it's time thank you for the nutrition now we are recording this interview on the sidelines of the valdai forum and many of the discussions here today are about hugh crane and how it's being sandwiched between russia and the west lots of conflict mongolia also finds itself within two great powers russia and china and yet from what i understand it is a source of development rather than discord how do you explain that well. we're developing the. ballast relationship with our neighbors and it's our priority. was russia and china we have strategic partnership and really it is a trust beasts confidence relationship the most important thing is really the fact that you give priority to this relationship you is your relationship on your strengths of course we're different countries that means we have differences it doesn't mean that we do not have differences but it's very important

to menage those differences and to capitalize on your strengths but from what i understand it took you sound time to arrive at that perspective because you said in one of the interviews that before mongolia used to view its landmark status as an imitation what allows for that change of perspective and this new vision of being landlocked in having no access to the sea as something that you can actually gain from here you know two things again under do love the sea convention we have the right to access the sea and our neighbors due to a very good neighborly relationship which is of strategic nature we're having no problem with our access and that strength of the trash law we should be also using forward which means it is you know in dealing with our two very big neighbors. still we're also using their goodwill plus

a traditional law as well that's what the exec and with. these two markets themselves are very big markets for example china is one of the prime you know export markets of mongolian commodity and russia is also a very big market but vets were buy more from russia than selling at that test we were in our discussions with our russian friends were telling them almost with problems that we don't like this deficit in this has to be changed and i assume you tell them that not in the way that for example the current administration of the united states tells its trade partners what what i really think is that we're using gold you know instruments that are in our dispositions which means longstanding friendly history of cooperation and therefore when we are

communicating this sort of messages of ours we really need also understanding of the other hand our trade with our neighbors is beneficial to our neighbors as well it creates jobs in the you know edges and provinces and regions of our neighbors so it's not that it is not an unfair relationship we're talking about mutual benefit you know if you're being very positive. and the russian china's relationship in public is all about smiles and handshakes but behind closed doors that you can be a pretty tough negotiators and i've heard many stories in moscow off how inexorable the chinese for when negotiating the price of gas with the russians i'm sure there are many other examples as well i assure that either of them is not using or not trying to and least to your country as as an elaborate shit against the other. well you should ask them ask them. if.

what i really think is that it it really is a trilateral relationship which means it's not only about moscow and beijing it's about us as well and we're there and our game is that to keep the ballasts that it matters because when we are saying that look here it's a little excessive well war and about the good thing is that we're telling us strategic partners there isn't the agreement to toe almost all of the problems so as you said and as i said before it you know yes i am positive but i say that were different countries and therefore we have differences not everything is choked with sweet good to know is that it's a trilateral relationship at truly trilateral relationship but wherever there is russia and china the united states is now far too far away what's your current

state of affairs with washington very close very close and we just had a visit to for prime minister to the united states and up until now we had a comprehensive partnership and now we have extended the level of our cooperation to an extended. comprehensive partnership so we're already and making one move ahead in terms of advancing a relationship bent that really means you know trade technology education culture you know we are you know taking into fox news and we are. you know on the policy based decisions we deliberately are working to expand them now the iraq all of the trumpet ministration into the white house has changed the american relationship with many countries both foes and fred. to the war so you're saying

that men go away is rare exception to that everybody heard the speech of president trump at the general assembly and he said he talked about principle proud of his message the doctrine of u.s. policy and the u.s. is saying whoa we are requesting the countries of the world to respect their sovereignty and then to return they will be respecting and working with them they will not be trying to have other countries have certain types of you know systems it's their business so you see in the other words this principle pragmatism is you know the way we also see the foreign policies of other countries as well and therefore you know we're really trying to catch the moments that are. you know positive on which we can build the cooperation on the bilateral basis with our partners you're being very diplomatic as i'm sure you either have to be but about

a month ago mongolia together with russia and china to quieten the biggest military exercise to be held in northeast asia in more than three decades and unlike other military drills which usually focus on honing specific skills that give us thought many aversive were simulating a war scenario. who could possibly threaten mongolia with a ground war. you know it's not about threatening god about threats but it's about you know if our neighbors see you talk about pragmatism i'm not sure if you do something you have a pragmatic reason for that exactly therefore we have our military doesn't matter how small it is but a state has to have its own military so that's one thing secondly if you have a military they'd better be trained and then they better be interoperable with

their neighbors because for example due to our very longstanding relationship with sergeant union then and many of our military officers were treated in russia and then you know many of our officers were pretty comfortable that we know you know the you know russian maneuvers tactics that cetera but with time we started you know if you do not keep training for something behind the minister i'm sorry for interjecting bread my point that i made earlier was that it's not just any other military drill which usually focus on improving in hansing the coordination and cooperation those maneuvers had a very specific scenario a scenario of a ground war which tells me at least that your partners and your neighbors moscow and beijing believe that that scenario is probable

