that pledge the chinese may need to swap european goods for american ones they may stop buying airbus and buy buoying in stats as if it was some exclusive tucson if dots were to proceed i suppose the current trade where would look like child's play the rule american demand on china is not about farm produce it's about high technology americans are concerned about china's made in china twenty twenty five program which seeks to subsidize china's development of ten critical technologies technologies where the best in particular the u.s. of a head of china today including robotics commercial jetliner manufacture. computer microchips it's a crime. so the american demand is that instead of china subsidizing

this made in china i don't even if i program should be buying technology products from the american market now this demand has not been well opposite but this isn't the heart of the nickel see sions the negotiating strategy or the night states they are trying to get china to. to stop subsidizing some underwriting this major technology initiative and instead by technology products from the u.s. in order to balance the bilateral trade because if the chinese want to buy major technology products from the u.s. market that would be a much better sure way of cutting down the trade surplus than buying american farm produce which even if they bought all american from produce there would not be able to balance the trade to the satisfaction of the americans well i'm mr cellini and i think there could be a legitimate questions about the fairness of all of such pressure because if china

wants to develop a high tech industry i think it should be able to do so i mean all the countries india including russia including the united states including do how you know interest is in the reach they see a potential but that my question to you is somewhat different i want to if you see any way of addressing the current balance in trade between china and the united states or between the united states and other countries in the way that would be fair to all and that would not destroy or significantly undermine the trade system that has already been suffering quite a lot in recent years it's a good question free trade is founded on fed trade but free trade is not always fair trade free trade becomes fair trade only if the two parties involved have the odd relationship

that is matching if there is a mismatch in the mix between two parties the trade relationship. may be free in terms of free trade but it may not be fair trade so fair trade really depends on your politics it depends on part dynamics and that goes to the heart of this matter that fran is not about trade only create is largely about politics and the politics is not right for one party then we will not see fair trade so in this china. you must relationship the americans still have it wanted the us they have the most powerful country and they're seeking to use their greater leverage to get the chinese to accept their major to months this is the dynamic at play kind of ok well mr trelawny we have to

take a short break now but we will be back in just a few moments stay tuned. you never know what's around the corner never know what's in the pub and all can take place that excitement is that not knowing that's where the adrenalin much comes from. and you can use in these definitions and extremes of all forms of. the violence is a part and it's almost a schizophrenia gang culture where you can do all these things and behave badly.

in portable public hospitals for all. of us was more so for the last. punishment and infirm and more or less in the start. of a broader way in the fight but i was really did a poll down down went up with. any reason is the least if you don't involves it's constantly evolving and. welcome back to worlds apart with a brown like lenny professor on strategic studies at the new daily basis center for policy research mr chill any you wrote once actually more than once that india is a critical swing state perhaps the most critical swing state in the world when it

comes to global trade at this point of time do you see its interests aligned more with china regardless of how ten years that relationship is or with the trumpet ministration neither to be frank with you because when china india has a very lopsided trade relationship the chinese trade surplus with india has doubled in the last three and a half years to sixty billion dollars which means that every month china is enjoying a five billion create surplus with india and more importantly the content of the trade relationship the chinese are dumping manufactured goods to the in our kids and buying essentially drama truths from the market. so that tribulation ship makes china anything but the partner of india as far as the united states is concerned because of american pressure on india on the information technology industry to

give you one example the americans have not been very helpful even though the u.s. and india have a close relationship but the americans have been pressing india on several different fronts they want india to cut down its trade surplus with the u.s. right now in danger as a twenty nine billion dollar trade surplus which is which is less than half of what china enjoys was of india by the americans and sustaining that india cut down on that trade surplus they also want to get india to open up its economy to more american products so india is facing multiple pressure and on top of that the americans are trying to pressure india on on russia and on iran through sanctions so india certainly does not look at united states as a partner on trade now it's been presumed up until recently at least that the

global economy is not strictly a quid pro quo you know i buy i sell you you know goods for its one dollar you buy the same for me like they are the general wisdom has been that it is more complicated than that that you compensate the trade deficit by having other sort of relationships but it seems that both mr trump and to some extent to you as well subscribe to these kind of again as i said quid pro quo type of trade do you think that's the way to go for the future as far as global trade is concerned there has to be some degree of. symmetry in the critter nation ship it's like relationships between individuals if if relationship between any two individuals as unbalanced that relationship will not flourish it won't be sustainable over the long term similarly trade relationship that is unbalanced love cited unhinge is not going to last for ever really last even ten years. there needs to be some degree of

balance but mr chill and even in personal family relationship determining that balance is extremely hard it's not only about how much money somebody brings into the household or how many chores a person. carries i guess what i'm trying to ask you is whether you have any formula in mind for determining that balance for things that are not easily quantifiable well balanced that's not involved just numbers the amount of goods traded. and not on your just symmetry in that aspect balances also in terms of how the two sides are benefiting from a trade relationship what is the content of that relationship is it in the economic growth of both countries or is it anything more they can all make interest or one

