on the the hello and welcome to cross ok. we're 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, then cabal, look and pittsburgh. he is a professor of law and the author of the plot to scape goat russia and killed. so we crossed the passcode last task. he is an associate professor at kyoto university, a gentleman cross type roles, and the fact that means you can jump any time you want. and i always appreciate 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 of 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 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 typically, um, um, financial aid,

ukraine is facing international default immediate, it's very so now they're in very big financial troubles here. well, is there a, the 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, select misters, a lens keys um explanations of how they still wanted the feed russia and how the oh the, the old the right piece is, is adjust piece according to the ukraine, please formula. and that, that's something that can be said towards 3 days ago. at the same time, it is very much possible that these kind of talk from him, these rhetorical chased is 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's saying. he has being consistently talking out of both sides. okay. smiles. 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 actually with what they wanted. so the one thing that i'm waiting for is for items zalinski or um, 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 the and we know that by now that we know that for 2 years the main pillar of that would be ukranian neutrality. so as soon as somebody starts saying, we are again serious about contemplating you printing and you try to see has missed this last you 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, the bonds of newspapers in different parts of the western world. yeah. and, and to keep the ukraine story uh at the top of it, keep it as a headline here. yeah. you know, dad, 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 more ambiguity go ahead. i was going to, you know, i'm a many times and this program called a biden's war and things like that. i mean, well, i don't know if it is his war, but i don't know who is worth it. 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 2 are really in charge. and these are near cods who want war . 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 sheet chief executive at the helm to check these crazies, the crazies are in control. and you know, it makes me very freight and it makes me very afraid to dan, you're absolutely right. ever since the 2nd world war, the primary mission of the chief executive, the united states as to avoid a new killer holocaust here. but the passcode we have with this administration, they seem to have rejected the idea of deterrence of nucular 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, the united 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 is 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 indeed, in one way deterrence, they do not for cease russia as somebody who has a legend legitimate reason to, to who determines 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 view point is a basic necessity of any thing foreign policy make. and the last 30 years off up there, really polar of the pull,

the bowman has taken that away. and so people like mister blinking then all this, they are literally not able to perceive any more the world from the viewpoint of the russians. and therefore they don't fact to that day and therefore they think constantly rush res bluffing. they do not think it's rita. this is a super huge problem and it might blunder in a nuclear or a nuclear holocaust if it continues. because the russians are not the last thing, i don't believe groceries bluffing. well, i think, dan, because from the rushes point of view, this is x a central. i mean we have an incoming of foreign affairs of our for the european union call us. and she wants the breakup of the russian federation. it's 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 and beauty and decision making, it's going to make you apprehend. so that's a very, very least go ahead den to. yeah, no, i mean, the russians do have an extra central thread. 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 proceed, 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, by just 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 being civilians recently, which may have used us weaponry and re cognizance. um, how could you know if she were on the other foot, 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, 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 it, get your drones out of the black sea. and of course not threatening, but saying there could be consequences if they say ok again, being very restrained pascal. and that's maybe the only positive out of those states 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 is strategic empathy. as i just said, is again on the table, which is the minimum. yeah, the best buy block or go get to us go. this guy, 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, and do they really want to go? i will go up the escalation lot or 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 brain as with the wrong. i do think the same still goes for russia or 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, they start, well, we have to keep our fingers crossed here. gentlemen, we are good to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on ukraine states without the beautiful sun soaked vineyards nestled among some breast, picking the rolling hills as a gentle breeze comes off of the surrounding sea comic imagery of french one country. but this is not france. we are in a coupon, rush out on the black sea, where recently they've got the serious about making some world class one the of wanted to come

here since i was 12. when my grandfather told me that his mom came from russia that we were, i was part russian. i didn't plan on staying this long. i was gonna look around, i was gonna see if it was for me. but then i came. and then i was like, i remember when i go home, i've never been happier in life than i am here. so i've only lived here a few months, but i wanted to tell you what fascinates me about russia and share the stories of other foreigners who lived here like jay who worked as a chef and now raises godes and makes cheese in the countryside to like chad who has been granted political asylum because he's being persecuted by the f. b. i. us, embassies. and for countries that come after me it's, it's wild like an american family that recently moved to russia with 6 children. i've never felt safe for my entire life. then living here, the to

take a fresh look around his life. kaleidoscopic isn't just a shattered reality. distortion by power to division with no real opinions. fixtures designed to simplify will confuse who really wants a better wills, and is it just as a chosen for you. fractured images presented is 1st. can you see through their illusion going underground? can the story is we are, which are ours to make. you know, i'm not really you care about me. if you care about the play. i wish somebody could

