record and transmit. good evening, there is a big game on the air as the second phase of the russian special operation in ukraine develops, the collective west, which considers the ukrainian conflict as a proxy war against russia, is increasing arms supplies to kiev and introducing new anti-russian sanctions just about this yesterday. agreed with the president of the united states, joe biden, and the leaders of key american allies, who held relevant online negotiations. and now the united states has introduced a new package of anti-russian sanctions. and what as for the supply of weapons, we are talking about increasingly

heavy and strike weapons today. it is known that the new package of american military assistance to ukraine will again amount to $800 million, just like the previous package itself, which, let me remind you, included combat helicopters, armored personnel carriers and passenger shells and the deputy secretary of state of the united states victoria nuland. today in particular. specify what will be included. the next package of military aid from the us and allies is heavy artillery. this rocket long range systems. and these are anti -missile, anti-ship missiles of their leaders that it is necessary to achieve a military victory of ukraine, not a peaceful settlement, but a military victory of ukraine, but russia's response was not long in coming today, a successful launch of the newest intercontinental ballistic missile sarmat, which, although not is hypersonic, but

has the means to bypass any modern missile defense systems, and we will discuss both russian american relations and the politics of the biden administration in a broader context, with big game host dmitry simons. dmitry good evening. it is a great honor for me to speak with you again. dmitry exactly. well, of course, in relation to the sarmatian. this is the answer in the sense that it demonstrates the russians. water availability and that russia cannot be ignored, but it's not a responsible sense that, well, something said, russia decided to launch a rocket. uh, this uh was planned for a long time. this system was known. but the fact that this is a test, but it passed successfully, what called speaks for itself and dmitri i don't know what you think got wet. unfortunately, we live in a period where if you want rockets and artillery, they speak

louder and often more convincingly than anything diplomats can say, but here's one thing that said. uh, german concern els and she is very interesting and very important. he said after yesterday's talks with the bidens and others. i wanted to say that the key leaders of the west there were poland and romania, that's what poland is key. i already knew that. they just suggested that they kinda, uh will replace russia in the top twenty. but now, uh, the place of the great power, we see that it is claiming, romania well, all right, after these very important negotiations. uh, olon schultz said, the next west is taking the position that nato should not be involved in the fighting in ukraine, well, actually this is a positive statement. this statement speaks of pragmatism and would seem to speak of a

desire to avoid military escalation, because that's what the west holds to the position. this is important and interesting. in general, in this case it is more important intentions, but important things are not words. and you know well. e that nicholas ii and on the eve of the war with japan and on the eve of the first world war. he says nothing will happen. because i don't want it. well, europe can wait until the russian tsar goes fishing, his father alexander iii said about nicholas i that in europe not a single gun was fired until the russian tsar wanted it. here is a very good example. you cited , uh, the differences between alexander iii and his son nicholas ii were very important, and alexander iii he greatly strengthened the russian army, but he

never invaded anywhere. he carefully avoided external political adventurers, and nicholas ii, on the one hand, fried the army in many ways, and on the other hand. he had very serious imperial claims, and he was in very risky situations in the first place, of course, but in manchuria , uh, here is mr. uh, the german chancellor, i believe that he does not want war, but in general here, if you look at his country's opposition to ukraine and the positions of a number of western countries. you they were just talking about it, they are supplying ukraine with more and more weapons and more and more heavy, more and more heavy, more and more modern, and they, besides. they openly say now that the goal is for ukraine to achieve victory, so i don’t know what it means to achieve victory. and by

definition, ukraine cannot achieve victory in a conflict with russia because russia has nuclear weapons. and there is no ukraine. so, apparently, it is assumed that ukraine will achieve, and some limited victory on its territory, and then russia will not have to respond with some kind of crushing blow, because the collective uh west. and well, let's say more specifically nato ukraine will defend. but if the question is posed this way, you are already, of course, the potential for a very serious escalation of the conflict, that is, in fact, but nato does not accept ukraine, uh, ukraine some. or at least give both weapons and a promise that can be perceived, but

by the kiev leadership as a guarantee. and here i have a question for you. is there any from your point of view the russian leadership has a red line, for which the combination of sanctions pressure on the supply of weapons to ukraine and some promises to ukraine that what is called the west will not leave it, if some kind of red line, after which russia may decide not only to give the most serious warnings, but also to use some kind of power resource dmitry firstly, i completely agree with you, but the situation is really very alarming. and your close friend i think is former united states secretary of state henry kinsinger, uh, who was the secretary of state and council before that, as national security adviser under richart nixon, who was directly involved in the founding of your center in the united states, he introduced the concept of strategic anxiety. and this is when the great powers, e

