who do go through the bureaucracy and headaches to become u.s. citizens the right way the legal way so the bloods you if you're going to provide these illegal immigrants with some sort of document it should be a plane ticket back home with instructions on how to apply for a green card the legit proper way just like everyone else asked fashion just my opinion. twenty fourteen promises an exhilarating winter. and make heaven and the rest of our lives for sochi twenty four take. on ott.

hello and welcome to crossfire for all things considered on peter lavelle nato a deadly alliance without a clear mission decades after the end of the cold war this washington led alliance continues to exist and expand after an ambiguous adventure in afghanistan and behind regime change in libya nato now look somehow in some way to absorb ukraine what is nato's gambit. to cross not nato i'm joined by my guest martin mccauley in london he's a specialist on international affairs at the university of london also in london we have jonathan steele he is an international affairs commentator for the guardian and in washington we cross to ricardo all caro he is a visiting fellow at the center for the u.s. and europe at the brookings institution all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect and you can jump in anytime you want and i very much encourage you jonathan if i go to you first the cold war has been over for over two decades we still have

this alliance in existence and there are many people that are very critical that will continue to expand and some will even go as far to say this is maybe the center of the problems going on in ukraine is that brussels is very interested in absorbing even further countries to the east this time ukraine. well i'm certainly of the school that thinks that nato should have disbanded at the end of the cold war i mean nato lost an enemy when it's not tried to find a new role it should have recognized that it was over we were a different continent now different climate different context there were no enemies in europe anymore and we should collaborate but instead of that the basic agenda of nato still being an anti russian agenda and they've been trying to absorb as many countries into that into that alliance as possible but in fact you know it serves very little military purpose nato. it's really only a coalition of the willing and the idea of that article five if that one country if

it's an attack the do all countries will come to it sorry it's useless now because at the time of the kosovo intervention by nato against serbia it was a coalition of the willing in two thousand and one after nine eleven when nato came forward with a statement saying that they would help the u.s. defense. put interaction article five us just ignored it there were particularly interested in nature of that stage they wanted to go after al qaeda and. afghanistan on their own and so need to really have ceased to be anything other than tool kit in the american imperial mission ok riccardo that's a pretty strong statement there a part of the toolkit of american foreign policy after all i mean if you look at where it's been use its force its been outside of its area of sensitivity its original core than the north atlantic how do you respond to what jonathan just said well actually i. i tend to agree with him with much of what he said. perhaps

i wouldn't be so i wouldn't be so certain that nato has pursued the ninety russia agenda but certainly nato as a large ment's has not be brought forward according to our consistent principle and this principle is actually common sensical i'm in my opinion not a should expand whenever that expansion around increases and hans has security when that is not the case that now the laws mention not take place so in my opinion the words are a good rationale to expand nato to eastern european countries in the ninety's as there is a good rationale to to do the same thing for the balkan countries but the offer to the offer to ukraine and georgia back in two thousand and eight two for a prospect of nato membership in the in the future that was that was very ill conceived because it contrasted with basic principle of just martin how do you look

at it because i obviously from where i'm sitting in moscow we did seen as very much an anti russia alliance and again if you looked at the the association agreement the view which didn't sign if you look very closely the fine print it does talk about military intelligence joint work a mutual work in this is so it's often a really big red flag here is that the expansion just continues and what other reason could be is that what the ham in russia that's it's it's plain as day here. i think that if you start off with nine hundred forty nine going to set up. europe was divided between eastern europe which was which under the soviet union and then the rest of europe so therefore it really had a meaning and was really put to protect germany and other countries and they felt without the american umbrella they faced the central threat from the soviet union now that's all gone because. nato originally was there to rebuff suffered military

attack. from a conventional and nuclear point of view that's gone so that what's left you are left with the countries of eastern europe which feel insecure visa to russia if you look at this tony let me let you in your poland czech republic they're very happy they want to be inside a larger security framework because on the road they feel they couldn't resist any russian pressure so therefore it's mainly a function of their perception of the russian threat that you may say and others many say there is no threat there certainly is no russian military threat towards western europe russia is not going to attack western europe or such but the little countries are afraid of pressure which could in fact force them to make concessions which they don't want to make and they feel happier within a security framework which is nato they'd like to be in the european union because they're only marring if you're like mark do you think that you do you think the same countries in eastern europe like sending soldiers to fight america's war in