just tell me why this is their hair patriot lynching beating poverty. why supremacy is just the disgusting campbell, the people in mississippi voted on a flyer, and 65 percent of the people voted to keep the car and fly our purposes to this in the name of the competitors. so, because of these monuments that you see everywhere or not, they're not monuments to the confederate government, their monuments to the, to the soldiers, to the batteries. you know, if we're going to be offended by everything, every negative part of our history, we have to get rid of everything the welcome back across stock were all things are considered. i'm curious about your manual. we're discussing, you create the

let's go back to dan and in, in pittsburgh here. dan, it's been report a bit of a foreign minister, a lot better off had a conversation with the us and 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 organs, russia. um, there's no way to interpret the situation any differently. so 1st of all, our office 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 russian heart land and you continue to

threaten russia. x 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 russia into responding in a way that they can point the finger that the russians are escalating the russians . having taken the beta thus far. but there's a wide variety of things that can happen. so satellites being destroyed, drones being destroyed, i mean, it's gonna, 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 it is just such a dangerous moment. then 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 as an accident, then we don't know anymore. what's happening i'd, i do not believe that 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 negotiate ations now because we are rubbing closer and closer to a, a gulf of tonkin mold and, or, or a lot of both of these issues. one of these sparks that can really cost another general european war or a 3rd world. 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. i'm focusing the world's

a big the public attention on foreign policy is always one of those things you can do here. it, it, it really bothers me very much. you can 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 all this, i live in the sand here. let's start from that point. okay. the west refuses me even to put up anything except for this ridiculous zalinski program. go ahead, den. 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 blocks, 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 are going to have to wake up to that,

you know, but you mentioned that yeah that the a president that's in trouble and dimes in trouble. they like to focus elsewhere um 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, you know, you gotta start a war. the wind is ridiculous. the american people, the polls show they want peace. they don't want to keep supporting you crate. they want the us to stop, to stop supporting israel's war in the eyes that you know, why can't the administrator can wake up to the fact that maybe making peace could be a winning a winning strategy for them? well, i mean pascal, i mean if you 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 to both parties are very pro war, but we've seen this in the, in the european elections. but 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 enough 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 kicked him 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 once does, 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 decide moments ago that the dog about should not be returned to ukraine. explain, too. 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 f and the dom bass,

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 as it seated any right to have that as part of ukraine. in any case, these are historical parts of russia. these the, you know, the don bass was the backbone of the russian revolution of the civil war and, and frankly, of the soviet union and of russia, you know, as the industrial hard land and, uh, you know, it is, they're not going back. they never want to go back in their way. she should be respected. yeah, will 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 the 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, well that's a very new that's their that's fair. yeah. keep going. nights it's, it's an absolutely horrible state. i mean the ukrainians are the greatest lakes victims. i mean every day ukrainians have the greatest victims of it. the 2nd victim instructions 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 as never, being in a better place into european theater, off of geo politics. the 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 63, 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 last, it's 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 turn 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 government small 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. oh, judging from from past elections that something is fundamental. you're going to change. maybe in the best case, we will see you at the escalation with russia,

but that would probably mean the re focusing of us efforts to china, which might be an even bigger well over time or rapidly running out of time. but then i 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 peace in ukraine. 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, noises before the 2020 election and really didn't. he didn't not become afraid to rush, i think because of pressure to from the deep state where you know the data. unfortunately, we've run out of time, but i, i'll leave you with this thought with both with relative you. even if donald trump gets selected, which i think is very unlikely in the, in the,

the way the system is designed. but they'll in peach 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 the, [000:00:00;00] the,

the rabbit collapse of the ottoman empire gave the arabs hold for independence. but the colonial power, so their future differently. great britain and france agreed on the seizure of the arab lands under the guise of the so called mandate of the league of nations. this bible play caused particular indignation in a rack, which was to get under the control of the british. in may 1921 rest with claim for independence broke out both assuming and that she took part in it. soon the rallies turned into a real uprising against the invaders. more than 130000 people took up arms. britain urgently began to transfer reinforcements to a rack and used aircraft radius war secretary, winston churchill birch, they use of chemical weapons against the rebels. and general ser i on their hel dane bordered the destruction of any village where weapons were found. burning a village properly takes a long time,

an hour or more according to size paulding recalled cynically. in his memoirs, the mediaeval cruel, the paid off, the revolt was crushed. however, separate his empire had to make serious concessions. in 1921, it recognized bustle. the 1st, as the king of a rag time gave part of the power to representatives of the local population. v. a racket revolt marked the beginning of the national consolidation of the country and became an important milestone on the weight of final independence.