make steps in full. confidence steps of a provocative nature in full confidence that they will not lead to a big war, they will not lead to a world war to a clash of great powers, but it is precisely their conviction that a big war is impossible, just in the end and leads to the fact that this war happens, henry of the intestines gave many examples of this, the first world war is a classic example, so on the part of the united states and on the part of nato it seems to me, and especially on the part of european countries, which, by the way, are more openly and deliberately talk about the need for a military victory in ukraine ukraine over russia and just what we are dealing with is strategic liberty. i fully agree with you. ukraine cannot win by definition, and not only because russia possesses nuclear weapons, but simply because the

potentials of these countries are not comparable at all. comparable, russia uses a fifth of the current military conflict in ukraine, and maybe even less than those russian resources of the conventional armed forces, it’s just that in terms of people, russia has an overwhelming superiority in firepower, russia has an overwhelming superiority in aviation in artillery in missiles in everything. moreover, this superiority cannot be compensated, but by western supplies, therefore, even about a victory with conventional weapons without use of any weapons of mass destruction. by the way, speaking, apart from the nuclear plant, there can be no question, but the west is nevertheless increasing these deliveries. in addition, the west is doing even more provocative, or no less provocative deeds. and for example, in fact, the raider seizures of russian tankers that

took place in greece yes, allegedly in the execution of the sanctions of the european union, in fact, such actions can be performed only by decision of the un security council, the decision of the european union is not is international law. so, it seems to me that a very dangerous delusion has arisen in the collective west recently, and this delusion lies in the fact that the pace of the russian special operation, which is actually connected with the fact that russia is not conducting war with the europeans, the ukrainian people and does not consider ukraine as such, as an enemy which needs to be defeated and destroyed, so many in the west perceived this pace of the russian special operation as a weakness as a weakness. yes, and from here all sorts of talk about the possibility, and even a military victory, and here i turn to the sarmatian, of course, uh,

dmitry sarmat is not an answer to the words of victoria well, it's been planned for a long time. and launch, but sarmat is a very important reminder and signal that russia is by no means a weak country, and what can russia say? how can russia respond? yes, you asked a question. well , firstly, i think the most correct and striking response from russia will be, and success is military success in the implementation of the second phase of the special operation, and uh, russian success will show the senselessness and counterproductiveness of the supply of western weapons. well, besides, i emphasize once again russia is a nuclear superpower. russia is one of the most advanced and powerful countries in the field of conventional weapons. russia has the full range of cyber weapons and who, like the united states, does not know this, and it seems to me that russia has given a very clear signal and my question. to you in this connection, dmitry. what do you think of

this signal in washington? i mean start they heard the sarmatian and whether he somehow influences the decision- making or the united states will go in the same spirit, and dmitry and washington probably heard it and they doubt that washington will appreciate it. well, you know, washington convinced itself and this, especially after the cold war and especially during the mother's administration, that, in general, russia can be disregarded, because although in the matter of strategic nuclear weapons. russia is inferior to no one, yet these weapons are so destructive that russia will never decide to use them, and therefore, if you want , in this way, from the point of view of this conventional wisdom of washington , strategic weapons can be excluded from the balance of power calculations altogether. yes, russia has all this, but

the west is the first. uh, they won't hit moscow with nuclear missiles. and if so, then why worry. well, i spent a week in moscow after i flew to washington and i saw the mood of ordinary people, and i talked to officials , and i was especially impressed by what one, uh, a big general told me, but he told me the following, that russia very hard lost to fight in ukraine that russia calls this special operation not a war, and not just like that, not just to underestimate, as it were, the fact that is happening, but because russia really doesn't want full-scale wars in ukraine and with ukraine. well, he said the option that russia would lose there is no such option, and uh, we are counting on the best, but you are ready for what

will be required and uh. i asked him, but what historical parallels come to your mind, who think about it, and he told me very interesting not about russia, he told me about china. so he said, do you remember during the war in korea, china sent its volunteers and this was not enough and the united states, which at first lost strengthened their grouping and, led by e-e general makar, went straight to the borders of the people's republic of china. what the chinese did, they didn't retreat, they sent their troops. yes and that's when it stopped limited chinese operation in korea and this started the war. and after that, the americans had to retreat. they

