ah, are a lot welcome to all the current politics is still primarily the reality of alpha males, especially when it comes to interactions in russia and the united states with thousands of nuclear ship rockets pointed at one another with this week's while actual summit in geneva, lodge and joseph biden seems to have, would be march your politics aside and even agreed that they bear the responsibility for managing the relationship between the countries. how long will this commitment last, want to discuss that? i'm now joined by the person, the director general of the russian international affairs council. mr. cord. nothing great to see you again. thank you for talking. john. welcome. now you've been following the, your sodium, the huge russian relationship. since the very beginning of your career, i'm sure you've seen quite

a number of such leaders. some of that can be cold war days. they've dealt literally with the fate of the world. i don't think that could be sad about the junior meeting, although i think there was also a little bit of this history in the making by kids. how do you or staff is significant the significance of these interactions in the grounds came of things. well, i think that it's fair to say that in the relations between moscow and washington, nothing serious happens without some meetings. traditionally, some meetings have been a major catalyst for any positive change in the relationship. they have elections in i states and you, president comes to power. he makes a couple of da statements towed to moscow. then he consults with his

experts with the system. so it turns out that unfortunately in suddenly his mosque was indispensable. you have to build relations with leaders the year. so they put together some, it's meeting. and after the summit meeting, basically as things start moving diplomats military, bureaucrats, experts get together, come up with ideas, sometimes agree on some on something. sometimes they disagree about some, it's are indispensable. not only you from this particular meeting, there was a lot of talk on the american side about the need to approach pushing 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 the indeed the case with the bite

and ministration that it was? perhaps vulnerable because of this need to appear at the top with which is when in fact it's actually counterproductive for reaching any you know, stuff then disagreement. whereas with moscow, well, the problem, one of the problems on the us side is that the president has to keep in mind he's domestic audience. and of course, by didn't, is exposed to severe, not necessarily a fear, criticism, not only from there, 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 with food 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 would include the human rights agenda and the faith of alex in the law, me and the janitorial integrity of ukraine and the vance in bel, i was on all of these issues. it is very difficult to reconcile the positions of the 2 men. right, and i think the approach was very clear in explaining caesar had lawrence, he can discuss any international problem with president biden. but what he clearly does not want to discuss with keys us peer is domestic coffee. so there are there is that you have the stance. 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 biden's, one that had to do the strategic stability and cybersecurity recruitment. and then the other one that had to found off american journalists implying that he wasn't tough enough with him. we just need to bite and do you think we'll prevail when he returns back to washington? it's hard to tell it of course, but i think that by didn't i would like to get to deal with in 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 u. s. are some competition,

especially in the military field for i think that to binding understands fairly well, that the main strategic a diversity of the united states is not russia. it is china and russia is this section. russia is in the irritant. i think that biden will do whatever she can in order to have his hands free for dealing with may jean. but of course, as you rightly pointed out, he has to keep in mind the us public opinion and the positions of the us customer spent. so he cannot avoid these potentially varied devise of issues that he mentioned in his press conference after the meeting with wooten in geneva. and i think the art is called to balance these 2 agendas. it's not easy, it's 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 was speaking about the, the rational post her right now. i had an impression that the russian side was approaching into some it's not for 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 the appearances. do you agree with that? and then saw, is it janny and given how many frustration there are in moscow with the u. s. 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 particular situations. so if you don't have anything to hide about, 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,

assign is coming from the bite in administration and biden friendly. think times it seemed as if they were viewing russia as they go hooligan, a large rogue stake a disruptor. not very, the all theory is 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 biological 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 too perceived as the major opponents will be nice states. russia is a distraction or off season, an irritant. i and it's better to deal 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 might play a certain role in the north korean nuclear issues i. it is definitely an important player in europe. so i think that really bad and inspiration starts to appreciate their old that most place may be, you know, they believe that most is punch and 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 would 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, most coo is, or it's least, it might be easier to deal with that. well, most definitely not as far as washington. i cannot make my but when it comes to military, my, i think i'm going to russia would argue that it has even a certain degree of superiority. and in fact, in the latest grad assessment reported by the us intel community, it was specifically said that the russian military rad increases dramatically when it serves, or if it serv, as to what they call the force multiplier for china. as far as the americans are concerned, do you think all these talk with the russians about strategic stability? isn't the ultimately about russia in the united states,

