maxime now mind you the word sexual never came up and said they only got probation at that time russian diplomats are unable to be of any use to kids in such cases which earlier prompted russian to pass yakovlev law and that law prohibits americans from adopting russian kids altogether now live was an adopted child from russia and he was left by his american parents or locked in a car and he eventually died from suffocation but when the law was passed it prompted huge debate both here and in the united states whether the orphans would benefit from such restrictions while the local authorities in the united states seem indifferent to the fate of little kids adopted from here in russia well there is government is expected to use its dominant position in parliament to keep in force the decision not to build

a new nuclear power plant the construction area got sixty percent backing in a referendum but the turnout was a mere twenty percent some analysts believe a losing atomic power would lead to disaster and the question was pretty vaguely no one explained to the average voter the particulars of nuclear energy from bulgaria keeps using only the two reactors it already has it will soon find itself out of power as the service time is running out alternative sources of power have proven to be too expensive lost out on a lot of economic assets over the past year losing nuclear amadou would turn us into third world state completely. right it's time full of business now with katie pilgrim a so katie the federal reserve meeting has finished what's going on give us a little bit yeah it's rounded out it's tuesday me saying it's happy and i'm going to tell you that the stimulus measures the aggressive ones they all going to

continue going forward right now the markets and dropping it was always had g.d.p. figures for the fourth quarter disappointing as well as the u.s. economy has to contend with are we getting into details off of the break in the business but that's what we look forward to that. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else you hear or see some other part of it and realized everything you thought you knew you don't know i'm trying hard look at the big picture. choose your language. call it make it with know if you're going to. come up with the. truth it's good to consider. the

opinions that you've been great to. choose the stories that impact. you. i. was. allowed to walk into business on k.c. fill in thank you for joining me now russia's economy is set to become the largest in the well by twenty thirty at least according to the ministry of economic development and away but this projection relies heavily on if the price of oil goes up and i spoke to ivan ticker off from my nights as capital on the details of the

reports and he spoke through the figures and he said that the price is all about oil. the minister of economy is is proposing are so critical dependent on the price of oil they're talking in their forecasts about oil prices continuing to gain in value to about two hundred seventy two hundred seventy five dollars over the next fifteen years or fifteen or twenty years so if that forecast were to materialize i think once again i would be comfortable with growth rates in russia somewhere around four or four and a half percent but certainly not the five hundred have six percent of the government to start in about in its most optimistic scenario yet best case scenario tell me at this point in time what is the basic biggest risk to the russian economy a slump in china all the year is insolvent but i think this is the cutest externalities are going to have a continual continued slowdown in the chinese economy the states at the end of the

day be able to avert the fiscal cliff are going to give are going to see. disintegration of the european union i think these are the key risks and they are external by nature that we've got the russian economy needs to do it over the next over the short the short term or in the short term horizon however i think if we're trying to take kind of a longer term view. before talking about the next five to ten years like shooting that it is the domestic environment is a much more domestic factors that will be the key determinant of the russian future what's going to happen with russian demographics what's going to happen with corruption what's going to happen with the easier it is to do to do business. russia become a friendlier and more welcoming place for foreign investment so again in the short term horizon i think they practice will continue to dominate but on a five to ten year horizon in the domestic factors need and will become relatively more important. i'm going to say russia finale check out the stock markets as you

can see it was a sea of red for the r.t.s. and the my section is all about the news coming from the u.s. that really spoil the day as you can see there entrenched in negative territory those u.s. g.d.p. figures really pulling through the markets of i want to mention the fact that energy companies managed to benefit from growing oil prices worth a mention there were moved around and check out the russian ruble because it was a mix performance you can see it managed to gain the u.s. dollar but lost out to the common currency the european markets ended the day down it was a similar story really for russia all thanks to what's happening in the u.s. for europe as well those fourth quarter g.d.p. figures slipping back into contraction just as u.k. figures did last week as well so that brings us on to wall street we see what's happening in the eppy center of it all really and they continue to fluctuate out of the federal reserve meeting i mention metabo just a second ago it's now ended and as expected the treasury department they will

