to approach put in from a position of strength, i think perhaps strength was emphasized way too much for it to be taken at face value. i think when people could such an emphasis, it's usually a sign of vulnerability. do you think that was indeed the case with the bite and ministration that it was perhaps vulnerable because of this need to appear a task with putting when in fact it's actually counterproductive for reaching any you know, stuff then disagreement with, with moscow? well, the problem, one of the problems on the us side is that the president has to keep in mind his domestic audience. and of course by them is exposed to severe. not necessarily fear can be a decision, not only from the right from the former supporters. so he's predecessor on the healed, but also from the left,

from the reform of being in his own party. so whatever he does, whatever he says will be scrutinized. so there are certain issues that biden has to bring to the table. i will put in the, even if he doesn't believe that can be cooperative on these bonds. so it's practically unavoidable that any meeting between biden then, which would include the human rights agenda and the fate of alex in allow me and the janitorial integrity of ukraine. and the vance in bel, i was on all of these issues, it is really difficult to reconcile the positions of the 2 men. right. and i think the top which was very clear in i explained she's lines,

he can discuss any international problem with president biden. but what he clearly does not want to discuss with his us peer is domestic cuffy. so there are, there isn't that way. she understands. domestic affairs of there are some feathers . i will ask you about the russian poster too. but let me 1st squeeze in one more question about by them, because i don't, i don't know if you would agree with that, but i have a sense that there were almost 2 boy items, the one that had to do the strategic stability and cybersecurity recruiting and then the other one that had to stand off american journalists, implying that he wasn't talking with fujen. we have these 2 by them. do you think we'll prevail when he returns back to washington? it's hard to tell, of course, but i think that by didn't i would like to go to deal with him on certain issues. it doesn't mean that you would like to have and your, he said,

it's not possible at this stage, but he would definitely like to cut down the risks and to reduce the costs of an uncontrolled us are some competition, especially in the military field for i think that to biding, understands fairly well that the main strategic a diversity of the united states is not russia. it is china. and russia is this section, i say, is in the irritant. so i think that biden will do whatever he can in order to have his hands free for dealing with b g. but of course, as you rightly pointed out, he has to keep in mind the us public opinion and the positions of the us a little customer spent. so he can not enjoyed these

intentionally very devises issues that he mentioned in his press conference after the meeting with wooton in geneva. and i think the art is how to balance these 2 agendas. it's not easy to present tampa, didn't manage to accomplish this mission and it is still an open question whether his successor present biden will be in a position to do that. now speaking about the, the rational poster right now. i had an impression that the russian side was approaching to some it's not from the position of strength, but rather from a position of confidence including self confidence. it was, it wasn't trying to impress, it wasn't defense. if it wasn't defensive. i felt like it was more about didn't has done appearances. do you agree with that? and so is it jenny? and given how many frustrations there are in moscow with the us as policies?

good. i agree with you assessment. i think that the position of the russian side was that essentially the ball is in your court. in the us court. we need our best. we came up with the many proposals. we do not try to surprise you to present you with something that you do not expect. we are open to your ideas. but i think that what they deny on their side is that it is asha who has to change her behavior. i think the strong perception of president putin is that russia doesn't have anything to change. he can explain why most acted this way or another in particular situations. so if you don't have anything to hide, but he expects the united states to demonstrate

a little bit more flexibility, maybe a little bit more imagination in order to get back to some of the proposals which already on the table. now you said recently that judging from the initial side, the sign is coming from the bite in administration and biden's friendly. think times it seemed as if there were a viewing russia as they go hooligan, a large rogue steak a disruptor. not worthy of serious engagement or even gratifying attention, whereas beijing was seen as a serious, near peer opponent. why then it was by the meeting with fujen before his bilateral summit been, she's been paying while it's up to biden, to answer this question. but my personal date is that

