they're not just kind of ineffective but they're very often bad for which he calls america first so how are those two going to talk to one another what do we think well i think this is actually a very interesting question to ponder because as you said these two represent two very different archetypes of governance the new york european the way which is based on laws it's very simple deliberations slow motion decision making and the what i would call the old american way you know get it done and get it done very quickly and it's not that donald trump doesn't respect institutions i'm not sure about that but i think he definitely has a certain disregard for for the dialogue for the sake of dialogue i think he may believe that the european union is using it to its advantage to keep the benefits as much as you may dislike him i'm sure that that is the case for most european intellectuals do you think your of can learn anything from donald trump well first

of all i don't think international politics is about liking are not liking it's about asking whether parties countries and their leaders or groups inside countries . have learned and know how to pursue their interests which is what it's all about in a way that's enlightened for them meaning that it's in a way which also contains or is interest in the long run indeed that's what the u.s. did when you talk about the old american way the old american way depends what you call old but has to do also with the end of world war two where the u.s. created the bretton woods institution and very much as a benign and had him on sometimes sacrifice its interest in the short run to pursue its interest and more general global interest in the longer run so in this sense i would say that. the question for me is whether trump is pursuing even his own country's interests in the appropriate way. it's not about whether i like him or

not whether i'd like him to babysit my children that's not the point and indeed i don't think donald trump you say well it's not necessarily that he dislikes institution you witnessed as well as i did his coming to the u.k. and advising. terrorism may our prime minister to sue the european union indeed he said many times he doesn't think that you should continue to exist he doesn't like i want you to know it really depends on the point of view because you can make an argument that he actually trust the institution of courts and he believes that judges will be able to make the best judgment i mean coming from russia you know what people mostly distrust our court system that is actually you know kind of you know a sign of respect but nevertheless you mentioned he's a slogan america first and i think in order to discuss it in a serious detail we really really have to contend the issue of nationalism and what strikes me about nationalism is that for many in europe it is quite clearly

a pejorative term and we all understand why it is a bridge or a deterrent but for many. you know in other parts of the world in the united states even more so in russia it is actually a positive term do you think people in europe and the leadership in europe actually understand that not everybody shares dire conception of nationalism and their fears of what it represents first of all i mean you're absolutely right. as you remarked about russia that it's not because we value institutions and conversations and it's for resolution of disputes that i would be arguing that institutions always do the right thing i mean institutions are led by very fallible people men most of the time if women were in charge and you think it would go better and you know so institutions can have failed ideologies they can be problematic and indeed the problem. that russians are struggling with and americans and many around the world

is a fear that people have that institutions supra national institutions is taking away what they found new their sense of place control as we say in the country where i live that's why briggs it is also all about taking back control and so if you're suggesting to me that it's a very universal trait to want to take back control to feel that your life that you are part of a polity of politics that is closer to you and not somewhere out there i'm with you i agree and maybe you and i could have a whole conversation about semantics so we could say well yes but nationalism is that you often use as a term to denote the pathological or problematic aspect of national identity to have a national identity to be proud of it to want to build democracy in solidarity with within a space that's not global is

a good thing i agree with you the question that you and i have to ask we have to ask it to the russians we have to ask it to the europeans we have to ask it everywhere in the world is when is it that people start turning this proud of who they are in their collective into a tool of exclusion into a tool of aggressive intervention in other people's affair indeed into a tool where you don't respect the national identity of the other side so it's a very complex story and you're absolutely right to imply that the european union right now is struggling in trying to balance its people's yearning for this sense of control and the sense that we need to do things together in this crazy dangerous worth world of ours so it's a balance and when you ask me about european elites you know there's every kind of political elite there are those that are very blindly supra nationalist wanting to for. yet all about national identity there are those who are very nationalist and

populists there are those in between their old suits of shades of colors in europe as in russia and as in everywhere well yes and no because i think the main difference in how the european union and russia for example approach the issue of national is for many in europe nationalism is almost the root of all evil is basically blame aggressive nationalism for the carnage of the world war two and what they kind of miss is that for the country like russia national is was the saving grace this is what carried us through those terrible years back in the late thirty's and early forty's this is what sustained us as a country so therefore for us nationalism is not something that ruins half of the continent it's something that allowed us to actually persevered in the face of that aggressive force and what i wanted to ask and i think when i listen to trump at least i think what he's trying to. take you away do in the best way he can is you