continue with their says easing program actually buying up securities at a rate of eighty five billion dollars a month and that's really an attempt to spur the stagnate economy the g.d.p. result i mentioned was disappointing especially after consumer confidence recently fell as well and we're going to stay with the u.s. for now because i'm sure you've all heard of the lehman brothers well if not it was pretty much the first domino to fall in the financial crash of two thousand and eight and if you are u.s. taxpayer you may want to leave the room right now because according to a government watchdog report u.s. taxpayers stand to lose twenty seven billion dollars from the two thousand and eight financial bailout certainly sounds a lot but let's break it down so there are around three hundred million people living in the u.s. right now so let's just presume they are all tax of wiring citizens included. it's

a baby and that means that each and every person is having to four pounds one hundred dollars each now every day i speak to pass and some ethics cassadine said that the tax burdens for america will be ongoing the american taxpayer is going to face higher payments for quite some years to come but remember that the bush tax cuts were only temporary and they've now been reversed for all american households who earn more than fifty thousand dollars per year that means that each american in that income bracket is going to be paying more than a thousand dollars a year in additional taxes that kicks in from january in other words immediately so on average they're going to be paying around another eighty seven dollars per month in taxes government is money that consumers won't have to be spending to drive the recovery now the u.s. government they want to spur growth to get the sixteen trillion dollar debt down

now we tax is rising when wages and salaries are going down is this mission impossible. it's a very difficult square to circle isn't it i think going to take a very very long time at best it will rely on the ongoing willingness of foreign investors to lend to the united states at all time record low interest rates and if it any point in the future overseas investors become less willing to do so or they demand a higher price for that then the american economy could be plunged quickly into a very deep and very prolonged recession so it's possible that they claw their way out of this but actually it's a very very high risk strategy still from current levels ok so tell me who's in the worst situation right now year for the u.s. . well there are both in difficult and different situations but i think to the

extent that the us is a single country with a single government a single people a national identity and a common purpose you could argue that actually it's somewhat better positioned than those seventeen countries still fighting and squabbling amongst each other in europe and so the business for today coming up after the break we talk to two experts about the feet of u.s. foreign policy to stay with r.t. .

here the reindeer is interesting for the herders. and when it suffers people do their best to help. but the distances are. and the roads are tough and unpredictable. will the roman need be and try.

it's just so. i'm joined by hilary lever it. form and lists for both bill clinton and george w.

bush administrations two of america's most informed middle east experts their new book is called going to tehran which offers a way out of the current diplomatic crisis it's called why the united states must come to terms with the islamic republic of iran thank you very much for coming washington seems to be very happy with the sanctions they're quickly in the arena chrono me why should they change policies now why should they come to terms with iran sanctions are not going to work sanctions have not worked we've seen sanctions imposed on the islamic republic of iran for thirty two years we saw crippling sanctions in effect imposed on iran during their eight year war with iraq from one thousand nine hundred ninety eight we saw at that time half their g.d.p. was a racist half of it and still the islamic republic of iran did not surrender to hostile foreign powers the idea that now that sanctions are going to force the islamic republic of iran to surrender to what it sees as hostile foreign powers and their

demands there is no place for that in the history of the history of the islamic republic of iran and frankly there is no basis for that anywhere the united states imposed crippling sanctions for example on saddam hussein's iraq for over a decade killing over a million people half of them children and even then saddam hussein's government did not implode and it did not concede to the demands of hostile foreign powers it took a massive us land invasion to do that the ability to stand in the other side's shoes to show that you can do it is key to diplomacy i think you would agree with that but everything the u.s. has done so far showed you read the opposite of that starting from the u.s. helping get rid of their democratically elected leader in the fifty's putting the shah in power much hated figure in iran what can the u.s. do to. now to show iran that they respect their national interests the first thing