afghanistan. well they've got to do that because the car is the coalition of the willing if they don't do that then the americans might not give them any military aid or the middle might not take them seriously so who is already hearing it it becomes pressuring whom you hear answer very interesting who is pressuring them jonathan if i go to you if you look at what nato has been doing in the last few years and libya comes to mind i mean this is it's its strategy its structure its mission i cannot fathom what it is ok why is nato being called upon to go to change regime in tripoli i mean that again has nothing to do with the origins of this alliance. no i agree with you and i think what you said about ukraine is really important i mean what is happening there it is still part of this old drive to get ukraine into a military alliance with nato i mean just the other day at the munich security

conference the secretary general of nato underscored rasmussen made the statement ukraine must be free to choose its own path without external pressure. we know what that meant was very very should be allowed to join nato without russia stopping it but the reality is that every single poll that's been taken in ukraine over the last decade has shown a majority of ukraine's against joining nato young recurvature came to power in twenty ten on a platform of keeping ukraine nonaligned the ukrainian parliament and subsequently adopted a resolution saying that ukraine's not national security structure she would not include nato membership so why on earth didn't mr rasmussen so something like you know ukraine has opted for non-alignment and we need to respect that decision ok instead of the fact that we could be a recognition of reality he kept up this idea that nato must be new credit must be part of nato you know there's a lot of criticism of nato is that either it expands or it ceases to exist how do

you react to that characterization i wouldn't see the tradeoff whether it expands or seizes to exist actually i think it can keep on going if it does not think it can save loose steps like like offering again to ukraine or even georgia the prospect of becoming a member. would like to pick up on what martin was saying i mean it's true nato has no single pole pose any longer as it used to have during the cold war of course it has now i mean it has been suffering a sort of crisis away don't it for twenty years and even more now but i said think that nato is even though it now it is more so. of a car is still relies on a very strong bargain i mean. all eyes have different objectives however they trade off their security interests in the alliance and what they get in return is still

is today outgunned so for instance the minions the european union so there's more countries for instance in eastern europe they still feel treffen by russia so u.s. commitment to security is by far the greatest guarantee that their territory will not be invaded there will not be a threat and countries such as each value or germany or which are which do not feel threatened by russia or anybody else for that matter still see nato as a very important privilege. and the military powers in europe france and britain they see nato as the platform on which they can actually still project power internationally and amplify their international influence well and though you know that you know i have a little britain and france does its own thing on its own in africa for example martin it seems to me that nato is just a fig leaf all it is is for american hegemony in and expanding american military

might i mean you can say look all the there's a coalition of willing you know the the good westerners are all together it's a fig leaf it's not true. yes the americans are the dominate nato but must remember that they're cutting the military budget and obama doesn't believe in american exceptionalism so the five he's not conducting the foreign policy of george bush or ronald reagan would have conducted so therefore native from that point of view is becoming less american centric but of course from from its point of view it wants to get involved in africa doesn't want to al-qaeda to expand and you could see france then saying to the other members of nato you should help us and up a pound of the british military mission in mali and so on there for that part of the world has to be made secure and it must not be hunted over to the terrorists so therefore their nature will inevitably expand its influence into regions like that and countries such as france will try and join nato but to go back to ukraine one

of the reasons why i know you would like to get involved in ukraine is because then you get nearer and nearer iran because the the real problem is a run around ukraine is not a threat there's no threat military threat from central asia there's no threat from russia but the threat they perceive is from iran and the middle east so therefore if you can get round if you can in fact circle around then you're doing very well you get greater a greater presence and so on and so nato in many ways is expanding its mission because they'd like parkinson's law i mean we're going to jump in here we're going to go we're short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on nato stayed with party. leaders.

transit route to vnukovo report your best way to the heart of moscow. put it on your show comment why should he make immunology face i dislike you about .

our. pleasure to have you with us here on t.v. today i'm wrong reese you should. choose your language. of choice because we don't have to drill kind of itself and i . choose to use the consensus get to. choose the opinions that invigorating to. choose the stories that impact the life choose the access to opportunity.