indeed china is to perceived as the major opponent will be nice states. russia is a distraction that isn't an irritant, i and it's better to do with russia 1st in order to be better prepared for dealing with aging. i think that by didn't, might hope that russia can be helpful for the united states. and again, this time it done my list to enroll in the north korean nuclear issues i. it is definitely an important player in europe. so i think that generally, by an inspiration starts to appreciate the role that most place may be, you know, they believe that most chris punch above its weight. but even if it does, it means that you cannot ignore it. and on top of that,

i would add that to some extent, it is easier to fix simulations with moscow than will be gene. because moscow is molten economic competitor of the united states. russia, the united states are not competing for the same markets or for the same sources of materials. they do not have territorial disputes. so in a way, moscow is, or is least it might be easier to deal with. well, most definitely in the far west washington when it comes to can all make my but when it comes to military, my, i think i'm going to russia would argue that it has even the certain degree of superiority. and in fact, in the latest grad assessment reported by the us intel community, it was specifically stated that the russian military rad increases dramatically

when it serves, or if it serves as what they pulled the force multiplier for china. as far as the americans are concerned, do you think all these talk or with the russians about strategic stability? is it the ultimately about russia in the united states, or is it about the united states in china and russia, serving simply as a trial used for and more difficult conversation? well, i think it's more complex. so whereas, if you dig some specific areas of the current global military balance are actually steal fire and it will be the case for a long time. on the other hand id will be that the united states is primarily concerned about going military capacities of the people's republic of china. after all, they more or less know how to deal with russia. we have

a common strategic culture with the united states, which makes it a little bit easier to talk and to goody china. these particular juncture is motivated to subscribe to this strategic culture. and so kind of a country, we refuse the policy or strategic isolation. and that brought us to the united states. and they are concerned about the going capabilities of china, especially again in your eyes pointed out, especially used by china as a multiplier your even rio. because from what i'm understanding over the russian post you're russia is not so eager to offer it as an ex delivery for to anyone. even china? no, no, of course, you know,

it does mean that will become just and appendix to china. but russia might go china to address some of the g problems in the china's military build up. russia still has spectacular military technical capacity which it might use to shine in the region. sudden, gibson, new technological development. the miss miss missle fields. were the navy or are many knowledge is well let's go to my we have to take a very short break right now, but we'll be back in just a few moments station. the me or one of the worst in shootings in america,

was in las vegas in 2017. the tragedy a close a little of the real last vegas where many say elected officials are controlled by casino loaners. the dangerous shooting revealed what? the l v m. p. d really is and now it's part of the spin machine to the american public barely remember that happens just shows you the power of money and las vegas, the powerful showed their true colors when the pen demick heard the most contagious contagion that we've seen in decades and then you have a mayor who doesn't care. so here's caroline goodman, offering the lives of the vegas residents to be the control group. to the shiny facades conceal a deep indifference to the people vice gonna say that they will take an action. absolutely keep the registering and keep the slot machines doing. this is a money machine is a huge cash register that is ran by people who don't care about people's lives

being lost. ah, phoenix has actually got a little uncovered face men's, clothing and shoulder stuck. it's a kind of us can feminism name is mean i bought it up, put a human, some of the whole mother that of us. it was up on the job. but you don't want me. she lives in one of the most dangerous and patriarchal provinces of africa has done cost. when she was time, i miss that. sure. no, i shall do that before that updated anyway. i'm glad that i got the notes that she does her best to fight for women's rights. i am not able

to get that done. as you know what i do know that she's known here by her nickname, king this other guy reco. much other than was really good guys i, i use with we're going to talk a lot about wild quino energy and also use volcanoes as

a metaphor to elucidate. so many of the big trends happening in geo politics and fine in the me or i welcome back to names apart with somebody for to know the director general of the russian international affairs council. which of course, in the before the break, we touched upon strategic stability. one of the outcomes of the geneva summit was an agreement to create some sort of a mechanism for a bilateral consult patients. and in that area, is there anything other than that moscow is really looking towards achieving in those consultations or others taught themselves simply a mechanism for engaging with americans?