lost seoul again and in. in the end, president hover, the new president eisenhower, came to the conclusion that it was necessary to put an end to this; such games should not be played at all. here i am, now we are on channel one and i was told such an episode from the history of channel one, there was a film crew of channel one in france and suddenly such a person jumped out in front of them in front of the car, something began to dance, shout to insult and not missed the car. well, he didn’t have a machine gun, he didn’t have deadly intentions at the exit of the car, the operator of the first channel. i hit him so that he flew off and then it was clear that he was very offended. why is he doing this? well, you know, such things should not be done even on the streets of a french city. especially with russians. and it’s

absolutely impossible to do this in relations between a great powers and e, so you mentioned one very important point about tankers. well, they tried to do such things with tankers with iranian tankers, of course, the united states and great britain began to stop, and iranian tankers. uh, they said that they were violating sanctions, that they had wrong paperwork, that they were using this money to encourage terrorism, and so on and so forth. well, what did you do before? they began to seize, and in the persian gulf, england, english and american ships. ah, to seize with the use of force, and in general, london and washington faced a dilemma was there a large-scale war with iran or retreated

and no more tankers were captured. so i really don't want us to come to such kind of mutual tests in relations between russia and nato. i believe the president of the united states, his secretary of state, his national security adviser, his secretary of defense, when they say they don't want world war iii, especially the president of the united states who is rather old. and he still remembers the vietnam war very well, he understands how, perhaps, the danger does not really want to hope that they are not just to say that they will not just think so. and that they will seriously calculate how to avoid such a turn of events dmitry, i also really want to hope so, and uh, i would like to emphasize that the current conflict in ukraine is the first conflict in several decades

, when, in fact, great powers are on opposite sides of the barricades and nuclear superpowers because it's a proxy war. yes, the united states is waging a proxy war and, uh, it's very important not to lose control of this confrontation and prevent uncontrolled escalation, but here the question arises about the quality of the elite. you just brought me to this question when you said that you believe in both presidents biden and jake sullivan and floyd austin and in ton damn i believe that they are not crazy. i don't believe. i believe that they are not the truth, but the quality of the decision in the administration is a much more complex issue. here, from the russian point of view, we are faced with the problem of degradation of strategic thinking in the elites, and in western countries in general, in the first place, this concerns, of course, the european union from here. by the way, their talk about the need

to win a military victory over russia, they admit, even the idea that this is possible, but also this applies to, uh, the united states and joe biden. he is a participant, one might say, of the cold war, but you also understand, and he is quite an elderly person, and here is the domestic political situation in the united states , again, the quality of the elites here, i cannot but mention the recent statement by senator christopher kunz, and who represents the state dallower, and the very state that is in the senate, uh, 36 years old, if my memory serves me, but represented by joe biden, chris koons, was just talking about where is the master of deploying american troops uh in ukraine and direct involvement in the war? yes, now the administration categorically refuses this and the jentsaki, uh, stated that e biden does not agree, but with the position of e from the position of kunz, but here's what you think about how domestic political problems and the problem of elites in the western world affect

uh, n-the policy of the united states regarding ukrainian conflict, i will talk more narrowly about the american and not even the american league as a whole, but american foreign policy in our center. oh, three or four years ago. uh, there was a talk of american foreign policy strategy. and that was before the pandemic. so we sat normally in our e-consult room. our board of directors is comfortable enough, uh, drinking coffee, uh, and even wine, and we had a very nice conversation. and uh, a few people. er, perhaps the most prestigious of those present. eh, they were talking about that needs to be handled very carefully. e with russia that you can not push russia china to

each other. and what, actually, to have russia as a partner would be a great strategic achievement for the united states and next to me, but i was sitting very, uh, a worthy person at one time. uh, ambassador to moscow, one of the most prominent american diplomats. you guessed who i mean, but because it was a private conversation. i won't name him and he didn't whisper dmitry he said. do you understand that everyone who says this is even older than you, i, as it were, are not a very young person. and this is an observation. it was right here the generation of the cold war, even the most aggressive knights of the cold war. they dealt with reality. they understood that you can't do everything in the world. and if you think that you can run into too much. and uh, uh, gradually in the american foreign policy establishment. ah,

but if you like, a feeling of own infallibility and own invulnerability developed. this is very dangerous. now dmitry they convinced themselves what is very obvious? i hope you will not be offended by me, the collective economic smell is much stronger than russia and when this collective west applies sanctions against russia, more and more cruel, and at the same time goes for the so-called secondary sanctions, that is, it begins to twist the arms of american allies and even neutral great countries , like india and, in general, russia. here at this level, on the economic side, it is difficult for someone to oppose. here is the reality. well, who is this, it means in practice, a in practice, this means that you need to think about what else russia can do, and the answer to this was given by

