does not believe in the strength of the russian people, shoot him and buy him. what’s ready, stop, where are you going, let’s go, dad, people, this is leon trotsky, this is arbitrariness , why are you silent, people? due to the fact that

trodsky’s activities have taken on the character of an increasingly open counter-revolution, the party is faced with the need to expel him for borders of the union of soviet socialist republics. in the past, if you had to go through this path again, what would you do differently, where would you turn, nowhere! but what about your children, father,

friends, comrades, millions of dead? you you didn't understand anything, you cling to little things, i changed the world, no, no, you dared, but nothing worked out, everything you did in your life led you here, to a life of fear and hatred. and it will only get worse, you will rot, day after day, convincing yourself that you did everything right, but you will not believe in it, you will not be able to save yourself even by suicide, because then you will sign your own defeat, i told you that we are with you from the same test, forget it, you are different.

coward, you don't have the will to follow through end, i'm not talking about the framework, ask if i want to return, i will return, definitely, just not to the past, in the future, i threw seeds into the ground, they will sprout, through battle, blood, i showed... people a new world , they will no longer want to live in the old one, never, i set fire to it, it’s galling, you smell, smell, smell, burning, the only thing i regret is that i was not cruel and consistent enough, showed gentleness where necessary was to have a firm hand, retreated where it was necessary to go forward, regardless of any

victims, but nothing, nothing, this world... in the flames of a new war, who knows what it will lead to, and whether your steel will hold out, this is war, a new just world is being built, my ideas are immortal, which means i myself am immortal .

a special analytical edition of the big game is on air, with me in the studio karin kneissl, former russian problems at st. petersburg

university. madam minister, we are glad to welcome you, thank you for taking the time. thank you. yes, thank you for the invitation, i , uh, have been traveling to europe regularly for many years, i visited vienna several times, suddenly i realized, a couple of years ago, that i don’t understand anything about europe, because the europe that i knew, uh, appreciated, somehow gradually disappeared. when you talk about big politics and just about some cultural values, about some approaches to life, about some, well, if you want, each other, i’m not exaggerating, something really

serious has changed in europe, you completely right, i completely share your assessment, it is very sad, i am almost 59 now, and for most of my life i was very devoted to the european union, it cannot be said that i was proud of europe, because we were the old generation, who still fought for civil rights, for freedom, in particular, the 18th century in europe was completely dedicated to soldiers, then the wars of the 20th century followed, and you you know, i am always grateful that my... my ancestors did not move, they could have gone to new zealand or somewhere else, and i lived in the city of vienna, i considered it my privilege, i was very involved in organizing international politics , i knew how to write

letters, how to write, i knew who sakharov was, we wrote letters to brezhnev, and i could be free when i was 20. this seems something extraordinary, because in those years i worked, i knew these countries well, i i knew how much freedom i had, including in scientific work, what future prospects i had, this is no longer the case, europe is literally melting, disappearing before our eyes, i saw how it began, and i thought a lot about it, i i thought when, when all this started, i got sick and began to lose my nature, but i must say that the concept of freedom, justice, this includes

freedom of the press, which now raises big questions, this is the freedom of scientific thought, this is the freedom to act - this is how you raise your children, the freedom to do it as you think is right. all this is disappearing today, the center, which for many years in washington, was very much involved in exchanges, dialogue with european countries, mainly not with austria, but a lot with germany, gradually i began to understand that although the people with whom we met were parliamentarians , experts, sometimes even ministers, although... they had enough, i noticed that the conversation still didn’t work out, because more and more they had some ready-made formulas that they repeated just like that, as if they

we learned them by heart to try to think, to argue not in the sense of who will expose who better, in the sense that maybe we will find some... that’s right, it’s very interesting that you mentioned, these are exactly these aspects, because there were lines that... had to be drawn, it was believed that we were working on behalf of the european commission, and when you went to a certain country, you were given certain points that needed to be spoken out, and accordingly, your activities included bureaucrats, that is, in my assessment, political vision, thinking essentially there was no, there is no diplomacy in this, because i can only speak for international relations, i have never been involved in... finance, there is a very technical approach, but as far as democracy is concerned, it seems to me that the right thing to do is

deep conversations, building trust, and this includes packs, the process of communication, even if there is a conflict, if there are some serious problems, or vice versa, if we are talking about your ally, this is the art, including the craft of conversation, communication before it became an art, that was it. so this art, it began to disappear over the years, from the moment i was a young diplomat, in the nineties, it was different. 20 years later i returned as a minister, the absence of this dialogue lack of communication, we focused on the line that needed to be pursued, that is, this was some kind of plot that needed to be developed, all this was without real involvement in the process, without real communication, all this, of course, spoiled all working methods, influenced them.

