yeah i don't know you know right now what's happening in the united states as you're aware is that we have a number of concerns in regard to russia and we're addressing some of them more thoughtfully and more aggressively than others so for example we're worried about russia's potential threats to the baltic states and therefore we have operation atlantic resolve the so-called european deterrence initiative we've got nato forces rotating through poland and the baltics and i think that will continue and that's probably enough to reinforce in your putin's mind the idea that we are committed to the security of all of our nato allies i don't think john bolton needs to add anything there necessarily or even if he adds something maybe it's a few hundred more u.s. troops it probably doesn't need to be a big deal on the other hand in dealing with the election security problem that we had in two thousand and sixteen concerns about russian manipulation of voter rolls or of you know email releases from the democratic national committee or setting up

trolls and adding fake news into our social media accounts i don't think we've done very well at protecting ourselves from future threats regardless of whether they're from russia or some other place these are new threats in the world of the internet and social media and we need to toughen our electoral system so that we're less vulnerable president trump doesn't like this conversation because he sees it as an attack on the legitimacy of his election victory in two thousand and sixteen but i think john bolton will try to persuade president that in fact this is a threat to our country more generally and we have to address it regardless of whether we think it came from russia or somewhere else in the where it would come in the future and at whose expense it might occur in the future so on that issue bolton probably will want us to be stronger and tougher i could go on but you see what i'm driving at on some issues bolton just tests to sustain current policy and others he may push for some new ideas now. you're being very diplomatic in this conversation but. you yourself wrote the other day in one of your articles that

putin behaves like at home and this is i think very similar to the language that ambassador bolton would be used with russia or its leader and i can tell you for sure that if president trump decides to quote from your articles in his conversation about vladimir putin and that conversation would not last very long i wonder how do you think the american president should navigate this very complex challenge of negotiating in good faith with russia beach presupposes a certain degree of politeness and having to please russia critics of russia haters both at home and within his own administration right well let me say two things first to clarify why i use that language because i saw a number of things happen that i think the kremlin had a hand in everything from the attempted assassination of the double agent in britain to some of the support for the assad regime and its barrel bombing and artillery attacks on its own populations in syria and perhaps even issues like the

numb soft killing in russia and the evidence that i've seen suggests complicity at the highest levels of the russian government in some of these tragedies which had a very human cost now i could be wrong but that's my working understanding and that's why i use strong words at the expense of the russian president however i also have written about how i think that vladimir putin is genuinely respected among russians because he did help stabilize the country after the yeltsin years he tried to restore a sense of stability growing prosperity international prestige and in my writings i've tried to argue that we need to understand the basis for president putin's popularity even if we ourselves don't like him and that's the way i try to combat this now in diplomacy you're right you know what i've written on these pieces of paper as a scholar is one thing if i were somehow meeting with president putin which i don't expect to do but if. if i were somehow asked to do that that i would try to be

polite but i also want to raise human rights issues because that is fundamentally one of the divisive issues right now separating the united states from russia and by the way one last point i know that a flood a mere putin where in this conversation he would point out that we americans sometimes feel a little bit holier than thou that we sometimes feel like we're the only country that's trying to be moral but we also we also make a lot of mistakes and some of them are from negligence or incompetence for example the poor way in which we prepared to stabilize iraq after the invasion of two thousand and three the poor way in which we prepared to stabilize libya after the overthrow of khadafi in two thousand and eleven the way in which we encouraged the syrian opposition to rise up against assad in two thousand and eleven but then didn't give them enough help so we just essentially condemned the country to a civil war and i would personally acknowledge that if president putin said these things to me or to us that he would have a certain amount of validity in those arguments so you know the criticisms can go

in both directions certainly criticism could go in both directions but i think the big sound of damage i simply don't understand how americans can even compare that because if you take the you do war in the rag the war in libya the war in syria the casualty is a measure of them how hundreds of thousands whatever you don't like about russia's action in in its neighborhood or even in the middle east it never comes to dive same point and yet the. political culture it is very common to even deny russia's moral equivalence but the united states despite the fact that the americans i'm sorry for being blunt killed far far more people around the world than russians have ever done don't you find this. rather contradictory and well you know i recognize the need for this debate because i hear what you're saying. and some of it i agree with and all of it needs to be discussed now in

syria from an american a standard american point of view which is not necessarily mine but a standard american point of view is that we rose up or we encouraged on protests that day had these protests or speech infiltrated from iraq reach guilt a lot of people be how did a lot of people suppress rights people's rights to much larger extent that they local government come back to iraq but on syria the american interpretation is that we supported demonstrators and then they were mowed down by assad and then russia came in to help assad who already had a lot of blood on his hands the russian view is that americans were naive because by supporting the demonstrators they failed to foresee the most likely result and so even if the americans were not morally directly guilty of murder they wound up encouraging a process which had foreseeable consequences that were very bad now my view i'm not

