efforts to china,

which might be an even bigger test that well you over to i, but rapidly running out of time. but then i, i do know that this ukraine's on its last legs, so you can make that case here, but nato nato is not on its last legs. people have to remember that in this conflict is gone, going to be over for quite a bit of time. go ahead, dan. well, that's right. you know, i mean, of course the candidate donald trump is talking about making piece of the new crime . he says it can do it 24 hours. um, you know, that is, you know, could be taking his bluster, look, he made good. um, you know, uh, noises before the 2020 election and really didn't. he didn't not become a friend to rush, i think because of pressure from the deep se, well, you know this data, unfortunately we've run out of time, but i, i'll leave you with this. not with the, with the wealth of you. even if donald trump gets selected, which i think is very unlikely in the, in the, the way the system is designed. but bill and pay to him before he is

a knock you rated. even if he wins. just i'll leave that with both that talk with both of you. that's all the time we have gentlemen. i want to thank my guests in pittsburgh and in kyoto. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at our to see you next time. remember prospect the take a fresh look around his life. kaleidoscopic isn't just a shifted reality distortion by power to division with no real opinions. fixtures designed to simplify, it will confuse who really wants a better wills, and is it just because it shows you fractured images, presented to this, but can you see through their illusion going underground?

can the we must face the simple truth to protect americans of the land that welcomes immigrants must 1st secure the border and secure it now. but just like beauty is in the eye of the beholder. what defines border security depends on the politician talking about it. however, with the election of claudia, shine balm as the new president of mexico will the former un climate scientist, the more focus on the environment in the future, or the present crisis happening at their north and southern border on sky, no use. and this is perspective the president.