do you share that oh you know the military have their own way of thinking and the military has to be ready for any kind of you know activities possible activities it would be in the leave to think that oh it's very remote it won't be happening if you are in the business of building strategic thinking. you cannot afford to assume that something will not happen now mongo is very straightforward about wanting to grow all of the russian chinese trade but any benefit could be a liability both moscow's and beijing's relations with washington are. quite complicated right now are you food we insulated from the potential fallout from. the bickering that both russia and china on one

side and the united states and other. of course the risks are there and therefore we're really also trying to counterbalance this sort of risks and therefore we have third neighbor policy and on the basis of that approach we're building very strong ties with our third neighbors as well so that in case of problems we still have live vibrant commercial relationships with other countries so therefore the risks are there we really want this to stop and we hope that at some stage you know the party is will come to terms even in the countries with the most close relationship the rather differences but if you really start only building attending those differences and then attending them with negative approaches then at times you don't solve the problems but you exist the important thing is that no

matter how difficult it is to keep the dialogue now let me ask you specifically about the trumpet ministrations intense focus on china's trade policies one could make a case that if china's experts deny that states are inhibited it may encourage beijing you expand their markets even more could be actually a beneficiary of the sino american trade wars let me be very diplomatic here we do not want to benefit on the loss of any of our partners so we really want to keep our way of life to keep this relationship with everybody so therefore i really i really think that they find a common language but in terms of china's position they were i think.

this discussion over the trade deficit it was there already long before if another obama administration and many administrations were talking about this trade deficit rate so china was already anticipating that at some stage this could come up in mind to partition of their response is that this built in road idea was already put in place back in two thousand i think thirteen in this was already in anticipation in case something happens they would want it to have other markets where they would be also that way or heat or do you think they would develop that initiative regard myself their relationship with washington. of course they would have done it regardless of that but still i think they wore aware of

this sort of thing that's one thing secondly i mean central asian economies this frontier of music were commie out of crisis they were new markets then they provided new opportunities for their goods and services so naturally as you say with or without this new you know problems they would have been already dealing with it but. opening up these new markets and the surety access of their products and services and i said we have to take a very short break now but we will be back in just a few moments stay tuned. for

when i came back from iraq. marijuana. cocaine methamphetamine anything that's altering trying to get us out. that bad mindset used in the chemical that would be self medicating. going to be drinking and drinking ino new not just killing myself but drinking alcohol links don't drink to get drunk alcoholics drink to feel normal. that's why they call it's this way drug addicts do what they do shop ourself in their. star cool idea which is guys are going through to do it it just means to. need to be built those. pushed on by the v.a.'s r.'s drugs bill and stuff you need to be built. they just really shouldn't be looked at like numbers they should be looked at like people if they go

to a veteran center for health issues be considered as someone who really needs attention and. you want to make sure that the quality is not just a slogan of misery but that also is associated with the rise of the stuff that the believe how can you have a rise in the stuff to get by having people who are rich saving and investing. broadening increasing the size of the national park so that you can distribute whole to everything. else like there's someone else living inside of me like controlling my body. the byproduct of that drug is the cause like severe depression.

because it a little you need him into a zombie it's crazy. you know we don't have to do anything it's not our fault you know shoes crazy and all that. took years traumatic takes long time to get rid of. welcome back to worlds apart been dumping thought but tara minister of foreign affairs of mongolia minister go is a rare example in asia of a country that gets along with pretty much all its neighbors. and far and i heard a number of american experts for example from the brookings institution suggest that because of that it may serve as geneva or our house and of the east is that

your intention we wouldn't mind but. we do not have the sort of. established goal of becoming one you know one because if you don't you'll get the frustrations so you better not and in that sort of situation. what we have you know we're built this country what what we have is already pretty good enough for us we do not really want to be this host of many things but if the countries choose mongolia we really don't and to get just the other day a month ago issued an invitation to kim jong un the leader of north korea it's you visit your country whenever you find suitable and that coincides with the prospect of a second meeting that's been the north korean leader the american president and apparently there is a search for the most convenient electrician for that what do you think

a lot about art can offer that singapore wasn't able to provide singapore is a great place and they could provide the everything so we're not in this sort of competition we can provide something more it sets no one who's objective is very simple. this world peace order and especially with the peace in our region is the most fundamental capital we have so far and we're benefiting from it and we really do not want to be this free riders of this you know great value that we have so we really want to. contribute to the strengthening and console dition of this to the extent that we can so therefore as long as this peace talks are in place the mirror were it happens it's already good enough for us with all due

respect i think you're being very modest because i see human foreign policy as a little bit more proactive than you described for example back in two thousand and thirteen your president and president was the first head of state to visit north korea after kim jong un took power and human tain there pretty good relationship with that country ever since can you give any advice for example to the americans or other members of the international community of how to engage north korea productively our relationship with north korea did not come about yesterday in the north korea's history of this too is seventy years we are one of very few countries that has seventy years of history of diplomatic relationship with them when pyongyang was being born to the ground our ambassador or most of them bastards were leaving. one