i would say that first of all it was boring, just boring, these notes said: i want to talk with a person, yes, of course, on the topics that we had to discuss in order to resolve this or that issue, but let's look at a specific question, for example, nord stream, i remember august 2018, after the bucharist nato summit , at every meeting we did not give the same theses on nord stream, there was a decision between berlin and moscow on this matter and this is the issue of direct gas supplies to germany, and this agreement had to expand, because there is a demand for it, at that time, nato members and members of the european union also participated in these negotiations, you know, i am not a member of nato and should not have answered, but you know,

it could have been a little more creative come up with something, because i knew this topic very well, so getting involved in such conversations and holding a meeting on this topic was simply boring, because we knew in advance that we would talk with angela about 20 years ago, when she was already leading her party christiana was seated next to me at a dinner in washington, which was organized by the conrad dehner foundation, and she still spoke english rather poorly, so she preferred to speak to me in russian, basically she asked why washington is so anti-russian mood, and what can be done about it?

and this is someone walking around, 10 years old, i’m at a lunch at the german embassy and merkel is speaking, it’s like a different person, well , firstly, she sounded very very anti-russian, and secondly, well, she spoke as if everything was absolutely it is clear, as if there is only one possible course of action - a compromise. you’re not just showing weakness, you’re kind of showing that you don’t have any serious moral qualities, and it seems to me that this transformation has happened, not only with merkel, but also with many european politicians, and that this is not only with politicians, but also from all over, at least foreign policy europe, so i don’t understand how this happened.

i'm asking the same question as you, because i saw the same thing when i came back, because from '98 to 2017 i was in this environment, but before that, and you know, then there was the so -called monoculture. a single culture, that is, we, for example, reduced the choice of fruits to two or three; this was such a monoculture within the european union. and it was on everyone levels, including in the scientific community , because the bologna process, in my eyes, greatly united our thinking, united our science, there is no longer that diversity, there is no longer this competitive element that shaped the scientific future of europe. i don't have

an exact answer to your question. and it seems to me, yes, angela merkel has really changed , i never understood, which was launched in the tenth, eleventh year, she had a very tough approach, i remember the statement she made that there is no alternative to the euro, then yes, we know this approach, and it seems to me that this is a very good approach. because creative thinking should always have two or three other options, well, not ideologically , but radical in that there is only one way, which to a certain extent is a drama for the germans, and north america picked up this approach,

because these are the ones, this, because they were one of the first settlers in this territory. therefore, you know, there are different ones, they must be present in human communication, there is no black and white, for a certain period this may work, but no, you need to understand that you may not live together, but you can live next to each other, and this is a free approach, i really appreciate it. new prank from vavan and lexus, this conversation took place during breaks between the cybersecurity summit in estonia, the prime minister of estonia told why she turned off all russian tv channels? oh yes, it was very difficult, it was the problem of how the male kalos

receives income from russia, i must say that this is a big, big scandal, and also about when ukraine will receive the plane. f16, y we don’t have f16, denmark has them, you will see a prank that caused a huge international scandal antifake, premiere, tomorrow on the first, gene snob, product of the stellar group, roman, katya, it’s so good that you’re small, what a pity that you’re small , you follow me, why? i love you, my mongolian, my blind woman, like this for the rest of my life , katya and i love each other, i want you and your father to know about this, who is she, who is she? well, can you imagine, mom, she is the daughter of this very kostina, do you think that out of all the boys, she chose your son, i i’ll bring roman to another school, roma, we thought about your future, my future,