know something about that kind of nationalism sustaining nationalism rather than nationalism that six to destroy everybody else don't you think that when people in europe are so frightened by either putin tromp or people of that sort don't you think that they're actually not so much fearing the danger that those personalities represent as much as they fear that side's within europe the fear of europe itself clearly you're absolutely right to say that troubles or are rather challenges always start at home to stop pointing to the other look in your own backyard to see what your challenges are and indeed in our european backyard i'm not sure i agree with you when you imply that you know when europeans are looking at russia they kind of forget what we as europeans to rush to what you call russia russian national. samina i'd rather cold you know russian courage russian pride i would

call it patriots but it's ultimately based on the very strong national feeling yes absolutely so we know we old you and me and others want to use the term patridge ism to say that's the positive that the fighting for the right cause you know die mention of nationalism so you like me and i think many people in russia will make this distinction between the kind of national attachment that leads you to defend values to defend values against nazism to defend values against all sorts of of problems in the world also to be sunny there with one another to help one another i mean all of these elements of patches and then national identity are very important the question is when you want to give a lot of. support to trump. i see where you're coming from you're saying you know way you know the americans and us in russia we share this

understanding we're not like these naive kind of. europeans who want to forget about nation we understand that making our country great again is you know the best thing in the world and you can say that but are you sure that you want to share with putin the i dare the sorry with trump the idea that this requires therefore to build wealth to put children in. a way from their parents to with pup you know racial politics to do all sorts of things and i'm not sure the russians you really do want to share with with a child i have never actually bought the idea that we as russians can really say anything to the americans to the extent that they will actually you know take that as our advice i'm not a big fan of you know meddling in interference stories simply because i don't believe it's possible but i think it's also a little bit manipulative to kind of. lump all those things together because you

can criticize any politician or any had of stayed on one set of policies and agree with him on another why do we have to sort of criticize or praise in such a wholesale manner oh and i don't so you and i can completely agree with this let me give you one example nato you know trumps and i'm not sure speaking to me from moscow is the best example you would take but the trunk comes to europe and say hey guys you know why you are only four countries a nato spending two percent of their rigid e.p. or more on defense which we're bearing too much of the burden now course we could say well that serves you it's industrial military complex we could say that the germans for instance spend a lot of money you know in development and that's conflict prevention it's a kind of security you can celsus of that all sorts of things like this but you could also say that in a security alliance there should be an equal sharing of the burden so in that sense i don't like the style the way trump says it but on substance it may not be such

a bad idea now of course from the russian viewpoint i'm not sure that's the the example that you prefer but on this one you know i'm happy to add to say that there should be a conversation with trump well professor nicolette is i really want to have that conversation with you but in a couple of minutes we have to take a very short break now but we'll be back shortly stay tuned. for. you to. come full. thank you. and they use indigenous be. you know we that the baby in the. trees.

must flukey him so that the only thing behind but the earth he came. out of a sudden a man just. simple be there. i said i when entering it's given me if they will not allow me. if they will shoot me . i don't know how long a million million indeed i'm definitely not you menominee been thought you could have been killed by the human on my own that i got medical i mean you got me i you . know what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy confrontation let it be an arms race this on off and spearing dramatic development

only personally i'm going to resist i don't see how that strategy will be successful very critical time time to sit down and talk. exist says harlan kentucky. overall in this room boyce's it was very amusing to. meet. a co money city with almost no coal mines left. the jobs are gone all the coal was afraid i'd. love to see these people the survivors of a world disappearing before their eyes. i remember thinking when i was younger that if anything ever happened to the coal mines here and that it would become a ghost town but i never thought in the million years i would see the. and it's

happened it's happened. i've been saying the numbers being something they matter to us is over one trillion dollars and. more than ten thousand dollars foreign stamp each day. eighty five percent of global wealth you longs to be sold for bridge eight point six percent market saw a thirty percent rise last year some with four hundred to five hundred three per second per second and cornrows to twenty thousand dollars. china's building two point one billion dollars a our industrial park but don't let the numbers over. the only numbers you need remember it was one of those you know for the mid one and only boom boom.

