small not much support what kind of opposition would you like to challenge you at a certain point we saw the police cracking down on the occupy wall street activists i won't call the actions of police appropriate or inappropriate my point is that every opposition movement is good and useful if it acts within law if they don't like the law they should use democratic means to change those laws which they should persuade voters to join them and they should get elected into legislatures so that they can have a chance to change the law if there are people who act outside the law then the state must use legal means to impose law in the interests of the majority that's the way it's done in the us and that's the way it's done in russia truth be told we criticise for that but when the same thing happens in the us it's considered to be noble never mind that it is double standards we have got accustomed to this and pay little attention to it when i think about it when it happens in the us to growth america. but i wish you do the right thing in that everyone must be treated in the

same fashion because these two situations are identical because the only difference is that our diplomatic missions don't actively cooperate with occupy wall street and your diplomatic missions work together and directly support russian opposition but i think this is wrong because diplomatic missions must forge ties between states and not meddle in their domestic politics. getting back to popular movement if they express their will by legal means without breaking the law then they're fully entitled to do that in this case it would be beneficial to any state because it's a way to provide grassroots feedback on the state policies whether it be social domestic or foreign policy work. next question is from oksana boyko the president of our new show she moved into presenting up to several years of reporting for our team which to me iran is a great example of how you can create extreme tension and mutual relations by blowing out of proportion some insignificant differences the iranian nuclear issue

that everyone's been talking about for the last decade basically relies only on some vague suspicions to iran is partially to blame for the tension build up but the root of the problem is the stance of washington their signature foreign policy principle friend and foe divides russia has a good record of avoiding tension and relations with other countries your public statements indicate that you know the cost of admitting it so where is the line for you between avoiding an all out confrontation that could have an impact on russian security and maintaining our principles position which could to be critical to our security. first i've repeatedly voiced russia's official stone's iran has the rights to a peaceful nuclear program and it can't be singled out for discrimination for his second we need to be aware that iran is located in a very challenging region i've told our radiant partners about that that's why iranian threats made towards neighboring countries in particular israel threats

that israel can be destroyed absolutely unacceptable this is counterproductive. this is not a proper hotel of the iranian president nor. a great venue critic it doesn't matter whether it's a probably quite old not it means it's best to avoid a wording that could be improperly quoted it could be interpreted differently that's why the focus on iran does have a reason behind it but i have no doubts that iran is complying with the rules simply because there is no proof of the opposite according to the latest i.a.e.a. report iran has been abiding by the commitments it has taken up with the truth there are some outstanding issues but with jew patients and friendly attitudes they can be resolved but i have a great respect for iran and a great interest in it they are very proud of a country they have their own understanding of their place both in their region and in the world and that's something you have to respect the grass the core of the problem arabians are very smart and cunning politicians and to

a certain degree they have exploited this confrontation with the united states when there is an external enemy it united the nation but i guess the united states have been employing the same technique after the collapse of the soviet union they have been no external threats that would allow washington to dominate the west they must be a threat so that the u.s. can protect their allies from any of this position yields political and economic benefits if everyone relies on one country for protection then this country is entitle to some preferential treatment so it's very important to possess this status of a global defender to be able to resolve issues even beyond the realm of foreign policy and security issues i think the u.s. has been using iran for this very purpose that it is to unite the allies in this shadow of a real or full strength of actual best interest the level of trust can i clarify something the thing is i was asking you not only about the u.s. iranian relations but also about the us russian relations whether you agree that we

have fundamental ideological differences on key issues of an. international law so right on the eve of my meeting with u.s. obama you're pushing me to make some serious statements it's a very important if the country thinks it has more rights than others you know there are stories i mean i thought you wouldn't notice my deviation but you did indeed you are very persistent to date we don't have any significant ideological differences but we have fundamental cultural differences individual ism lies at the core of the american identity while russia has been a country of collectivism take scarlett o'hara from gone with the wind for instance she says oh never be hungry again this is the most important thing for her russians have different far lofty ambitions more of a spiritual kind and we have different visions of life that's why it's very difficult to understand each other but it's still possible. that's why there is

