sunni sectarian difference here which is playing a very big role in what's going on in syria right now. well peter let me just to get back to what was discussed previously before the interruption i mean there are two dimensions to the to the situation in syria now there is on the one hand a very legitimate powerful movement of civilians who are claiming in fact change in the country and access to democracy to social justice to economic and political rights and this should not be undermined this this is a powerful and legitimate movement which started peacefully it's been only since a month or a few weeks that it has become militarized which is in fact leading to the internationalization of the conflict but so far it has been in majority a peaceful movement now these movements are claiming change and access to power and the end of the assad rule over the country there is another side to the debate which is now the involvement of the international community and in fact the fact that syria is in a web of strategic alliances which is in fact trying to gain the momentum to take

advantage of the political instability within syria to try to shape the geopolitical game in the middle east and we have calls made by neo conservative think tanks in america calling for military intervention regime change etc to build on this momentum and this is problematic highly problematic because the movement in syria has been very powerful and legitimate and has gained momentum inside and in the region if there are calls for military intervention if there are links made to syria's choice of partners in the region or syria stance in the arab israeli conflict that would bring that would deliver to my eyes what has been so far a very powerful movement and a call for liberty and democracy i agree max i tend to agree with that area if we do get a military intervention which i still think is likely they each though it's the outsiders that will determine the political outcome the eventual outcome on the ground in syria and it may have a whole lot to do with what i mentioned earlier when mentioning and you around.

yes. first of all one has to avoid. really be critical about some of the kind of. sorts of simplistic narratives that are recycled continually by the media and this from what i'm hearing now also by experts as well you know about democracy about human rights the syrian people as a whole rising up because there are thousands in the streets but you know there are millions in the country. and i think the same problem applies to our conception of intervention is being narrowly reduced to direct military intervention you know either invasions or bombings and so forth there has been intervention in syria by the united states and by others but i'm going to focus on the u.s. for several years at least and now even if you knew nothing else what you will see described in the embassy cables that were published by wiki leaks is

a pattern of the united states. providing funding to opposition groups that are tied to ultimately with the muslim brotherhood in syria and so forth this is not a secret what's also not a secret is that obama spokesman stated very clearly that the united states is pursuing a range of policy options what is known is special in intelligence circles and other circles as a continuum of force which involves sanctions dissin from ation campaigns psychological pressure attempts to isolate the regime and so forth and this is a kind of measure that's being put forth between put forth in front of the security council right now so there are all sorts of forms of intervention intervention has been happening and it's mean happening since before these protests even began ok if i go back to you david what do you think the outcome will be what. kind of syria i

mean i mean everyone i don't think anyone will shed a tear on this program to see the assad family go no one ok it's more about a process what do you think the end game is i mean and i said facetiously you know what kind of jeffersonian democracy what kind of country do you think is going to be there is a going to be hostile to the west it's going to be and will continue a serious can traditional foreign policy what kind of relationship would have with israel with iran with hezbollah there's a lot of people you know are focused on the here and now but those are the questions going to be asked whatever whenever we get to this end game. yes i know there's a good questions but nobody knows the answer to those questions. outcome in terms of. syria's foreign policy is a question mark and i don't think actually any of the players involved has much of

a clue about that. because you i want you want regime change you're asking for really demanding regime change without understanding what the unintended consequences could be that's interesting yes we are because many thousands of innocent lives are at stake that's the key and anyone who insists on maintaining the regime is condemning thousands more innocent people in syria to death and that's why what matters is not what the foreign policy of the new syrian government would be but the removal of this vicious dictatorship as soon as part of a well ok i want to think that russia's own interests can be preserved in that situation if it is willing to negotiate seriously with syria and i'm pretty sure we all agree that they're talking to them and my well what do you think about that the the law of unintended consequences here is again i can bring up libya when i mean obviously mass and it's getting worse. right but i mean without even comparing i