welcome back to cross talk where all things are considered i'm peter lavelle remind you we're discussing nato expansion. ok i'd like to go to jonathan in london martin brought up on the issue of iran which i think is very interesting is because this tells us how honest and legitimate the west particularly the united states is in dealing with iran because if they can get a deal then why do they need to expand ok anti-missile defense in all of this here but it is same time we hear that nato needs to have should be in. have a presence in ukraine i mean they're certainly contradictory there is certainly

a two track here but i would i would disagree with martin is that if we have a nato ships controlling the black sea this is not in russia's geopolitical interest when we look at the middle east and beyond go ahead jonathan. no i certainly not i mean that's why this alliance of certain interests you know when the united nations was set up at the end of the second world war the idea was to have a military strategic committee which would do you know run international peacekeeping operations or even war fighting if that was necessary so that would be much better the u.n. should do this because the u.n. is universal and people should wear expected the big powers were expected to earmark contingents of forces that would be a variable to the u.n. on a permanent basis under u.n. command but unfortunately that's not happening because national sovereignty has come into the way and of course us. to submit any kind of part of its activities to international scrutiny and so we've got nato now as the kind of

world's policeman but this is quite wrong and we should be trying to limit the scope of nato not expanded in our car to you brought up your very first point in this program is that expansion creates more risks but you know what you have in ukraine for example hypothetical in the alliances that really create more safety for the alliance as a whole i don't see it. absolutely quite the contrary quite the contrary and that's why i think that ukraine will be a nato member not just least in the foreseeable future i mean there are east said nato is a fake i mean you brought up the argument of the fig leaf nato as a fig leaf for u.s. foreign policy to a certain extent definitely because of the u.s. much greater sway than any other are you on the ally and nato a's and the instrument in the us for all of us foreign policy but nato is also now alliance which has its in which. is have their own rights and duty is and i can make sure you thought. offering again ukraine

a concrete prospect of membership is pretty much not an issue which is well come in many european countries particularly western europe and night i don't see them giving their consent to moving that i them forward in nader's agenda i would actually i would also contest the interpretation of ukraine being a set in terms of of of iran i mean this is in my opinion bringing things a bit too far it's really speculative ok but martin i mean i'd like to keep it that point there because i mean i remember foreign minister lavrov said if we get a deal with the rand then we don't need to have to worry about anti-missile defense expansion in europe and in ergo nato's interest in ukraine i mean you can't have it both ways you have to be one way or the other yes lover of. his right.

if iran is denuclearized if there's no threat of nuclear weapons in iran you don't really need them to shield against those missiles and you don't need to put iran in the dock of the prompt you can. arrange some type of. with around but of course when you look at a military organization militaries always want to fight wars the old want to be active they're always looking for somewhere to get involved in and it's up to the politicians to hold them back the the rationale of the military when army has to get involved so therefore you have all these huge armies and huge defense expenditure throughout the western world which built up during the cold war which we were legitimate in those days and now people would say we can't really afford any more of that so therefore nato has to rethink its policy and the key really to the future perhaps is in fact southeast asia because countries like

vietnam strange new zealand and perhaps even the us yes us would be saying what about the rising power of china because everyone knows that the real power the real threat perceived threat. to the united states and the west will come from china and china is rising problems may be dealt with but you know we still have the obama administration making a commitment to nato jonathan i'll just be the cynic that i always am i mean at least the defense industries make money off of this ok you got to upgrade got to upgrade you got to buy it from america you got to buy it from the certain suppliers here and the taxpayers pick it up here also it's the that's a cynic but it's happening you know i mean that's obviously one of the rationale for the continuation of nature they want to sell american high tech weaponry aircraft submarines missiles all the rest of it to the new countries new new markets expanding markets because most of these countries of course goulard

previously on circuit equipment so there is a strong economic or political element behind this whole expansion of nato then the slew of that elite skateball top you know these elites in these new countries like an albanian macedonia that are on the edge of nato recently joined nato so it's very very like the free trips to washington being treated. equals being being being given the high tech training and all the rest of it and feeling they're joining some kind of you know sophisticated european white man's club and it's very you know it's very seductive and it's hard to resist that but some countries manage to do it i mean even the finns finland for example is not in there to spite of pressure from the americans from even finland to join nato you know ricardo if you look at the history of nato recently all it does is threaten or poor countries in the world it really it doesn't it's not going to fight a major war with anyone who's the enemy certainly russia is not the enemy but it we