i don't think it's only about engagement. i think it's about a number of specific outcomes. the most hopes to get to got a short so what we need is to re invent, come to all, to come up with a new model of strategic arms control, which would reflect you. reality is all the military balance of the 21st century. and it is very, very complicated taska because we have to keep in mind very many independent variables including militant technology development, including the nuclear power was progress include in dual use technologies. so the new start agreement is extended to for another years. but we shouldn't fool ourselves

thinking that it's sort of time to come up with a new model of arms control the sooner we start working with americans on these one the better. and he's now another outcome of the geneva talks is a variable agreement to deal with cybersecurity retry no surprise, many of your colleagues in moscow because washington quite persistently refused to answer. and janny grim is at moscow on the subject and in geneva by them handed, which in a lease. so i think fixed in critically important factors that he thinks should be protected from any cyber attacks. d as a step towards meaningful discussion or the country a probably you for yet another round of sanctions. well, 1st of all we can look sanctions. i think that unfortunately we're likely to see more sanctions. the question is, what's anxious we are going to see. what they should be concerned about in the

cabinet is if the united states goals for something bigger, like 6 tauriel sanctions, sanctions against the russian energy sector or the sanctions against the russian financial assist system. deputies such sanctions will create additional low uncertainties and risk. so for the u. s. economy. and so i think that the by mistake will be reluctant to go that far. but if it does go, it becomes a matter of concern for the company is concerned, or would that put a stop to any effort to reach any meaningful agreements in bilateral relation? well, i think that it will be close to close to stop him major contact with the united states because different these sanctions will bite quite

painfully. but as i said, you know, i don't think that by them is entertaining this idea of these juncture. but to get them back to your question, i have to say that i was as many others. i was surprised to see such a twist in the us position because if you recall, there are some side there aid this topic many, many times. and we got close to a 4 minute joint task force on cybersecurity in 2017. when the fulton met on the margins of the g. 20 summit in hamburg. and tom promised to launch some, a group such a group. and later on, when she got back to washington, he basically adopt the idea. the traditional us position has always been that it is

russia, o, e. she's using the cyber weapons against the united states on the us turn it to. that's why we don't need any asians with you. you should just stop your malign activities or you should stop doing what you're doing. and there was will be today . if i read the decision, say, engineer or a card, actually it seems that the united states. so find that i got denied that it is, 1st of all a bilateral problem. the trash can also have its concerns. and 2nd, that it's not that simple that we don't do need to have a group of professionals, of experts of diplomats to assess these problem. and may be to come up with the conclusion that would assume both sides well, you mentioned previous may be transmitting with an in house and in 2018. and i

don't have any analysts. mosca believed that meeting was a victim of its own success because the, you know, the, the warm, personal dynamic between the 2 leaders essentially killed any prospect of the reach agreement being realized. do you think this meeting in geneva is vulnerable on, in this regard? of mary 6 because the united states is a divided country and of course, present biden has to face fierce opposition from their item from the left hand. of course, conservative republicans near cones will use against biden the same tactics that publicans had to see common from democrats after come sink. so they would accuse bite him of being too solved indecisive, of electronically agenda. not tough enough

with him and definitely they will try to sabotage some of the agreements that have been reached. geneva, one of the good things about biden is of course, that he's a very shrewd and experienced auditions politician. he spent many, many years on the hill. he knows how to rock congressman. unlike his predecessors, he's a part of the washington political establishment. so probably hugo can live better than the top deed. trump had a very messy administration and you know, people within his own team who were sabotaging his actions. and i heard some of analyst and moscow say that one of the big appeals of bite and for the kremlin, is that he can actually personify washington,