you know, it’s mine, it’s up to me to decide, these children cannot be separated, roma, let’s die together. i agree, only 100 years later, who told you that this is love, let it go, hear, let it go, you never dreamed of it, on saturday on the first, a special analytical edition of the big game was broadcast, when the cold war ended, when the soviet union collapsed, there was the feeling that, in general, they returned to europe, that russia was part of europe, that the russian elite was part of the european the elites, which is about to happen, turned out to be illusory, but then there was still a feeling , well, that we can somehow talk, that we can

have some kind of mutual understanding, now i have a feeling that there is not only a crisis... of trust, which is definitely exists, but i have a feeling that there is a crisis of mutual understanding, that even when we speak the same language, let’s say, we mean different things, and probably, something like the situation that has developed around ukraine today, that somehow... then we will have to get out of this situation, what it will take is diplomacy. of course, successes on the battlefield are very important, for me there is no doubt that where we are now, in relations between russia, we will need to try to find some... with your understanding of european political thinking today,

their self-awareness, in general- then europe is negotiable, you can agree on something with them, which would then be respected, it seems to me, the head of relations, the future, which. must be built on legal relationships, because now there is a complete lawlessness, i'm talking about confiscations, about sanctions, about freezing russian assets, we need to return to political and diplomatic interaction, to a new opening of those, there must be legal actions that will clarify the situation, but i think that this is important if we talk about new diplomacy about

new vision, you need new people, new talents, and you need to select personnel differently , i don’t know to what extent the european commission is looking at new diplomats, we don’t even know how now... it seems to me that we need to rethink national mood within the european union, the process of integration, when rome and paris will again remember sovereignty in international matters, and that they will be able to work again in bilateral formats, as they did before, and it seems to me that in some capitals within.

less, of course, but there are diplomatic traditions that exist in italy , in france, therefore education, language, approaches, principles that were described, including from bismarck , who united germany, he established the foreign affairs of germany, because before that, these were separate lands, separate principalities that coexisted and fought for their borders, bismarck had problems recruiting youth, generals, military, but not peace envoys and ambassadors, and today we lack this art and craft of democracy even now in france and in italy and even in spain , for historical reasons it will be easier, of course, he was not only an outstanding chancellor, but he was an outstanding diplomat, and as you know, at one

time he even was, you read his memoirs, then in general, find out that neither st. petersburg, neither the imperial court in st. petersburg i liked it, he didn’t leave st. petersburg as... a friend and admirer of imperial russia, but at the same time, he had, i have to tell you, he was a convinced german nationalist, united germany, but at the same time he had an understanding , that there are other big countries, then the austro-hungarian empire was also a big country, these countries have their own cultures, their own interests, and even when he... had strong disagreements with france and russia, he understood that if you can’t if they are completely destroyed, then something must be done about them

to negotiate, this culture of negotiating, it still exists in europe , it seems to me that after bismarck this thinking appeared in... black and white and this division provoked the first world war, because today it seems to me that there is no need for much thinking taking this analogy to extremes, of course, something can be considered, but the level of globalization and the common market, which was before 1914, was impressive, there is a book, but angelo, which is called the great fallacy, and he writes that trade is partial guarantee, but

as we are now seeing, there is a big problem between russia and germany, which coexisted, has now changed, a big misunderstanding has appeared, returning to bismarck, we must admit that there are several centers of power, and there is no need to point them out, i was a minister, i never teach others people, what should they do, it’s wrong, it’s their own national interests. that’s exactly what america really, really likes to do, tell what other countries should have national interests. i agree with you, the order that existed in the 18th century, after religious wars, a community of various

sovereign states that. disappears, especially in recent years, because a monopoly has appeared on the value system, when people are told not only what to think, it seems to me that we need to fundamentally rethink and re-examine our history. history, these are the subjects that you definitely need to know, but we have lost this knowledge, and we speak the same language, as you rightly said, but we no longer understand each other, you now head an analytical center in russia, you conduct research in russia, as i understand, most of the time, i also correct me if i’m wrong, that you... in europe, that i didn’t understand