a few of those that stayed here you know to show the solidarity was among go in the best they never forget that so. during korea war there were many orphans although mungo is a small country but with all our heart we try to help them and we brought many korean more friends to come and stay in mongolian families so already we have family relationships so the relationships are very deep and very longstanding and on the basis of this we are really communicating with the north koreans and we're really trying to also bring across the idea that the nuclearization is a much better option because and in this there is no double standard or hypocrisy we are. new to nuclear free status country so we're telling them well that's what

we are and this policy is working for us and we're trying to communicate you know this denuclearized you know situation may contribute much better to their security then the nuclear programs well the united states clearly is not approaching north korea in the same. fashion but the same apheresis and humanitarian affairs what is it about the american approach to north korea that anything is not working i think so far the approach was working was working this in the trump approach of threatening frist and then pulling back is that a good this also has a this also diplomatic you know. tactics diplomatic negotiations are very long you know process so.

in fact they were tried to approach in the from a different angle the previous administrations and on the basis of that experience this administration knows that or create this approach is not quite working now let's try something else and then there approach it with this different approach it was pretty clear even approach actually and it really faced oh a lot of criticism in washington as well but yet they did it to go ahead with this and now we have these talks i mean all that north korea as far as i remember and i've been in this poll policy for quite a walk time in the north koreans were saying that we want to sit down with the americans and talk and this was not happening now it's happening so it's a more we have now north and south korea have just agreed to begin reconnecting with rail and road links something that was met with concern in the united states

americans a theory that this me undermined the current sanctions regime do you see that as a kind of a bad called good cop routine or do you think there are genuine disagreements between saul and washington on how to approach north korea a very important factor in the change of situation was this new policy of. the south korean administration that thawing of relationship between south and north was a very strong impetus and bases for the u.s. more. more talks and therefore i think both south korea and us are in very close communication and it's not secret image everybody knows this and this. negotiation is being kiri carried out in synchronized efforts so i'm sure there are consultations going on whenever

a north korea's mentioned the issue of human rights usually comes up and i know that you served as the chairman of the parliamentary subcommittee on human rights i assume this issue is near and dear to your heart. how do you think the international community should approach that subject when it talks to north korea you know human rights as to sion i think is one of the most fundamental richard and we human beings achieve and at any cost against anybody the should be protected we have this human inst instincts actually of protecting each other therefore were. the reasons you no problem with human rights you need to talk about them but i'm sure you know that there is very deep skepticism at least in this country that western countries may be instrumental

lising the issue of human rights too much exaggerating it when it is politically expedient ignoring it when it's politically inconvenient do you think the current international discourse of human rights is genuine and productive in terms of actual have trusting the subject i believe it's genuine i believe it's genuine but of course you know we're not in heaven. we're on planet earth and this place is not perfect so i do not rule out there are certain problems right but in general in general. just go around in the ask who does not agree with the supremacy of human rights everybody would agree which country does not protect its own citizens all the countries including the country we were just talking about they would be claiming that we're protecting our citizens this

fundamental interest in protecting human rights is pretty genuine but when it comes to the real implementation there could be problems and whenever these problems are we should be one by one settling them but we should not be really trying to make it perfect right away that will cause a lot of mess go ahead its own transformation from that socialist state capitalist state looking at north korea what do you think presents a greater danger to the region and to the world as a whole preserving the north korean system in a state that exists right now with its nuclear weapons whether it's press treaty a repressive government or perhaps the efforts to change it but the bigger danger because. no the bigger risk is the continuation of nuclear power sis. and preserving nuclear

weapons or an attempt to keep it going on that would be much bigger risk the rest as long as the region is peaceful then you know the rest will be happening as a result of the interaction. still in the under the international law under the u.n. charter you know the principles of. the independence are the fundamental you know norms of international law but through interaction i think there will be certain reforms and changes especially. when there's talk in the focusing more on the economy and they already have made their party decisions to focus more on the economy focusing more on the economy from our own experience from the experience of fresh mongolia we all lived in socialist society if you want to

change your economy there will be reforms and changes it will be just necessary well minister i have to thank you for you being very generous with your time and thank you for being with us today thank you i encourage our viewers to keep this conversation going on our social media pages of the series and same place same time here and while the part of.

the charlotte's. point. we're starting last with. the beginning heading east into the swamp we're going into the belly of the bees i think i want to leave now doesn't get any more. it may be completely different and this. has been twenty forty you know bloody revolution to correct the demonstrations going from being relatively peaceful political protests to be increasingly violent revolution is always spontaneous or is it you know or here i mean you know liz put video of. the school in the middle of the ukrainian president recalls the events of twenty

forty and. those who took part in this today over five billion dollars to assist ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic. led. police . believe.