a very simple person, whose name was alexander the great when they brought him a knot in persia that no one could untie, that he took he took the sword and cut him to pieces. so i really do not want the collective west and the united states to push russia to cut this city where it could be dangerous for international security. this could be a very costly experiment for russia, it could be catastrophic for the west but you need to know where to stop dmitry while russia behaves like a responsible great power and pay attention. she except uh, putin's decision to transfer the gas trade in the calculation. uh, up to the ruble, they don’t even introduce counter-sanctions of serious counters

against the collective west, and russia also emphasizes that they are not interested in any way in a military conflict with nato, and you are right that the relative weight of russia is of course less than the weight of the collective west well russia has very a powerful ally and that powerful ally is the non-west. which is striving for a strategic independence that does not succumb to these american secondary sanctions and history with india saudi arabia turkey many other countries. this is also confirmed from the russian point of view. the more the united states will put pressure on these countries, the weaker. they will show up on their own . they are actually chopping the bough on which they sit both in the geopolitical sense and in the economic sense. i mean the role of the dollar as a world reserve currency, but dmitry is extremely interesting to talk to you. many thanks. we will continue with you, and be sure to our, uh, conversation of the topic, inexhaustible, and the big game will return to this

studio in a few moments. the most beautiful end of the olympic season of figure skating on ice star team of champions the best figure skaters of the country and the world not only numbers that are loved by everyone, but also the premier of new programs. after all, the show must continue ice show eteri tutberidze champions

on ice on sunday at the first it doesn’t matter how the stakes are changing building the future we are investing in our earth and confidence is the dignity in this our strength is the strength of our country to justify your trust to support you, really, issuing loans every day.

sovcombank is closer to people and earn. watch the whole video, create in lenta there is everything for a bright easter festive easter cake 250 g with a 38% discount, 59 rubles. 99 kop. just one registration for hinoslug and many

banks at my service. you reinforce each other and just one capsule per day maximum for your microflora, which means for immunity. why do you need a lot of cards when there is one halva with an installment plan for 10 months? up to 6% strengths of different cards are collected in one halva, only one card for everything. you collect a tape recorder city of dreams in magnet and play by your own rules vtb team look for advertising that will help you get a free vtb multicard it is right in front of you increase your ability to easily pay for transfers without a commission return up to 20% yes as partners and that's it

sleep deeply sleep long sleep like in childhood to a large technological jar. it is important to stay face to face with a person for three minutes in two clicks on one call to justify your trust to support you, really, issuing loans every day, sovcombank is closer to people. in short, my father gave me my first car. so i tried it for the second time and then took it for myself. there is also a new one, as i dreamed of at a great price and a loan is also right there for 25 years, we do not stand still. we are investing in the future in achieving safety. here we invest in our children, invest in the future. what is there in the silence of the frozen thicket, where

the heat hid from the cold? when will the heart beat faster ? when life returns with spring what where when spring series finals on sunday at first enjoy. on the air of the big game, dmitry simes and i just talked about the red lines. and that the united states, the collective west, may not understand where russian red lines may be, but, in one case, it seems to me that

russia has formulated its red line very clearly line and not with words, but with deeds, she proved that this is indeed a red line, the intersection of which can lead and has led to a military conflict. this integration is the involvement of the countries of the post-soviet space, with the exception of the baltic states in nato, russia has said many times that for her this is a belli incident and that a and formal entry and a-a, the development of the territory, e of the post-soviet countries by nato and the united states is categorically unacceptable for russia. yes, and this is precisely the main reason why russia was forced to start a special operation in ukraine because nato was taking over ukrainian territory and thus creating a military threat to russia the ukrainian conflict continues

its military phase, but at the same time the united states apparently decided to violate the same russian red line elsewhere in georgia and today in tbilisi, james went under the turai. and this is an official, uh, who is many, many years old. e works for nato e, today he is deputy assistant general secretary. uh, so when he arrived in tbilisi, he said that the doors of nato are open for georgia. and that he deliberately discuss with the government and parliament of georgia new initiatives and proposals related to its integration into nato ivan alekseevich is an attempt to ignite a second military conflict or, uh, this is testing russian red lines. yes, although russia already. it seems to me that she said absolutely unequivocally that this is an unacceptable situation for her,

what is happening? it's too early to say for sure, maybe, uh, a simple version of this statement, what? it’s just nato, the official is working out the standard program, there is a visit and they say what nato officials always say, that anyone can enter the open door policy, especially ukraine and georgia entry, then for them, especially the doors are open. this is a rather routine statement, which is always said. i beg your pardon. yes, here i have to. just maybe another version of uh over uh? more dangerous. it consists in the fact that