why, because i was looking all the time, that i would see some terrible accusations, that i would see what - your incredibly radical statements, i didn’t see anything of this, what were the complaints against you? you know, i myself have been asking this question for the last 3-4 years, what is my crime, i don’t understand, i only know that i’m on the blacklist, which means that i can’t have a bank account, that’s quite enough to destroy your life, because having moved from austria to france, and i realized that you can’t live if you don’t have a bank account, in 2020, perhaps some of the viewers already know, i was

accused in austria. as if i’m baiting my animals with a newbie, and you know, i went through 26 court hearings, the real reason, about the newbie, i understand that you didn’t find it funny then, but it’s hard for me not to smile when i hear about it, well, what were their real motives for this persecution, you know, there was one photograph that kept popping up, a photograph of me dancing with president putin, and after that, he bowed to me, i also bowed, and i was charged with this as insulting europe for the sake of russia, and you know, even scientific articles were written about this, and it caused huge conversations

, europe, that i was selling europe, so there were a lot of fantasies, a lot of dirty rumors, and there was another one, this is the main reason, but you know, some people who expected me to give them bribes and pay them did not we received them, this happens in austria, you know, they are so small. circles if you don't share with them, don't go with them, don't play their games, it ends badly, i tried to remain impartial and honest, but you know, i never fought for any votes, politics was not my main job, my my main work has always been science, but in 2019 i wanted to return

to science, but i realized that no university was like that, that i was too independent, i... this is at different levels, but everything became complicated, a lot of opportunism appeared , i read what was attributed to you, i repeat, all the time i was expecting that there would be some kind of serious accusation, not necessarily truthful, but at least serious, i... didn’t find anything, and the more i got acquainted with the claims against you, i got the feeling that it was just torn apart,

that your fault was, yes, that you refused to fit into their political correctness, since you were a minister, a politician, were in the public eye, then they had it against you, not only... i think you understand everything very correctly, because i was like such an unguided rocket, unpredictable, i had a different approach. i i always drew the attention of my interlocutor, and i wanted to broaden my thinking, i didn’t want to just read out theses, take photographs for the protocol, i wanted

to change something, for example, i studied the issue of various regions in syria, and you know, in some circles in the european union, there was a very big opposition against this, i also want to tell you that there was a project that we had to discuss with three parties, with the usa, with turkey, with russia, and we had to discuss demining in syria in lebanon and i wanted. then i had to help find support from germany, slovenia, without them it was impossible to start this mine clearance project, and you know, i

talked about this for 15 minutes with ursuly fonder, she answered me only one thing, assad must leave, and then i i realized that some people live according to these models, according to these theses, if we talk about the political program for syria , there was no vision, everything was clichéd, and you know, i’m probably to blame for this, i wanted something do, i wanted to go beyond these models, and i saw myself not only as a minister, unfortunately, i understand what you are talking about, and especially when it comes to syria, i worked as a journalist a lot, in syria and lebanon in the first half of the eighties, and many did not like

my articles, especially when i spoke in the new york times about how syria is a serious country that needs to be treated seriously, but although not everyone liked it, i... not only was not punished, but president reagan expressed a desire to talk to me, and he really wondered if there might be any opportunities for the united states in syria. today i absolutely do not see such, if you like, analytical, intellectual interest in new information regarding countries about which they have already decided that these countries are bad and should be punished. i don't know what to say about this other than wait and see and history moves in cycles, if something happens today it doesn't necessarily mean it will continue tomorrow,

we always tend to think that what happens today is the new normal, and this may just be an interval, i i'm sure we'll have a lot more to talk about, thank you for your time , for sharing your experience and your very interesting thoughts, and on a personal note, i wish you good luck, and for some reason i'm sure you 're here.. than in many european countries, thank you very much again. yes, thank you very much, it was a great pleasure for me to talk with you. you know, reciprocity is the key to success. we're going out to advertise, we'll be back in just a few minutes. if we take it

globally, i think that few people know who is slavsky so far? bomb, nuclear energy, education, medicine. all the elements that made it possible to say that sredmash is a state within a state, can you imagine, to manage such an industry, there is no uranium, there is nothing, everything had to be created, what kind of responsibility is this? he was the master, he was the forest everywhere, he had to know everything everywhere , and most importantly, you need to be able to make a decision , you often send people to their deaths, this is radiation, this is radiation sickness, it’s worth kurchatov, where are you going down, there’s the devil those were very heavily irradiated, he believed that the main task of his life was to create a nuclear