would say the choice of foreign policy would be in the hands of the syrian people and any democratically elected government which will. represent the majority of the syrian population i find it a bit difficult that syria's future foreign policy would be decided externally or by whoever is not from from syria this will depend on the choice of the people and if the question relating to military intervention is about they daming syria and shaping its foreign policy this is highly problematic and this is my. advice but it's very interesting that you have countries like qatar and saudi arabia and other members of the arab league very much wanting to determine outcomes in syria so that they have an interest in it i don't sorry i don't think they're just thinking about the people they're thinking about their geopolitical interests that's what states do there is no there is a geopolitical game which is being played between

a broader coalition of the gulf states i would say the u.s. see israel versus what is perceived as the syria hezbollah iran axis and the instability now that is lived within syria is an opportunity for power politics for you know is somehow severity in the links between syria and iran and hezbollah and weakening this axis and this is highly problematic because the syrian people still despite the fact that we have instability within syria there's been a choice made by the syrian people and there i would like to address the points raised by max there is a powerful movement there is a claim for a change within syria and i think should that should not be undermined and that is not fair to the young people who are dying on a daily basis and continue to go to the streets now how would that be instrumental eyes this is the issue it should remain an indulgent smoove man it should remain an indulgent us revolution and whatever comes out of the revolution the transition to democracy but you're saying the same at the same time you're saying this. it's

getting internationalize and it absolutely is max if i can go to you again when we look at outcomes here i mean it's saudi arabia qatar qatar united states israel to one degree or another and it's very ambiguous which way it would go for them because they prefer the know the deal with the devil they know but this is the major change in the region no matter what the outcome is because what i think we'll all agree that assad and his family are not going to be there for much longer. well i want to predict the future. he could very well be there for much longer i'm not certain how things could work out. early on in the. early years of the cuban revolution a lot of people would say that you know the constable wouldn't be there much longer and he certainly was so that's not an area in which i'm going to venture. i am kind of put off by the idea that foreign policies and democratic states

whatever that means i think a lot of people understand democracy in the west to mean multiple parties and elections i would have hoped that the idea was a bit more complex and meaningful than that but the idea that in democrat that democratic states established their own foreign policies to reflect the will of the people as far as i know that's not the case and we should we go on we've run out of time we're interesting program many thanks to my guest today in princeton washington and in montreal and thanks to our viewers for watching us here are to see an x. time and remember crosstalk. couldn't

take three. three. three. three.

three. video for your media project free media. looking to break the stalemate u.n. resolution stops short of calling. out. the u.k.'s high court considers that the fate of wiki leaks founder julian assange who is wanted in sweden on allegations of sexual assault case facing accusations of political motivation. at the u.n. atomic watchdog praises progress over its nuclear program another trip to the u.s. is criticized for leading a campaign of fear against. a

very warm welcome to you from all of us here. russia is standing at the u.n. security council on its opposition to any military intervention in syria differences remain among members over how to deal with the ongoing conflict washington the e.u. and some arab states one president assad to step down but moscow says the u.n. shouldn't be used as a platform to simply interfere with syria's affairs. now reports new york. the united states france britain could talk are. all those countries supporting this draft resolution said that there would be no military intervention imposed in

syria if the draft resolution was adopted but the most important thing to note is that those spearheading the push for this draft resolution are also calling for a ceasefire in in syria and also calling for a national dialogue between the government and opposition groups these steps these calls are calls that have been made by russia for the past few months russia has indicated on tuesday that it will veto a draft resolution on syria in which the tax calls for imposes any regime change and leaves a rhetorical door open for military intervention similar to what the world saw transpire in libya this unity council cannot prescribe a radio disappears for the outcome of domestic political purposes it's not in the charter we don't want the security council to call him to fall into the habit

because once you start as difficult to stop then you will start telling what king needs to do you know what prime minister needs to step down this is really not the business of the security council moscow has proposed its own draft resolution on syria which calls for both parties participating in the violence to come to the negotiating negotiating table and take part in a dialogue this is an invitation that russia recently made to representatives of the syrian government and opposition groups earlier this week to try to get them to come to moscow and participate in talks. russia has taken a positive position the draft resolution must cooper proves demands an immediate end to the violence and other positive points. is the call for the government and the opposition to sit down for talks we all want a political solution to the crisis in syria in the coming days the security council will be working to try to come to a consensus on the text of