that has to happen is this basic acceptance except in some of these low mcgreevey public as a legitimate and rational actor. this is the model that nixon and kissinger used to pursue the diplomatic opening with china in the early one nine hundred seventy s. it's not their achievement was not that they started talking to. the united states have been talking to beijing for years but it was this very narrow kind of dialogue very focused on grievance american grievances toward china and what china was going to need to do to bring itself in line with american preferences nixon and kissinger flip that on its head they said we are going to convey to the chinese both in words and in actions that we we accept the people's republic of china and on that basis the rest of these issues can be taken care of

that's what enabled this dramatic turn in american diplomacy toward china that's what we need to do toward the islamic republic of iran to accept it and then to back that up with concrete actions in terms of rolling back covert action programs in terms of stopping economic warfare against iran but what are the chances for diplomacy i mean iran is surrounded by u.s. military bases by nato patriot missiles they have to sanctions that are crippling the arabian economy it seems there's more ground for blackmail now than for diplomacy unfortunately i think that is the american hope that we can still force course out cause that's what the united states has been doing really since the end of the cold war we have focused on coercing outcomes by as flynt said projecting enormous amounts of conventional military force into the middle east to course

political outcomes and we were you know before one thousand nine hundred one we were somewhat restrained in doing that because of the cold war if we put in too many million many troops we were afraid that some. you know the soviet union would so in a sense that constrained us and force united states to really rely more on soft power more on having a narrative after the class of the soviet union the end of the cold war we i think left that left that out we put that under the table we focused entirely on trying to force political outcomes and what we've done in iraq and afghanistan has underscored the very important limits of that and i would add libya we were able to take out saddam and take out moammar gadhafi but what we're able to put in its stead what if everything fails what is your worst case scenario of this to liberate them so that was i think my worst case scenario is that the united states. starts another war in the middle east to disarm another middle eastern country of

weapons of mass destruction that it does not have. and that the damage that the backlash to this does to the american position in the middle east. makes. how much damage was done the american position by the invasion of iraq makes that will quite trivial by comparison that's my worst case i want to ask you about the new face of the pentagon chuck hagel he allowed himself to say outright attacking iran is a stupid idea and i believe you also called for direct negotiations do you think we could see direct negotiations any time soon with chuck hagel in the ministration well if he i think that that former senator hagel has taken courageous positions on iran on a range of issues and i admire them and respect them and the concern i have is that he is being nominated for the wrong job to carry out those positions his defense secretary if he is or if he is if he's approved to be as defense secretary he will

not be the person in charge of creating or implementing strategies of iran or any other foreign policy issue therefore he will be he will be at the defense department doing quintessentially defense secretary things in this environment which is to cut the budget and try to keep the united states out of another war now that peace try to keep the united states out of another war could have impact here but the problem is he what he could potentially try to keep united states out of another war without being able to either to offer a vision for another way to deal with this challenge the islamic republic poses a real challenge for the united states and a real challenge to israel in the region that challenges to significantly constrain both the united states and israel's preferred strategy for the region which is to project force whenever wherever and whatever degree we want unilaterally the islamic republic of iran challenges that not with tanks so that they go and park

their tanks in other people's countries they challenge that with their narrative they. pose that viscerally at its core chuck hagel said some very unflattering things about the stray lobby that they're quote unquote intimidating a lot of people in washington and also they are to say american interests should trump israeli interests if they conflict and that is the subversive thing to say here in washington could be a career killer can you name some key points where u.s. and israeli interests conflict i think it is very much in america's interests it's not a favor to iran it is in america's interest to come to terms with the islamic republic to accept safeguarded enrichment of uranium as the basis for a deal on the nuclear issue israel's ability to impose its hegemony in gaza or southern lebanon is not an american interest it may be an israeli preference it's not an american interests i think american interests would be much better served by