shield, he completed this task, on the 125th anniversary of the legendary minister, yashim slavsky, titan of the atomic age, premiere, on saturday, on the first, season premiere , you almost threw a party there, fet gribavich, where are mine? we went to the corpse, but there was a household worker, kovalev, viktor sergeevich, mayor, i hope to be useful to you, there were definitely two of them, yes, two glasses, two devices, and what is this, we’ve seen this before, which means that before retirement i decided to take up amateur activities, robert , i'll tell you again i repeat, hands behind your back, on the floor, i was not aware that the house was under surveillance, uncle van, but we seem to have the same whole place. ionova, an opera singer, and in her apartment she has the same sign as

our alcoholic. maniac, you think, it is not forbidden to use this word. you will not be saved, great, comrade, there was a maniac, and now a whole sect of maniacs. mosgaz, cherkassov's latest case. well, boss, here we go, from monday, after the program , time to the first. there is a big game on the air, now we will talk with karen georgivich shakhnazarov, an outstanding film director, general director of mastfilm, to my great pleasure, private guests on our program, karan , welcome you, hello, we live in some... interesting times, sometimes

i wish they were a little less interesting, but at least, there are enough events, it’s true, but just now, as i’m sure you know, both president putin , and the secretary of the security council of the patrokhov, and the minister of foreign affairs, sergei lavrov , spoke about the fact that the west, having established itself in russia, is now, of course, in there were many in the past accusations in the same direction, but i have never heard it said so clearly , at such a high level, in general, that great importance was attached to this goal, they sometimes say that the reagan administration or the senior administration, that they had an interest

to the collapse of the soviet union, destabilization, i have no doubt that there were people there who, to put it mildly , did not object to such, such a result, but to make the collapse of another great power a conscious, priority task of the united states, i don’t know that, more clearly, now we are talking about the fact that the united states, after the failure of the ukrainian counter-offensive, instead of drawing a conclusion about the need for negotiations, some kind of , from the american point of view, in my opinion,

is absolutely insane, what do i mean, the matter the whole point is that, well, you have to understand nothing at all, so that, let’s say, russia is not a banana republic, russia is a huge amount of nuclear weapons, a huge amount of other deadly weapons, so to speak, well, in the event of destabilization, very probably the situation here is civil conflicts. most likely there will be and, accordingly, the use, perhaps the use of the most lethal weapon in such a civil confrontation, well, you have to have absolutely no, so to speak, no gray substances in order to want such a situation, so it seems to me that this is some kind of completely,

i i remember, by the way, they were quite worried when the soviet union was collapsing, they were worried in the sense of what would happen to nuclear weapons in the country in a country like the ussr, in general, then bush, in my opinion, was there, and so to say, the americans then, in general, quite rightly realized that such a complete collapse of the country was completely unprofitable for them, so if they set themselves such a goal, perhaps they do, but this, in my opinion, is a completely crazy idea , dangerous for themselves, no one knows where will fly... who will have what here, so it seems to me that the idea is completely pointless and i hope, of course, that it won’t come to that, i generally don’t see the prerequisites for this, but the very formulation of the question is like this, it’s completely crazy, it’s generally speaks not about a very strong

analytical mind, so to speak, that's what the united states has made such a priority. task, to create political instability, well, based on what i said before, i think that there are still enough brains there to understand that this should not be done, even if you, if they want, they they want, of course, as they say, to defeat russia, they want to win this conflict, but it seems to me that it is not in their interests to bring our country to a reasonable position, so how realistic is this for them? or to what extent this is still a kind of game, i can’t say that, i hope that it’s more of a game, still i hope that there are enough people there, quite competent, who, as they say, can tell their management that you are crazy came down, what will we do with russia, if we destabilize it , where will the missiles fly, what will happen to nuclear

submarines, where will all this go, so it seems to me that this is still possible after all. some kind of game, although nothing can be ruled out, i wanted to say this, in the nineties, perhaps, the most the famous and most consistent opponent of nato expansion was george kahn, and cannan was dissatisfied with the fact that the former president, nixon, an adviser to whom i was then, that in general, nixon, partly at the instigation of kissinger, took the position that there was no need to oppose expansion of nato, if the european countries themselves want it, and what if we are talking specifically about the so