really here to debate you because what i've tried to do is to acknowledge that there are these two different narratives and they're both partially correct and i think we do need to revisit u.s. russia relations by listening to each other's narratives i'm critical of president putin yes but i also have said that we need to rethink the way in which nato has expanded into eastern europe and we need to try to negotiate a new security architecture with lattimer putin that would anticipate an end to nato expansion provided that putin would help resolve the ukraine and georgia crises and agree that all these countries can join the european union someday if they wish and if they're invited and if we can do that deal then we can sort of restart u.s. russia relations eliminate the sanctions and go to a more stable period in our history that's the kind of dialogue that i want to have well mr hamlyn we have to take a short break but we will be back in just a few moments stay tuned.

when you don't. see the teachers what did they could put in. to what they did not through only ten steps to. make. left alone they. said. cement claiming to know servant is messy that. you speak french. those are the books of you. then send them to continue. this busy the council itself to. the most expensive fish in the world each one is selling for tens of thousands of euros it continues to grow its entire life if it was thirty years old you might

have a two ton fish out there and yet they don't get that big today because we're way too good at catching. it's only remnants of a much larger mission was once there was much more widely distributed we have politicians that are in office for a few years they have to get reelected everything is very very short term our system is not suited and is not geared for the long term survival and that's why we have because this is a. fearful reality ransoming in our faces of people uploading their minds to it and they're willing to trade their physical body in exchange for the promise of immortality because remember as we've shifted from the physical to the spiritual i guess you good god we've also lost all values associated with the physical plane they all respect for gravity dollar spec for.

thanks. for the gravitational this ethical is valueless back you moral turpitude which is the new reality or heaven as some may call it. welcome back to worlds apart with michael o'hanlon senior fellow at the brookings institution mr howland just before the break we were talking about the perceptions of the war in iraq and there is an opinion that the appointment of john bolton is a direct consequence of the united states failing to reckon with their legacy of the bush years treating dot's war as a blunder as a mistake rather than a crime that it was and we all know the john bolton that the time was one of the

loudest advocates of that war he's still pushing. for preemptive strikes against both iran and north korea how high is the danger in your view of history repeating itself in this administration well that is a question a lot of us are asking in washington right now as well because like i've said before in this conversation i don't think that president trump will automatically do what john bolton tells him to do and i think secretary of defense jim mattis will have a lot of influence still i hope that secretary of state incoming peo will be very thoughtful on some of these issues although as you know he's also very hardline especially on the iran question so i don't really know what president trump is going to decide but i agree with the way you put the question that a lot of us now have this concern because we have taken away one relatively more moderate voice that's you know a charming master who has lived through. a lot of war who has fought

a lot who knows the consequences of war who understands the limited options that we sometimes have before us and we're replacing h.r. mcmaster with someone who's much more hardline and more ideological and in my opinion somewhat less experienced in the most important ways that can prepare somebody for this job so i'm a little bit more nervous myself but i'm not going to predict what president trumps decisions will be because again historically there are times where the national security advisor has not been the most influential or even one of the most influential advisers to a president or sometimes that person's role has been more about implementation and management and we'll have to see how this works out with john bolton now mr headland you've written a lot about the tensions between russia and the to the tensions that have lab in the past have only been in a new generation of weapons which at least according to the kremlin run the u.s. missile defense system in europe obsolete do you believe that to be the case and if

so do you think russia is now in the position of negotiating peace through strength as ronald reagan these to put it first of all i think the united states and russia both need to find ways to stop wasting money on nuclear arms because we are so much above everyone else and also we have so much power against the other one neither side could ever disarm the other with a preemptive strike and the other side could use a missile defense system to prevent a retaliation by the other side so we have more than we need and i regret that we're both wasting more money on these systems than we need to in the united states we anticipate spending something like one point three trillion dollars on our nuclear modernization agenda over the next twenty to twenty five years i think that's more than we should be spending and part of the reason is we're returning to a little bit of an arms race dynamic with russia however on your broader point about peace through strength. i actually do share some of that hopeful vision and i'm glad to see russia in some ways be stronger under vladimir putin have more

self-confidence rebuild some elements of its military strength it causes me a. certain actions that russia is carried out but i think a strong russia is good for the world it's good for the stability of eurasia to the extent that russia feels good about its own territorial coherence and protection that makes russia more confident actor and a more secure actor and so i'm in favor of that a couple of years ago a colleague of mine named cliff gatti he and i wrote an article in which we suggested that a future russia that the united states should aspire to would be something that we would call a reagan off russia so we took the were ronald reagan and added the russians suffix o. v. to imply that a peace through strength attitude on the part of russia where the army is is well treated and strengthened where the patriotism of the country is reinforced where