country all these factors together make the term balance balance is not just about the total dollar value of goods created by by by each side with other. now speaking of other countries the united states is set to decide next week on whether it wants to continue with cherif exemptions on still an aluminum for the european producers and it looks like the europeans are not particularly holding that breath they will be example much longer do you expect that to change anything in terms of the global trade balance because you know that both the e.u. and the united states more often than not tended to be on the one side when it comes to trade negotiations you mentioned trade blocks before while the developed countries used to be a powerful trade blog do you expect that trade block to you if not to fall apart on the police to be a little bit more fractured than it is right now if the united states indeed

withdraws dos. tariff exemptions from the european producers well you're a strict policy at the moment as is a mess because trump has created confusion on several fronts is critical to sharon in terms of its of america's allies for by refusing to permanently exempt the european union japan canada from steel and aluminum tariffs he threatened to impose tariffs on on. and on and on top of all this there was no going threat of of escalation of us china tension so right now this is the sort of confusion in terms of us straight policy but what this confusion is doing is making america's allies we think their relationship with the united states for example the transatlantic relationship which has been the bedrock of of western security

that frost atlantic relationship now is being openly debated and question in europe both mr chinese as you may imagine to me in moscow not big fans of that. transatlantic. security relationship we tend to think that it sometimes undermines security rather than strengthens it but putting that aside this state of disarray do you think it presents any opportunities for countries to form you know cross. you know cross camp ties because you mentioned before and up until recently the trade negotiations were stalled primarily because of the trade blocs now there seems to be an opportunity to put that block differences aside form something new do you think there is any chance of former u.s. allies or current curious allies and perhaps for more current adversity going

together and trying to influence trade policies in the way they find feed for themselves want to model is going to do this is going to it's going to make countries. alliances that. they're likely to. form new relationships. they're likely to reduce their dependence on certain countries for example and build a great relationships with some other countries so we're going to see some flux as a result of what we are witnessing today and this turmoil is going to lead to a very different kind of a trade matter in the years to come we have seen a point of ration of free trade agreements by that fully and regionally and i think we're going to see more of these f.t.'s emerging as countries seek to shift

their trade priorities and their friends relationships in a manner to create some stability in their frame policies and that freed relationships now you mentioned before this threat of second there is sanctions stomping from the trade with iran i know that india has a trading good trading relationship with that country so do the europeans but so far what i am hearing both from the indian experts and the european x.-press is is an idea that they need to go to washington and negotiate some individual exemptions for themselves i wonder if that is every really in a fact of strategy are they being slow in forming those relationships new relationships that the mansion because from my point of view or perhaps with make better sense to form a united states front and negotiate with the united states as united states on secondary sanctions rather than asking humbly for some individual exemptions

begging for individual waivers. is probably the worst option that any country can pursue because that will lead to even greater american pressure on that country to be subsumed into the united states because anywhere that is granted to a country will bill come with conditions that further constrict that country's options the fact is that whether it's iran or the new act the new american law directed at russia which is called country america is administering sanctions act these laws and these sanctions are seeking to apply american sanctions extraterritorial only extra to rule sanctions are unlawful international law they violate international law they violate the human charter

they also flout the rules of the global trade agreement and to give respectability to these dictatorial through sanctions will amount to giving a blank check to washington to set international rules for trade as well as to set international rules for interested relations countries have to speak up because in the past between twenty twelve and twenty sixteen when the u.s. was applying sanctions against iran on the oil front most countries went along because because the issue then was about restraining iran's nuclear weapons ambitions but now that the americans have withdrawn from that nuclear deal even as iran was in full compliance with that deal today the americans do not have this kind of. latitude to be able to enforce extra total sanctions

across the world elaborate harder time well mr china i totally agree with the i just hope that they could all not only speak out but also act together but anyway we have to leave it there i really appreciate your time and your perspective and i hope our viewers can keep this conversation going on our social media pages as for me to hope to see her again same place same time here on worlds apart.

elaine. oh my. illusions.

these we continue to discuss only about some amateurs of the maastricht. and we don't have nothing to give to the next generation have reason. to be proud to be utopian these is the reason all of us kept. up. a lot. by the looks of them. have not. learned.

this minute before has been there and now everything is being turned into a massive cloud of dust and the stories that shape where we are today is one of the few news i did to north korea to witness the demolition of its nuclear test site towards the denuclearize ation of the korean peninsula also ahead. everybody. knows that you know that that is the body another day another diplomatic one eighty from donald trump as he leaves the world guessing if the historic summit with north korea is back on or not despite polling at shortly after pyongyang raised its

nuclear site. this week the st petersburg international economic forum saw global business leaders on the political elite gather in russia's new. we take a closer look at what was one of the most anticipated meetings between the french and russian. also coming up on the program the u.k. government this week is accused of inaction almost one year on from the grand tragedy a public inquiry was launched into why seventy two people lost their lives in the london tower block. but the top stories from the past seven days on right up to the moment developments as well this is the weekly on our team international a highly symbolic step was taken by north korea that destroyed its nuclear test