this one center of decision making that would not sabotage its own decision. is that actually a fair assumption given how many efforts to undermine or prevent this meeting we saw on the eve of the sun, it's coming from the democratic corners, not from the republicans whom you mentioned. you know, that would be quite logical to expect that. but from, from the democrats themselves. well, there were in washington that the, by the team itself is divided. that there are hawks and doors the. the good thing about by doing that is that he's a team player that he's trying to find common denominator. either them or to impose his individual wheel on the everybody else. so i think that definitely you know, the he is in a better position to unite the dcf status from around himself. well,

i think this is something that he's capable of doing. no, i'm not sure that can unite the american society now on the eve of this meeting, both leaders, both by the appeal to national interest in order to justify something. but i think the problem there is that the americans are still defying, dives, national interest in a very universal way. what's good for america is good for the world, and this is something that the russians clearly cannot agree with. i mean, ultimately it's at the, at the root of all the current tensions between our countries. do you think any progress is possible without americans adopting and somewhat humbler definition of the national interests? my take is that the united states has entered a very difficult, painful period in its history. it has to moderates ambitions and

we'll have to emancipate itself from these universalism, which is not likely to work in the future. it will be difficult. i think we might see some setbacks, but americans leave in our other flexible political system. so i remain moderately optimistic about the u. s. ability to come to grips within you reality still, i think it will take time and definitely for men americans, it is all on the natural to believe that what is good for the united states is good for the rest of the human kind. sometimes it is the case, sometimes it is not because we've got to leave in these controversial situation and all of us have to learn humility and knowledge of the united states. i think that to many other leaders should also master this art. and hopefully in the end of the

day, we'll manage it. and finally, if i may, i don't know where the river that, but i think the bottom of the administration is quite blatant in instrumental ising ideology together. what is once, i mean, all these talk about democracy is being in an existential battle with a top. chris's which has been its main rhetorical frame so far. how do you think the kremlin should play around or leverage this narrative or shouldn't even pay any attention to it? well, because because it's so narrative for the cabinet, the, the, the, the greatest fight of, of today is the fight order and chaos. and we believe for least they, in the government believe that if you are support him, kill us direct or indirectly implicitly or explicitly y'all on their own side of

history. so we can offer our own ideological framework, which can compete with that on the united states. but i think that you are right, that the united states will have to moderate its ideological little. because if it does not, it will have problems with many of its partners and the allies all over the world. you know, it is easy to criticize a rational shina of for, for the louis still to return and isn't. but what about saudi arabia? what about to a key? what about, are there not liberal countries which are too important for the united states? well, mr. for the you're getting into the board about which turns them in, judging from the american media, is not allowed to any russian speaker anymore. i mean, they were very, very indignant about bringing up any of the, of the concerns that they're usually thrown by the american indirection to roger. but anyway, we have to leave it there. i speak to appreciate you being with us today. thank you

. thank you, and thank you for watching hope to hear again next week on well, the far as me, the me ah, we're gonna talk a lot about la quino energy and also use volcanoes as a metaphor to elucidate. so many of the big trends happening in geo 6 is fine, and the ah

phoenix has actually got a little uncovered face men's clothing and shoulder holster. it's a kind of gun feminism. its name is how camino above put a human level. some of the whole model that of us is, was up on the job, but you don't want me. she lives in one of the most dangerous and patriarchal provinces of afghanistan cost. why she which time i miss that? sure no, i shall do that, but that update it to run by. yes that i've got. he knows that she does her best to fight for women's rights. i am not able to get that done as you would. i do not know that

she's known him by her nickname. the king was, i got to reco much other. that was really a good one day i i as american, celebrates a new holiday marking the end of slavery in the us. the supreme court blocks a lawsuit against chocolate giants using child labor, one african farms u. k. government ministers say that if you will, deeply ashamed off for review, review the thousands of right victims to see justice and victims of all groups. say the findings are too little to like to know. i don't, the apology alone is you know, to healed her as the victims and survivors who have been so terribly let down the devastating floods.