the country feels that it's on its feet stable secure and prosperous this actually is the kind of russia the united states should want and it's a more realistic aspiration than believing that russia is going to want to join the european union or you know become the new other loans or sweden i think russia is very different than a lot of european countries in its political outlook and its history but we can i think benefit from a strong russia that's self-confident and at peace with its neighbors i'm not sure i agree with you about russia joining with europe i mean certainly russia is not going to be part of the european union but i think russia definitely sees itself as part of the european civilization with everything that in it entails including human rights the respect for the rule of law democratic institutions free and fair elections etc but coming back to that point of reagan of russia because i actually think that putin. may read a lot of. reagan thinking because he talks about that in his own way but he

centrally his main point is that russia will only be respected when when it's strong it is only the strong russia that the west and the united states in particular could take seriously but the. letter question i'm not quite sure you said that this is the kind of pressure that the west should one but do you think this is the kind of pressure that the west can take yes i think it's our i think right now we're not there i mean right now i see a russia that's still struggling to figure out its role in the world and i think some of what vladimir putin has done is regrettable it's understandable but it's also regrettable and you know you have good criticisms of american foreign policy mistakes and i think a lot of your criticisms are important ones for us to hear and reflect on i also have criticisms of russian foreign policy i think russia's been too aggressive towards ukraine and syria for example and i'd like to see russia more confident to the point where that kind of issue is no longer as likely to occur that's part of

why i believe this new security architecture where russia doesn't feel like nato is continually moving east and yet at the same time russia acknowledges the rights of countries like ukraine enjoy georgia to join the european union some day i think that's the right sort of compromise that's the right vision for this zone of neutral countries in central and eastern europe and i think you know you mention the yes russia is a european country what i was trying to say before yes russia's european but it's also different it's distinct you can tell me if i'm wrong but i don't think that most russians and vision the european project the same way that some western europeans do where the nation state becomes weaker and less important over time especially five ten years ago a lot of west europeans thought the european union would ultimately become more important than the countries they lived in and there's been some pushback against that of course in britain and else. where but that's still part of the european project in the minds of some west europeans i don't know too many russians who

think that way i believe russians want to be part of europe but also want to be their own entity the great power of you know eurasia and that the nation state is very important in the russian political consciousness and it's not getting weaker as history moves forward that's what i meant to say the russian i think is different from some parts of western europe even though it is also part of europe as you correctly point out i generally agree with you mr han let me try to squeeze in the one more question about another reason appointing mr prepare we have spoken a lot about mr bolton but didn't have much time to discuss him in particular he's currently be had of the cia and it's been reported in the russian media that the cia and russia's f.s.b. the federal security service the successor of the k.g.b. montane quote unquote an active dialogue and an indirect proof of that would be everything meeting between russia security and intelligence chiefs with their

american counterparts in in washington it looks like compare has already been acting in this squad that a diplomatic capacity even. as they have of the cia yeah you might be right about that i mean we've heard some of those discussions and some of those rumors and learned about some of those meetings to course i don't know the substance of the conversations but i think they may provide an entree into a broader conversation i believe the united states and russia are still going to have a lot of problems in our relationship for a while but we need to start having a broader dialogue about how we see our common future especially in regard to central and eastern europe and that has to be handled with a certain amount of separate you know conversation from the immediate policy agenda on syria ukraine election meddling human rights all the issues where we're still having a lot of disagreements and we will probably to. tinubu i have disagreements but we've also got to look to have some kind of a broader historical understanding of how our countries are going to get along with

each other long term and so as pompei i was the guy who can do that but i think it probably makes sense that he's going to be secretary of state that should allow him a more natural position from which to continue those conversations with russia well mr howland we have to leave it there but i really appreciate your being on the show today and to our viewers please keep the conversation going in our social media pages that's for me hope to see you again same place same time here on worlds apart .

well you know the cars they were kind of adopted because we were called pirates for so long. i mean they're in the smaller boats need to die hard to achieve and it's still a. lot tougher than. the little self to make cold fish already ninety percent of the dot and it won't be calmer. concert fifteen scoops seventy five tons and they do it several times a day with a big fleet now you get an idea of why. we have to understand we could not stay still would just. be witness for the new deal for you because our. i'm doing this because i want the future world to future generations to have and enjoy the ocean how we have.

a. feel. when they got to shoot it up to you believe because you. didn't think it was easy to cut. the russian ambassador to the u.k. right. into the policeman exposed to a nerve agent in the screwball poisoning incident commanding officers bravery and calling for cooperation with britain. u.k.