a resolution on syria but if the tax remains as it's been presented calling for president bashar al assad to step down and leaving the door open for military intervention this is something that russia firmly will be opposed to. report that when a peace activist jacob horn bugga says the western states have made a habit of using the u.n. to legalize its aims of regime change in many of the countries. that's the whole idea of these resolutions that they're considered no matter how tightly they are constructed they will always be construed to do whatever the u.s. government the british government want to do but one thing's for certain this is a problem for the syrian people to resolve not for the u.s. government the british government the united nations this is a problem for the syrian people so obviously that the main thrust of u.s. foreign policy is regime change we've seen them time and time again it begins with

sanctions it goes into embargoes blockade but ultimately the quest is to remove a recalcitrant dictatorship install a u.s. regime even if it happens to be a dictatorship so this is another classic example of where the u.s. is but an india other people's affairs when it really has no business doing so. and the indian ambassador to the u.n. says if the security council continues with its one sided approach to syria a solution will remain a very long way off. as long as the council is in a position to address a recommendation to both sides in a conflict i think you would get agreement but if the council wants to address its recommendation to one side that is the government and is not willing to encourage the opposition to come to the negotiating table then you've got a council recommendation which clearly is not acceptable to some members what we

need to do on syria clearly is to realize that the situation there is spiraling out of control their own reading of the situation in syria will have very serious consequences for these other countries in the region unlike libya the consequences will be higher i'm not suggesting that what happened in libya is not serious enough but talking of this and what's going to be one of the difficulties that we are having is that the security council expedience in respect of resolutions nine hundred seventy and seventy three on libya are now vitiate think the atmosphere in terms of the approach to words how to deal with the situation in syria. now you can watch the full interview with the indian ambassador to the u.n. in just over twenty minutes time right here on r.g.p. . the world's top whistleblower is taking his long legal battle

to stay in the u.k. now to the country's supreme court julian assange just wanted in sweden on allegations of sexual assault dating back to august two thousand and ten when she denies the wiki leaks founder insists the case is politically motivated and in response to his website publishing secret u.s. cables on wars on afghanistan and iraq parties laura smith is at the high court in london for us. the building that you see behind me the supremes court could literally be last chance saloon for julian our sons at least in this country this is a two day hearing which began this morning is expected to carry on until the end of thursday in which he will present his case to the supreme court to try and have that request to his extracts tradition rescind days if he does spell here he can then take his case the european court of human rights in stroudsburg but that is not a given this legal wranglings been going on for more than

a year now ourselves arrived this morning looking fairly relaxed it has to be stats that he stopped on his way into court to shake hands with a couple of his supporters who were here some had been here apparently since five o'clock this morning just showing their support for a thousand that he headed into court but without saying anything to the assembled media which he's taken to doing in the last months it is presenting his case in front of seven judges and they will be looking at a key question which is whether the european arrest warrant that was issued for him by the swedish prosecutor is valid can the swedish prosecutor in fact issue a european arrest warrant and this could in fact call into question the entire system of european arrest warrants that under which of course we know that people could be extradited within europe having little or no evidence presented against them now of course this case is all relating to sexual assault charges that took place in august two thousand and ten while

a soldier was in store and we are not expecting the outcome of this case to be announced in the next couple of days as the plane cool has said that it could take them some weeks to come to a judgment that would mean anything pertaining to two and and ten weeks as far as we know but we also know that one of the things that science has been truly worried about through this entire proceeding is that once in sweden he could be extradited straight from that to america and my to my colleague tom boston has been to stop to look at the relationship between sweden. and the united states the face that launched a thousand leaks julian a son does exposure of tens of thousands of secret documents has embarrassed governments the world over but the wiki leaks phenomenon is no longer his most pressing concern the swedes or thora teams want to question a songe over allegations of sexual assault dating back to august two thousand and ten prosecutors have been criticized by a sound his supporters and international civil libertarians with allegations of