look at the arab spring and we look at what's going on all the way from afghanistan all the way to the atlantic here there's plenty of things that nato can step on and get involved in we have the example of libya which is i think there are sterling outstanding moment of the entire history that alliance in a negative way of well let me get but. let me get back a second to watch i was saying i actually think that nato is rational is still much more political and strategic than certainly economic i don't see an economic rationale for nato i mean i don't see nato being so essential in the u.s. ministry of defense industry leader in the finance industry selling its items are across the world not not least because coming among the best customers of the us. defense champions are governments which are not within nato so i wouldn't say i wouldn't see that element as being so so critical while i still see

the political elements the bargain between the europeans who wants to go the united states remain committed to their security and the united states once you get windstream are no longer are not like it's i could jump in and ask you could if i could jump in and ask you i mean they want washington because they want the american taxpayer to pay for it because. united states pays the vast majority of the bill for nato so this is free riding that's what they want they no no no they don't want they're not the security of this is really an evolution is this they want someone else in times of austerity particularly now let the american taxpayer pick it up the american defense industries would be more than happy to do it i'm sorry but it's true. but to disagree although i do see your point when i see a thing that the economy economic i mean the economic rationale for nato is i mean implying the reason economic rationalist very weak although you what you said it's true in terms of the bargain sharing problem i mean the united states now accounts

for seventy five percent of the entire defense budget spent by nato members so there are some a actually there are some people here in the united states questioning the validity of nato because it cannot really give any any other value i still disagree with that because the political support which nato. european allies gave the united states and nations like the one we had in afghanistan it's been it's been really critical it's been really critical how i do see this problem and i'm not denying it one way very heavily on the alliances feature ok martin and we heard just afghanistan here again another one of those outstanding moments of the alliance i mean i said in the introduction in you know an ambiguous adventure but it's absolutely a catastrophe it's a good catastrophic failure and the alliance really showed what it is it's really not effective here without american power. that's absolutely right because afghanistan is the success from

a nato point of view that got so many countries to contribute troops but if you look at the germans contingent they refused to fight. they were not going to get in india involved immediate sense of operation so afghanistan from a military point of view is a defeat as was iraq and the afghan lesson i think will be learnt that you will have no future large nato involvement in a muslim country or perhaps even in any other country to try and change the government to try and change the way society is run and so on so afghanistan is in fact a high water mark is that they say it's a watershed is the rubicund and after this native new government in western europe would permit would vote for in involvement like afghanistan in the future one has the example of syria where the m.p.'s in britain rebelled against the british government decision to get involved they said no we're not going to do that and the

reason for that was of course i've got to stand why are we getting involved in syria and that's the reason why nato will not get militarily involved in syria or anywhere else in the middle east the big question is what happens then if iran gets a nuclear weapon that will be a key question and that's really will be decided by the americans and the israelis jonathan there are people that say they need to. go ahead but at their last last thirty seconds i but there are people who are saying what not exactly that nato should be global go ahead i just want first of all marriages to deal with one thing the martensite i mean are i think it was a watershed afghanistan what are. the problems the american british public's have about afghanistan and iraq with the ground troops in there there's still the use of nato air power in libya for example which was already mentioned several times and in syria the dangerous not yet passed but the americans might like to strike syria the syrian government forces. well with drones and the british and french might go

along with that too sir nato is not yet out of the picture in terms of all right gentlemen on the plane there it is not out of the picture we've run out of time many thanks to my guest today in london and in washington and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at r.t. see you next time and remember. the things he. told you my language as well but i will only react to situations i have read the reports. for years and no i will leave them to the state department to comment on your point to. secure because i'm not talking no.

thank you no more weasel words. when you need a direct question be prepared for a change when you should be ready for a. freedom of speech a little down to to freedom. we speak your language. but there. were news programs in documentaries and spanish matters to you breaking news a little turn to angles kidneys stories. for you here.

in the spanish find out more visit.

breaking news for you this hour here on r.t. international one suspect behind the attempted hijacking of an ethiopian passenger plane has reportedly been arrested by the boeing seven sixty seven on route to rome was forced to land in geneva. a russian pilot jailed in the us meets his lawyer and says. he's on the verge of a heart attack still waiting to be examined by a doctor. seven golds up for grabs in sochi on monday as the winter olympics enters its last week amid very tight competition at the very top of the medal table russian hopes currently lying with. a string of suicides rocking the financial world your naughty international which right.