investigators raid the offices of the political consulting firm cambridge analytic over a major data breach involving millions of facebook accounts. its police officer dies of his injuries following friday's terrorist attack in the south of france is now being hailed as a national hero. for the latest on these stories you can head to r.t. dot com coming up though a former pentagon official is the guest on going underground talking about the war in afghanistan and if they're watching us newquay nic explores the israeli palestinian conflict. and we're going underground is just a thousands demonstrate outside would immigrant detention center in england

previously denied access to the united nations special report on violence against women coming up on the show with an n.h.s. direct to claim again patients died because of overcrowding at a british hospital how sustainable is europe's first universal health care system in the hands of theresa may fall the tory shadow health minister lord recalled tells us charging for appointments may be the submission and there's more explosions rocked kabul what is britain still doing fighting the usas longest war we speak to the pentagon's former captain a few how resigned over what he says were lies about afghanistan was this a very raucous outpost i've said it before and said to get back bench members should seek to imitate zen like carl mccall father of a house gets named jack. pm piers over the more coming up today is going underground but first to britain's universal health care system the n.h.s. where according to one leaked email

a man died in the past fortnight because of overcrowding and accident and emergency this after prime minister to resume had said the u.k. was prepared for winter the n.h.s. has been better prepared for this went into the never for a we have put extra funding in there are more beds available across the system and she continues to deny it is using the twenty zero eight western financial crisis to privatized the n.h.s. but according to those like the late professor stephen hawking who died this month the evidence is being cherry picked to defend the maize government on the n.h.s. speaking as a scientist. that insists on acceptable. citing some studies but. just. they want to implement for. patients scientific culture reza stephen hawking given permission to challenge resumes policies on health at the high court will now not see the results of the

judicial review he and others sought jordache with shadow health secretary for the labor party which set up the n.h.s. was not available for comment so we went to a noisy green outside the palace of westminster to talk to former tory shadow health minister lord mccall he was parliamentary private secretary to prime minister john major and a member of parliament long term sustainability of the n.h.s. committee britain's parliament is due to debate his report and the sustainability of the n.h.s. . mccall welcome to going on the ground on this relatively cold they are warmer than it was well i think i'm going to need the n.h.s. and if it goes it. does tell me just quickly before we get on to most specific matters what the long term sustainability of the n.h.s. committee is because that's quite a title suggesting that you could have said that the n.h.s. is no longer sustainable. the general feeling is that if it carries on as it is it

may not be sustainable and there need to be changes and one of the big changes we suggest which is has already been adopted is to fuse social with ordinary medical care and because there's no doubt there's been a neglect compound of. social care and of course the fusing of those two elements of care has been the subject of quite a lot of debate because a friend they make of this week's announcement. that the nurses are going to get more money because already some criticism that whatever jeremy hunt is offering it's still a. to a full fourteen percent sixteen percent in the index linked since twenty ten well at least it's something i mean the problem has been and i've been looking back in the records and there was this statement from all the presence of the colleges the role cultures of certain surgeons physicians and so on the n.h.s. is about to collapse and most soon reach

a situation where recovery will be very difficult or impossible you know that's the sort of statement but the date of that statement thirty years ago see every so often they have these terrible so i burst but things are terrible and that things are difficult and we have to cope with different changing circumstances but if you if you look at the thing that's really changed in this country over the last twenty years it's basically epidemic blisse going to be zero second leg zero s. just it's just britain is the worst in europe we we've not seen life expectancy falling in germany yes we have it is falling in germany it's falling in the united states and it's falling here and what do those three countries have in common obesity that's why it's for you see there was a paper published in one of the journals they found that thirty thousand people had

died and you couldn't quite make out why that was so they blame the government government cuts so i wrote to the guy and said well what did they die of these thirty thousand people he didn't know what he didn't know i think he states two to government couple ok we do know that oh it s derived data says one hundred twenty thousand lives have been lost cut short by something austerity people talking about influenza the worst flu outbreak that wasn't obesity the excess winter deaths well wait a minute how do you know it's not the beast because that's the worst epidemic for a high. hundred years that's what's killing people is killing is killing millions it's costing billions and the cure is free at last it's simple as that. and then people say our world is multifactorial me it's very difficult it's not multi-factorial it's simply due to the fact that people are eating too much then they say our poor people can't afford the right food but if poor people ate less of

the wrong food taste better off we've got to educate when it is in the context of hundreds of thousands not being able to eat tonight without food back so obviously there premature deaths should there be them or not to do with obesity presumably one of the jurors or we have a we have two million. type two diabetics in the sky two million what's the cause of that overeating what's the cure. eat less and you can actually cure many of these cases if they would eat less maybe why this isn't amazing more. in a bigger fashion and people look at the finances in the way it's affecting poorer communities is a fact that your apportioning it seems blame to these poor community are here other than sage of the food multinationals asked to blame no no i take that point and.