a cumbersome contradictory and slow legal process huge arguments have also broken out over the nature of some of sweden's laws on sexual offenses such as those a son faces it's going to be a closed course and leading up to the trial is going to be held. well the chief prosecutor asked for him to be held in solitary confinement it's just. so there are so many bizarre aspects to the why in which the amount of matter is being conducted up till now. from our perspective i just can't see how he would get a fair trial others have gone beyond legal arguments saying that the storm raised by our sons through wiki leaks has made him a target for political interference across the atlantic u.s. authorities enraged at having their secret documents exposed may seek to have a son extradited there to stand trial but surely sweden's famed neutrality would

stop such a thing but i would disagree as to whether it's true it in is an outright country sit in a very clear cut. proximity and collaboration even in military operations with such campaigns initiated by nato you have print. so its presence in afghanistan you have a clear cut. it brought nato policy on the part of sweden and that is not to try to do with some u.s. politicians branding a son a cyber terrorist and calling for the death penalty it could get a lot worse for the wiki leaks founder the problem is not that we have too much wiki leaks we have too little. i think with people ok with. who is a national public polls indicate that very large majorities applaud

and support the efforts of wiki leaks the why do worry is that with or without julian assange governments around the world with something to hide will now launch full scale assaults on internet freedom in order to keep their secrets secret but for now the focus is on the man not his website killing our son just connections with sweden have raised many questions about what really happened in august two thousand and ten but now with a son and his future as uncertain as ever questions are being leveled at sweden's legal system and its relationship with the united states which could prove crucial to the fate of the world's most notorious whistleblower dumbarton r.t. stockholm sweden. he is coming to you live from the heart of moscow and just in a few minutes here on the program israel employs controversial takes to american jews back to the motherland critics say it needs to fix the problems that drove

them away in the first place. also a new gold china race to buy record breaking amounts of the precious metal exposing the trouble the u.s. dollar finds itself in. the un's nuclear watchdog says it's planning to visit iran again in the near future following a three day trip to the country of the i.a.e.a. believes in tehran is committed to progress over its nuclear program however u.s. intelligence officials believe iran is trying to be more open only because it's feeling the bite of new sanctions and despite admitting the country isn't building a nuclear weapon at the moment they likened iran to al qaeda saying it could launch terrorist attacks on u.s. soil but former cia analyst ron mcgovern believes people have been misled into thinking that iran poses a danger. if you look at the polls seventy percent of the american people believe

that iran already has a nuclear weapon that's exactly the same percentage of people in two thousand and two who were persuaded by what i call the phone in corporate media to believe that saddam hussein was working on a nuclear weapon it's bizarre what did the defense ministers of america and israel say they say are the readings working on a nuclear weapon no if the arrhenius were working on a nuclear weapon they would have to kick out the hewitt inspectors he would know that and they don't want that at all they are not working on a nuclear weapon they have not yet decided to do so so the facts are the offense ministers both intelligence agencies and say the way they say it is they have not yet decided to nuclear weapons well that means that the i mean simple english means they're not working on a nuclear weapon going to war i mean if on

a contrived synthetic you you have to take five steps back and say what is this whole about this is about a nuclear capability right now it was about regime change. well i thought forget it we've also got the world covered for you on our website and here are some of the items are standing by on line if you right now alex he thought it leaked nato report accuses pakistan's intelligence of assisting and protecting the taliban find out the details of that revelation and who it's upset the most dog also on line for you. imprisonment and deportation from america just for making a joke on twitter the story of a couple whose tweets sold and treated like terrorists by u.s. authorities. it's.

from the. dot com. in about nine minutes as the business but for now china has been taken over by gold fever it's believed beijing already the world's fifth largest holder of gold snapped up about five hundred tonnes of the precious metal in two thousand

and eleven that is double what it bought in two thousand and ten and it could be in the market for just a bit more investment manager francis believes beijing is wise to make a distance away from the weakening dollar china has the largest foreign exchange holding of any country and there were about one tree menu as follows them most of their u.s. dollar and for several years now chinese see how limits want to be government to diversify is holding for me change china's economy is why i was third of that of the u.s. and now both fall and china has about nine percent economic growth why the u.s. it has about one point nine percent is so it is good to diversify some with the foreign exchange holdings to do something not a u.s. dollar based like goal.