a kind of rational. political settlement to the palestinian issue that palestinians and other middle easterners will see as legitimate there is no way that open ended israeli occupation of palestinian lands will ever be seen that way and i think that's you know very much against american interests and i think in a similar vein it's but i would take us to a similar vein to what flynt laid out i know but i would take it a little more broadly it's very difficult for the way that israel is structured politically for it to accept and buy into and support what i think would be an american interest which is that all of the states in the middle east be able to have much more participatory political orders can support even more broadly beyond its borders because a country like egypt which i think the israelis see today is very much a threat in terms of how it's developing if it becomes any more reflective of its

population's preferences histories interests religion. it is going to become by definition less interested in allowing israel or being ok with the policies that israel has developed to use force coercively whenever wherever it wants along its borders or with its within its own population palestinian population under its control and the problem is the united states backs it and so this is the contradiction he was back at the same time it calls for democracy in all those countries and so that's what rings hollow i think for many arab and muslim populations is that it's not a real call for the by the united states for democratization what the united states is just trying to do is so chaos and civil war like we're doing in syria we're not really trying to get democratization in syria or political participation in syria it's selling chaos and destruction i think that's how many people see it and that's how it is unfolding what do you think israel is going to do next what is their strategy with regards to iran i think they have you know more or less come to the position that if you ron is going to be struck it's the united states that's going

to need to do it and so i fully anticipate over the next next to yours so that prime minister netanyahu he and his government will be putting a lot of pressure on the obama administration that iran is approaching whatever red line that you know who draws. that it's time for the united states to step up to the plate and and deal with this problem in a decisive way and even if they don't succeed initially in persuading obama because they'll they'll leverage it to get more sanctions on iran to get other kinds of pressure on iran they will try and keep iran in a box do you think president obama pointed chuck hagel of the message to his throw that's difficult to say maybe we'll see but i'm skeptical that obama really is out to redefine the american relationship with israel and i would add to that in addition to the point that we have the appointment of john brennan at the cia who i

think is someone who the israelis are just fine with. who will continue many of the covert programs of course our drone program but many of the covert programs that would be under his under his authority at the cia and that will be very much to israel's liking that will serve to undermine any attempts or any possibilities for a real are coming to terms of the islamic republic of iran there is an argument often made in washington that its fall would be a strategic victory against iran what can you say about an approach like that first of all at this point iran's most important arab ally is no longer syria it's iraq thanks in no small part to the united states iran's most important strategic ally in the arab world is iraq. even in syria you know but sharia law is still there i don't think is downfall is imminent and even if

you reach a point where he might feel like he needs to abandon damascus or something like this you're going to still have big chunks of syria that are effectively under the control of his government under his security apparatus syria might at that point start to look more and more like a kind of. you know failing state with different regional warlords in different parts of the country but that is not a situation which is good for american interests first of all or a situation in which iran you know continues to somehow doesn't have influence or or an ability to act in ways to protect its interests in the situation the idea that somehow we can just have these short term marriages of convenience to arm train and fund really honestly sunni islamist jihadist groups in syria in syria against the islamic republic of iran that just this time it will work and that

somehow secular democrats are going to come to power yeah that liberal secular pro-american democrats will come to power it didn't work in afghanistan and it's not going to work in syria thank you so much thanks so much for coming q thank you very much. the first baby steps are joint. folds and bones are not a big deal. but they can cause terrible trauma. for children can be broken by bare touch. and only the will of life can make old pains and sores.

fragile people on r.t. . olympos that live. her mother. would speak. her. lips. i wish i. looked. a bit limited so good luck. lifts me. and. i.

find i'm a better little. to speak your language. programs and documentaries in arabic in school here on the t.v. reporting from the world's hot spots seventy ip interviews intriguing story i used to. live in trying. to find out more visit our big t.v. dog called. slim. live

live. live .