welcome back to worlds apart from cynical ideas director of the center for international studies at oxford university professor nickell it is just before the break we touched upon the nato issue and this is a very very sensitive issue for russia i know that many officials in moscow find it very hard to distinguish between the european union which is their political and economic activity that russia is eager to develop its relationship with and nato which russia sees as occasionally aggressive military alliance do you think even makes sense for russia or for that matter for the europeans to try to distinguish between these two entities but of course that doesn't make sense as you just explained very brilliantly there are two very different entities. and indeed do you is a peaceful entity and only a defensive. and of course nato is also

a defensive organization but one but that includes other countries than the u. . but you know on the other hand i would say that since you are raising the issue of nato that. while i think that russia. has. complex relationships with nato and with the e.u. it's fair enough for russia to express. you know its own interest these are the the kind of alliances that happens in happen in its. neighbors but i wonder how would you navigate those very difficult relationship because all on the one hand as i said russia wants to have you know better trade ties with the european countries but when those countries are kind of from the common perspective lured into the nato alliance that makes it. very difficult to deal on the diplomatic level and i'm sure you've heard we've had

a number of scandals recently the russian diplomats have been expelled from greece over the major controversy surrounding the supposed it russia's interference in the domestic politics of greece dealing with the with its long running dispute over macedonia what is a fair game when it comes to europe i mean because as i said before there is trade diplomatic relationship and that there is another aspect to it which is security relationship well it is a complex question indeed and you raise of course the latest example of the methadone in question and indeed i'm not sure to say whether the expulsions where grounded on what kind of information you know i'm just an academic. i don't have inside information but what we do know is that

a russian businessman or did to poor pay whatever people who belong to the extremes you know on both sides in greece and in north macedonia people who have rejected an agreement that we have taken the press back agreement between the two countries we've taken twenty five years to get where we are it's an amazing agreement so very modern agreements it's an agreement of deep reconciliation between two countries of course over the name that becomes north macedonia over the sharing of identity between two countries but also lots of other elements of of cooperation and so when you say well you use the word lure country into nato in asking me about this and i would say very strongly knowing all my friends in scope in north macedonia that they wouldn't all of those who signed the agreement on their five minute. i would not considered that they have been lured they would consider that indeed this

agreement this is the great prize so the great reward for their country to both and turn nato and to start negotiations with the european language be fair here because i think it's clear from the public opinion polls in macedonia that the public is quite divided on this issue and we had previous examples in other balkan countries of people sort of being i wouldn't say pressure the alert as the term i used before but kind of prodded towards. that military alliance and that obviously comes on the back of many other far more fraught issues one of them is the issue of ukraine another one is a show of georgia. authorities one the major one was there an issue off nader interference and regime change in libya which absolutely appalled not only russia but i think ultimately led to the major immigration crisis in. europe so you know. this is definitely again this is

a formal structure and people who belong to nato they they they talk about the peaceful nature of that alliance but when push comes to shove this alliance das act very approach mystically and sometimes i think russia would argue it acts against the best interest of humanity as was the case in in libya so is it really such a surprise that russia would feel so apprehensive about this alliance moving ever closer to its borders. well i understand that is a question that is very important in russia and it's. one can hear that but in your question you've raised so many different issues it is very hard to respond with a general question so if you're asking me whether the intervention of nato in libya was a great success i'm with you not really i mean it may be in the very short term to avoid. many deaths in benghazi it wasn't about idea but it was a very mismanaged and we have a bit of a mess in libya right now and indeed you're competing you're right that this has contributed to the so-called refugee crisis that's

a different issue from nato in the eastern neighborhood or rather the should what i was called the shared and disputed and contested neighborhood between russia on one hand and the european union on the other and within that again i ask you shouldn't we distinguish between the former soviet space the georgia has and ukraine of this world where yes we could have a whole conversation about who wanted nato and ukraine itself with if i did and all of that we can have that conversation that's again different from southeast europe from the balkans who were never a soviet space which historically even under tito were always in between which of course since the end of the cold war have themselves expressed in many different ways their wanting to be part of the european union and which of course themselves are complicated when you're serbia it's not serbia or bows now are not the same

story as albania montenegro or indeed north macedonia so we would need to have a complex conversation i certainly do not believe in the series of influence i believe in each country's right to self-determination but i think that concept is being abused way too often and one thing that unites all those profiles all those cases. that i mentioned before for russia is the mode of decision making because if you go back to libya and if you actually analyze how the decision to overstep the un mandate was made it was made because of two individuals it was made because of the collapse are crazy and david cameron and those two individuals were able to override all the institutional safeguards that europe is so proud about so that decision to ruin the country and. cause a great havoc to the rest of the continent was made by very very close very very narrow group of people and there is no guarantee for russia that that the same