site in front of the world's cameras on thursday r.t. correspondent was among the journalists invited to witness the facility being decommissioned. we're in the beijing international airport and as you can see behind me we're being greeted like celebrities here have bills to go to north korea thing is we aren't even exactly sure as to where exactly we're headed. so you walk out of any airport what's the first thing you expect to see it's a bustling crowd of people pushing and shoving it's a taxi drivers offering that often overpriced services well check this out nothing of the sort here it's just an empty parking lot and three buses that will take us

to the city. this is where i will be spending the next eleven hours or so my very own oriental express i guess so check out the room the first thing to notice about it is the windows the blinds are shot there is some sort of a seal and we're not allowed to you can peek from them never mind filming the thing as an air conditioner some beverages but really not much left to do but to go to bed. everybody so we're just woke up it's six in the morning but check this out i just want to show you something really quickly they've opened the window the blinds are out so it probably means we're really really close. so we finally arrived this is the dog station we're being told a cylinder now we're up for a bus ride these are the buses that will take us through the next leg of our

journey. behind the east northern tunnel number two that's where the five nuclear tests five most recent nuclear tests have been conducted people here are reassuring are saying that there have been no radiation leaks that the environment is good but many journalists may think that well it's but a safe than sorry as you can see some are wearing respirator mosques and some crews have taken. to me tis with them to the strip which were no confiscated at the customs we were also handed out these yellow safety helmets. to go to work in the world but now everything is being turned into a massive cloud. builds

barracks were used for living for the soldiers to help to locate soldiers and well now north korea is showing that it is destroying the infrastructure to. around this trip we have been made very clear that what we've been free to choose on this trip was a privilege not to many people here in north korea get to experience it because done of reporting from north korea on c. yeah journalistic insight from north korea there with igor well on the same day as pyongyang destroyed its nuclear facility donald trump said he wouldn't be meeting with kim jong un at a schedule summit in june whoever just the following day he backed away from that statement. well you what happened to the. job you. want to do

or we'd like to work at the white house. decided to terminate the plan summit in singapore in june twelfth. everybody you know you know that better than anybody who knows what he thought so i'd suspect least of all donald trump knows what he's up to i mean this is somebody who jumped into that meeting first of all quicker than a ferret supper drainpipe there is no policy behind it this is somebody who is into making headlines and appeasing the base and yesterday the needs to not go down well with his base supporters that he had pulled out of this meeting he'd always seen it as a chance to make peace on the korean peninsula which would be world breaking history and i think you saw yesterday you saw all of that dissolving. well hopes of a meeting between the u.s. and north korean leaders were high with the u.s.

even issuing a coin showing the two face to face however recently america's national security adviser and the u.s. vice president and donald trump himself one that north korea could face the same fate as war torn libya a reminder the north african country gave up its weapons of mass destruction but still faced a nato intervention on saturday the leaders of north korea met in the to militarize on the cape about the border separating the two states j.n. told his counterpart that trump is committed to putting an end to hostile relations between the north on the us i think though that he sympathized with kim jong un's possible dots artie's don't quarter takes a closer look. this is a good deal for the united states north korea will freeze and then dismantle its nuclear program south korea and our other allies will be better protected the entire world will be safer as we slow the spread of nuclear weapons the deal did

sound good but it collapsed a few years later the u.s. promised north korea two nuclear reactors five hundred thousand tons of fuel year and a lifting of sanctions but it didn't deliver fast forward to two thousand and eighteen you know there's a chance that it will work out there's a chance it's a very substantial chance that it will work out i think it will be very successful but as i always say who knows you know i often say who knows who knows how it all works maybe. perhaps the u.s. sees the status quo of seeing north korea as the ultimate threat as being something beneficial south korea is spending billions of dollars making bases and paying u.s. troops essentially to be there to ostensibly protect against. the north now that being the case if there were to be peace in korea. there's going to be questioning as well do we need our troops there or. and so i think in that sense there are forces that don't want

a resolution that. the instability and allow us to maintain these troops and dozens and dozens of bases and posts in this small country in a region that we think strategically is or anime's of a government our friends of its military industrial complex and having a nemesis like north korea is a great excuse to pump up that military budget the request includes an additional four billion dollars to support the phaeton defense announcements to counter the threat from north korea no point seven billion to repair damage to u.s. navy ships and one point two billion in support of my administration south asia strategy japan is one ally that stands to benefit from u.s. military expansion especially after the recent reelection of its prime minister who vowed to defend japan from north korean aggression weeks after p.r. yang's missile launches these election is about whether we can defend japan from north korea and ensure it will leave happily and the unpredictability on the korean

peninsula has fringe benefits for some american rivals the south china sea has been a serious bone of contention as of late with the u.s. attempting to assert its naval presence there much to beijing's annoyance so the larger threat of north korea's nuclear program has shifted u.s. military attention that would otherwise be focused towards china and although russia doesn't directly benefit from its unpredictable neighbor it's certainly doesn't mind a challenge to u.s. dominance in the region what these countries are just beginning to recognize is they getting into an arms race as it's increasing in and as china is expanding its military operations it takes money out of the economic damages of the kind of the which we get is there a common enemy is a very complicated issue except for the south koreans who are essentially getting the short.