-called visegrad countries, that is, it was poland, the czech republic, hungary, well, yes, then, but these countries never particularly wanted to be junior partners of the soviet union , they have they had their own history, their own culture, their own religion, they did not have common borders with russia, with the exception, of course, of poland, which had a common border with kalinin, and we told kennen that well, in nato. there are no fools in washington, they will know where to stop, that’s what you’re saying now, cannan said, well, if they, non-conservatives, get on this train. if you allow them to climb onto the locomotive and start steering, then their appetites will only increase,

yes, you’re right, the ponies won’t know where to stop, that’s why everything you they said it’s very convincing and logical, but i’m not sure to what extent the criterion of logic fits the modern american elite, well, yes, in this sense absolutely, you’re right, you’ve misled me correctly. in this sense, because it’s really my version, it’s designed for people who seem to be aware of a certain, with a certain ability to analyze analytically, as they say, i apologize for the toftology, but in politics in history we know a lot of examples when people do completely senseless things actions that later harm them are us , by the way, we are very close... we see this now in the events that are happening in the world, so i agree, i agree that such

a possibility still exists, that such a possibility exists when - george bush sr. , was, if you like, a witness, and some consider an accomplice, of the collapse of the cia . regular seminars were held with experts, and i participated in some of them. and one thing i can tell you with certainty is that the administration was sending a very clear message, that the united states should not support any separatist movements in the soviet union, it was not said that they need to be resisted, that gorbachev definitely needs to help preserve the soviet union, no, as far as i know, the administration did not go that far, but to consciously and seriously push for the collapse the soviet union, i haven’t seen or heard anything like that, but

now we all see that they are actively trying to liquidate russia as a single country, now there seems to be a seminar in warsaw, organized by a fugitive deputy state duma, foreign... where they discussed how to split russia by military means, and how to create political instability in russia, and ponomarev boasted that he was involved in the assassination attempts on daria dugin. to a number of others, and now he has come to light as a person who helped

organize the unrest in makhachkala, such a person comes to washington and gives a big interview to the very influential washington journalist david ignesius, i’ll tell you straight that it resonated with me, when i read the article... that they were talking in ignesius's living room. i have known ignesius for i don’t know how many years, but definitely more than thirty. and we didn’t always agree, but i always considered him a classy, ​​erudite, pragmatic and noble person, although his political recommendations were, in general, more. yes, such a liberal, globalist, if you like, country, now he is sitting, talking with panavarev

, whom he quotes in the same article, when panomar says how he wants, with the help of ukraine, to overthrow by military means, the russian power, and not only that, he says that he... is not just in washington meeting with american officials, well, you know, at one time, when american officials dealt with this kind of characters, that was the task secret services, well, yes, and this was done in deep confidentiality, and after that they washed their hands very carefully, who is he? meets with officials, the cia admitted in conversations with the new york times that they knew

that people like ponavarev were connected to the ukrainian ukrainian intelligence services, that they not only took part in the murder of dugina, but also tatarsky, and a number of other people, this is what they are playing with, which, like an attack, can also respond, because again, earlier during the cold war there was actually iron , the rules in the cia are not to attack kgb employees, not so much out of gentlemanliness, but because they understood, yes, they understood that there could be an answer, absolutely right, somehow now i see, these are the sentiments in washington and more specifically in the administration biden, what they can generally afford

more and more and more. the consequences, what do you think, i think, we have often talked here, and you yourself have often talked about this, that it is generally obvious that the level of quality of the american political elite has fallen, this is already so obvious that it really is. as they say, it’s noticeable that this is not speculation, not our speculation, political scientists, analysts, people who are trying to deal with this area, in fact, when the quality of, as they say, bureaucracy declines, it commits the most insane, actions that are not calculated and maybe later

return.