data process and were taken into consideration or internet law expert on social media solicitor your coincides the way the issue was solved in the past by brussels, was to ignore it. there's nothing due about, about the inability almost of facebook. but boy, for example, to comply with you previously, lo, it is just impossible for them to do. but so far, your governments have been turning a blind eye. a g d p r is, is based on, on a single way of handling personal data across the board. in the united states, on the other hand, the, the laws of privacy are, are left largely to individual states. to legislation, there is no can abroad. the view taken is to privacy law. in fact, the reason really a right to privacy in the united states. it's just is just goes perhaps against

again, that constitution. well, if you'd like to dig a little deeper into any of those stories r t dot com, it's a solid starting point is always fresh content, lively discussions to be fun. there are 2 seasons, me the the the ah, ah ah, ah. hello and welcome to cross dock. we're all things considered. i'm peter labelle, after the shooting bite and some european leader such as germany's merkel and

frances macro called for renew dialogue with russia. the baltic states in poland said not so fast, thus there is no consensus within the e u on how to move forward. the ball remains in brussels court the the cross talking russia e u relations. i'm joined by my guess, john laughlin in paris. he's a university lecture in history and political philosophy in nashville. we have thomas schwartz, he is a professor of political science and european studies at vanderbilt university. and here in moscow, we have dmitri so slow. he is the deputy director of the center for comprehensive european and international studies at the higher school of economics. i totally cross talk roles and effects. that means you can jump in anytime you want. and i always appreciate, let me go to john 1st in paris, we have an impasse, not the 1st time in the repeat union when it comes to foreign policy. last time we

had the semblance of good relations was back in 2014, before the 4th regime change, and it's been downhill ever since. so where do we stand right now? and i, and i want to talk, ask on our, our panelists, the dmitri, why should we even care anymore? it's been 7 years. i mean, what's the point we've gotten used to not being together? go ahead, john. well, let's, let's remind ourselves that the european union is as the slave israel has shown, is a dysfunctional organization. and you just said in your question, why should we care? i don't think russia does need to care. it's a dysfunctional organization because we can see that the tail wags the dog, tiny little states, which have a population of india 1000000 also are able by finding the table loud enough to put spokes in the wheels of the big players in particular germany. and this is crazy

and tough. the dirty linen is, is washed in public. so it shows that the european union, despite what people say, doesn't make its member states stronger together, in fact, weakens them because you always have to go to the lowest common denominator. but in the sense, i think that we really don't need to worry about what goes on in the brussels meeting. because as we've said before on this channel, peter, the fact is there's a difference between relations with the e. u and the institutions on the one hand and relations between russia and the individual member states on the other. there's plenty of history of good or relatively good bilateral relations between moscow and se lynn vienna, who passed one or 2 other places. and those are quite different from the relations with brussels itself. and given that the not string to gas pipeline is about to be completed. i think if i can use a nautical metaphor, it's much more important what goes on deep down under the surface beneath the waves

beneath the froth. because that project, which as i have predicted for some time, is going to be completed is of much more importance that the ra ever it in the table in brussels. ok, well it's got, it's thomas and nashville, joseph burrell, the, the high commission of her foreign affairs for the repeating union has come up with a formula and i'll just repeated you here. push back, constrain and engage. well, why shouldn't russia do exactly the same thing to the european union? go ahead thomas? well, russia has traditionally, historically tried to divide and conquer in europe. it's not going to, it doesn't like unified europe, it's never like unified europe. i'm a historian, as much as a political sciences, and i know in the 1950s that nikita khrushchev was sent to american leaders, what the last thing we want is a strong europe. now i would, i would disagree with my counterpart,

thereby saying that you may be dysfunctional on security issues. but it is a powerful economic walk. it does represent the interest of millions and in that economic power, it would seem to me that it would benefit russia to have better relations with the you. but i think for a lot of reasons, particularly president security concerns and his own power. he doesn't want that relations because the e u is also a normative power, which pushes back against the suppression of dissidence in russia, which is back against the forcible annexation of the crimea. so for those reasons, i think russia doesn't want necessarily good relations with the new and needs to present the you as an enemy to russia. so in that sense, i think they will continue to try and pick a pick a part the you bike with individual countries and hope that the you cannot get its act together. well, i mean, thomas. so in say it's the russians that force the baltic states in poland to veto it. is that what you're saying?