or is it about the united states in china and russia serving simply as a trial you for a more difficult conversation? well, i think it's more complex. so whereas, if you dig some specific areas of the current global military balance or 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 liberty easier to talk and to goody china add these particular juncture is motivated to subscribe to the strategic culture. and so kind of

you know, 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 certain, gibson, new technological development, the miss miss miss fields or the navy, or are many knowledge is well, mr. carter, we have to take a very short break right now, but we'll be back in just a few moments station. the me he thought you had to push it glitched and he can he just, he but the know you mean russell, but i hope so. but over the, over the years, they sort of the motion learning and

a lot of stories going on in the course which i'm interested in watching for bob rhodes. i position me. we think he might be a soldier because of the boot. she's wearing huge, which pulled up, took a puzzled was little young on this. you're still watching, please. ah ah ah the me

or ah, welcome back to walls. apart with the courts and those 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. you create some sort of a mechanism for a bilateral consult patients and in that area, is there anything other than the most go is really looking towards achieving in those consultations or others talk 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 co hopes to get to got a short term. what we need is to re invent control to come

up with a new model of strategic arms control, which would reflect a new reality is all the militate balance of the 21st century. and this is a very, very complicated task, 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 5 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 on the better. and he's another outcome of the geneva talks is a variable agreement to deal with cybersecurity,

which i know surprised many of your colleagues in moscow because washington quite persistently refused to change annie grim and said on that subject and in geneva by then handed, which in a list of i think 16 critically important factors that you think should be protected from any cyber attack. d, as a step towards meaningful discussion or in the country a probably you for yet another round of sanctions. well 1st of all, you can sanctions. i think that unfortunately, we're likely to see more sanctions. the question is, what sanctions we are going to see? what they should be concerned about in the cabinet is if the united states goals for something bigger like 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 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 natural concern for the company is concerned. or would that put a stop to any effort to reach any meaningful agreements in bilateral relations? well, i think that it will be close to close to stop him major contact with the united states because deaf and the 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 are 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 tampa on the margins of the g. 20 summit in homework and 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 reference again the united states on the us territory. that's why we don't need any negotiations with you. you should just stopped your malign activities, or you should stop doing what you are 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 know the analyst mosca believed that meeting was a victim of its own success. because the, you know, 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 96? because the united states is a delighted 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 said that publicans had to see common from democrats after i think so they would accuse bye to know if would be to solve the indecisive, of like an a clear agenda not off enough with him and definitely they will try to sabotage some of the agreements that have been reached in geneva. one of the good things about biden is of course, that he's

a very shrewd and experienced politicians politician. he spent many, many years on the hill. he knows how to rock with the congressman. unlike his predecessors, he is a part of the washington political establishment. so probably hugo can live better than the top deed. trump had a very messy administration and 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 bite and team itself is divided. that there are hawks and doors, the earth. the good thing about by doing that is that he's a team player that he's trying to find a common denominator. other than to impose his individual wheel on the everybody else. so i think that definitely, you know, he is in a better position to unite the dcf status from around himself. while i think this is something that he is capable of doing well. 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 and painful period in its history. it has 2 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 it in our other flexible political system. so i

remain moderately optimistic about the u. s. ability to come to grips within you reality steel. 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 of times. 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, she's 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 all narrative for the cabinet and 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 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 ideological little. because if it does

not, it will have problems with many of its partners and 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 though you're getting into the board about which turns, i mean, 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 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 the

in the me i, i is your media a reflection of reality in a world transformed what will make you feel safe for the tycer lation community. are you going the right way or are you being that somewhere? which direction? what is truth? what is faith? in the world corrupted. you need to defend the join us

in the depths or remain in the shallows. ah ah. ah, the headlights are, what are you into national the u. s. unveils and yet another round of sanctions against russia. just 4 days after the putin biden's summit in geneva, and in spite of the very optimistic messages from both sides also in the storage shape the wheat here on our international moscow sets a rim record is the daily number of cove at 900 cases source to an old high and high, the city's mayor has announced a raft of new measures in the region of central italy wants to welcome tourists who have received rushes with nick v short white. a lack of approval so far from the

european medicines agency, one regional counselor.