group of people or different people of a similar mentality will not make similar decisions when it comes to russia ukraine or any other country in the russia's neighborhood that's really in turn destabilize this country do you understand what i'm trying to say well absolutely and indeed first of all it's important to stress that lived there was not an e.u. action but as you said british and french but in any case you are very right key in leaving aside the historical interpretation of what happened leaving aside the fact that of course we need to learn very deep lessons about how the un functions about how intervention is managed collectively all of this is right but at the very end but i'm not sure i would agree with you that therefore as we look at the need just story we should obsess including the media by saying oh well it's atavistic you know the west has it in its blood that they will do the same in russia in ukraine or wherever i think the west first of all has learned its lesson with afghanistan

and iraq and indeed libya i think in in a way sadly because in syria i'm not sure that the west has necessarily done the right thing or any of the external intervenors but indeed you can see in syria that when it comes to intervening in another country when it comes to overriding sovereignty you know russia helps itself to so. it's a very widely shared problem if it is a problem and we all know that under certain circumstances it may be right to intervene that's why the international community came up with this notion of r t r two p. responsibility to protect i am not saying that r two p. is a reason to intervene anywhere specifically but i'm just saying that this debate about intervention about what you call you know in russia sovereign democracy and all of these issues is a difficult one it's not black and white yes we should refrain from intervening and imposing our will on other countries but in certain specific cases then it's

certain specific very restrictive cases we could also defend the intervention professor nickell it is it could be very easily argued on the kremlin side that libya was that specific case when russia actually did not use its veto power when it trusted that was that the west was going after the good thing but it just couldn't help itself you know you know the rest is history now you said something before that the rest actually learned its lessons if it indeed learned its lessons why do you think it needs to push with the nato expansion further and further wouldn't it be you know wiser it's you you know. call it quick all done that and allow that trust to be established within the continent and proceed from there and who knows maybe that trust would be enough to proceed with the r two p. later on why do you think that issue with macedonia and keep pushing for the expansion of nato is so present earlier on oksana you spoke about what countries

should do what they want and you know in terms of institution think about it a supply and demand nato supplies itself and whatever service it gives and countries demand ask for membership or not and when you agree that in all of these stories we need to start from the countries themselves even if we're talking about ukraine or whatever countries but in the balkans and specifically in macedonia today we have countries who maybe they're wrong you know i don't know but they themselves and their government and majorities of their population would like to be part of these institutions there is this kind of attraction where there is the e.u. and the money in the markets that it represents and perhaps the values whether it's nato with a sense that it will bring some kind of security and like mindedness they demanded they ask for it you know our macedonian friends our north madisonian friends the reason that they change their own name to north macedonia and this is not an easy

thing to do they have a huge pushback domestically they have extremists who are saying no no no we don't want a concession with greece but they think they think the public opinion and the government that the promise of nato membership in e.u. membership is the right saying they're the ones who are asking for it they may be asking for it and yet it is after the parliament to ratify that decision and i think the whole case of a russian interference was based on allegations that supposedly that well connected businessman was agitating against rita fixations so probably if he was indeed doing that there was some space for turning that pain in. one way or another anyway president gladys we have to leave it there i really appreciate the spirited discussion that you're treated us to today thank you very much for being with us and i encourage our viewers to keep this book conversation going in our social media pages and hope to see you again same place same time here and will depart.

four men are sitting in a car when the fifth gets shot in the head. all four have different versions of what happened one of them is on the death row there's no way he could have done it there's no possible way because the oldest did not shoot around a corner. six guys or financial survival. customers go by you reduce the price. in elf well reduce some lower.

that's undercutting but what's good for market is not good for the global economy. could look good with the money did. not want to come up. with. nothing. good. life.

good. family. good good food russia sharing goodness. headlines here on r t the us president's national security adviser confirmed that a second meeting will be postponed until after the show which is a. as the secretary of state my plan peo is the real world in the senate over the two leaders recently meeting in helsinki. has the president told you what he and president putin discuss in their two hour closed door meeting took place you speak to the translator do you seen any of her notes or should we be doing as you put it everything we can to push back on likely election interference by russia. as donald trump tries to weather a political storm with fresh concerns of a possible russian and a fair.