international more to create a level playing field for everyone. you know starting with the u.s. is a very democratic state there's no doubt about that and it originally developed as a democratic state when the first settlers set their foot on the continent life force them to forge a relationship and maintain a dialogue with each other to survive that's why america was initially conceived as a fundamental democracy with that in mind we should not forget that america's development began with a large scale ethnic cleansing they wiped out the indigenous population then they were slavery and that's something that is deeply ingrained in america in his memoirs us secretary of state colin powell revealed how hard it was for him as a black man and how hard it was for him to live with other people staring at you it means this mentality has taken root in the hearts and minds of the people and is likely to still be there it will now take this sort of union we know a lot about started now that we know him as a dictator and

a tyrant but still i don't think that in this spring of one nine hundred forty five stalin would have used a nuclear bomb against germany if he had one he could have done it in nine hundred forty one or nine hundred forty two when it was a matter of life or death but i really doubt that he would have done it in one nine hundred forty five when the enemy had almost given up and had absolutely no chance to reverse the trend i don't think he would now look at the u.s. they dropped the bomb on japan a country that was a non-nuclear state and was very close to defeat so there are big differences between us but it's quite natural that people with such differences and to find ways to understand each other better i don't think there is an alternative moreover it's not by chance that russia and the us fortunate alliance in the most critical moments of modern history that was the case in world war one and world war two even if there was fierce confrontation our countries united in the face of a common threat which means there is something that unites us and here is the

honest to see attack in the high especially coming from new york for this meeting what i mean. american politicians and russia experts these days i often hear them acknowledge off record that the magnitsky act has effectively come first plays the jackson event a commandment which demonstrates the same outdated approach towards russia as we know when barack obama met with mr amid that if during the summit and so last year he made some hints saying he would have more flexibility after election. but would but it was early but i see you guys just don't get off the banks do you. know this is the last question i promise. i'll lay him tonight on the i was here for him to call create with russia however that is not what we're seeing today we've already touched upon many of our remaining issues with the u.s. why do you think the reset has not worked and can it ever take place in the first

place as an equal recite procope process or is it the trash is always expected to second it's national interest. they were in specialty should national press any state pursues its national interests in the u.s. is no exception what's unique it is that the collapse of the soviet union left america is the world single leader but there was a catch associated with it in that it began to view itself as an empire to its core things but an empire is not only about foreign policy it's also about domestic policy and empire cannot afford to display weakness and any attempt to strike an agreement on equitable terms is often seen domestically as weakness to be on the bus but the leadership cannot afford display weakness due to domestic policy considerations i think the current administration realizes that it cannot solve the world's major issues on its own in the first they still want to do it and second they can only take steps that if it for an end by domestic policy considerations

play a huge role otherwise you would be accused of weakness in getting a model in order to act otherwise you either have to win overwhelming support for they must be a chance in mentality when people will understand that it's much more beneficial to look at a compromise is a plan to impose your will on everyone but it certainly takes time to change those patterns of thinking in any country in this case is the u.s. first and foremost this change should take place in the minds of the ruling elite in the broad sense of this phrase i don't think that is impossible i think we've almost come to that would point very much both of them will reach it soon and if you which i see what i might point. the highway bill some the bones of its make its the winds through one of the

wildest and most beautiful regions of russia a place that's home to less than a million people and to keep the great frosts. join me james as i travel to the coldest inhabited place in the world. and meet some of the toughest people i'm told this time is on the planets. just make sure that you keep your eyes on the road well for a. race to the poll of polls only all known to you.

and. welcome to teal one out here you can feel it home. if there are three choices in life the first is to work in a mcmillan or

a man live on a miserable way like a slave. the second is to jump the wall and catch the american dream. most of it. and lose their lives or. the other choice is to become a member of an organisation and get inside the growing trade. to buy something will never forget. a. group of mine who did it by paid for what i've done i would never stop a. language. without if. someone. chooses the the consensus to.

choose the opinions that invigorating to. choose the stories that impact the life choose access to often. because.

the information reveals american spies based in the u.k. intercepted the top secret communications of former russian president dmitry medvedev during his visit to britain for a g twenty summit. leaders meet in the u.k. this week for the g. eight. explosions has reportedly rocked the syrian capital in a neighborhood with u.s. embassies and military airport meanwhile washington considers sending lethal arms to the rebels and imposing a no fly zone. with tear gas and flushed out by water cannons turkish police resort to harsh methods to break up defiant anti-government protesters gathering across the country despite uproar over the crackdown istanbul's taksim square.