because that's where the debate, if i were, if i were in the all dick states or poland, i would be very concerned about russian expansion is. russia has conquered those states in the past. so they fear, thomas, how can i the baltic republics? their sovereignty is threatened by russia as we speak right now. what evidence do you have to prove that? well, we have, for example, the cyber attacks on sonia during the earlier in. ready the past decade, we have lessons of history. we have the fact that russia, the, the, the baltic states, of course, your annexation, that's part of their historical. and as those countries closer to russia, do fear it's military power, russia. oh, shouldn't it shouldn't be anxious about nato expansion to its border. you know, it, the, there are 2 sides. all of these things here. i'm the disease platitudes here. dmitri, you're the, the russian in the room here. russia wants better relations with you,

but it's always conditionality over and over and over again. you must do this. you ma, it's, you know, you must change your behavior therapy and union doesn't have to change its behavior whatsoever. does it go ahead, dimitri? well, of course, i would want to have relation to the partnership with the organ union, by the way, russia insisted on even using the term strategic partnership and agreement in the new fundamental document and the new from the foundational agreements with the union negotiation. so we start in 2014, but you are absolutely right. it's impossible. it's impossible to have good relations or did you partnership or just more of a partnership with with the union and for whole 2 major reasons. reasons. reason number one is the director of minority within the european union. precisely. poland and the baltic states also sometimes joined by a country like sweden, romania,

who is your advice? danny was with the movement, trying to blog any river from on any improvement relations. and this can last started in 2014, it was long before i will remind you that back in 2006, poland imposed vito only go stations between russia and the european union on the new procedure agreement. this veto was being carried for one year on the hop right and amber off the fall of the ball. the state actually immediately after the u. enlargement. ball and in the baltic states started a price of the best to grab any pulls of the movement balls of the developments in russia utilization. and the 2nd fundamental reason is precisely conditional, says the only acceptable formula of partnership which is acceptable for the union is russia becoming

a part will be used for in process. excepting the more about this, you be want to build the european union in russia, formalizing domestic legislature, we village is leisure of the europe union. and russia basically becoming defects so associated with the european union. instead of being an independent great power and independent goal of the month, i pull a war even now, you know, even know when competent, what a german in talk about did desire be little dialogue with russia. what do they mean? they mean that ross issues on the, my partnership with china and to return european form. it shouldn't become if you read of the european, instead of becoming a dmitri, let me ask john here. so i mean, i think to be set it out really very well, very smoothly there. so if that were all to happen,

how is any of that to rush is benefit explained to me? how is what? well, no, hey, let me like john and i mean you, you meet people, laid it out here. so that's all part. that's all what the europeans want. the russians don't have a say in their own national interests. go ahead, john. well, i broadly very broadly agree with i agree with dimitry, i think he's put it very well. i think that's the hostility to russia in, within the european union. and i mean, within the brussels institutions is not only due to the polls in the baltic states, but he's also has a very strong ideological dimension. there was in the eyes of these people. russia represents the other europe. in other words, it's nationalistic, it's christian, it's rooted in history. it plays power, politics, it thinks, in geological terms and so on. and all those things are things which europe, pretends to have abandoned or has abandoned. and therefore, russia is

a kind of guilty conscience. it's a kind of perfect enemy. it embodies everything that the european union doesn't want to do. so it goes way beyond just the gym, elliptical aspect. of course it does include that as far as what does russia get out? a bit concerned thomas swat said that you was asking who, who benefits both sides benefit? and this is one of the paradoxes would benefit. one of the great paradoxes, there's a paradox between a contradiction. in fact, between the public language at the european union level, which is of course, the language of sanctions. and the reality of fairly considerable economic interaction between the various u member states and russia. and indeed some competition between them in order to have better relations. the gas pipeline is only the most obvious example, but the level of industrial and commercial cooperation with germany is very high.

and when emmanuel mccaul went to the st. petersburg don't make for him a year or 2 ago, he boasted that france was russia's most reliable economic partner. so there is a double language going on here. on the one hand, the language of sanctions. and on the other hand, the reality of the need for a high level of economic and commercial interaction. okay. might. yeah. if you, it is a paradox right there, because i know that you know, that the, there's a lot of in german industrialists had been put a lot of pressure on merkel to start this new dialogue after 7 years getting it started. and then we have a few putting that i think, but more of a cultural pushback, which is not to anyone's benefit here. all right, gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here and we're going to go to a short break and that's about short break. we'll continue our discussion on russia, e relation. stay with our to the

me, the news. there's a concept that can almost tell moral hazard. and that is that if you constantly bail out the worst factors in the economy, they will act with morality. and so at the fed bid, they've got moral hazard on steroids. they're rewarding the worst factors who are doing things like in town and stealing hundreds of billions of dollars, some people, and just drawing their own country into trees. and the fact i argue with me go ahead try i don't think they can't ride on police report and all have in december 2020 a group of anti finishes. fill out a film crew access for 3 months. 3rd row, like if people, organization, it's an idea that must be opposed to the game ground. they make their faces.

but they can say what they believe and we believe in helping our community. we believe that fascism is one of the major threats to the united states. has gotten proven, this is a chance to see who and teeth are really are in order for me. my 1st amendment right. and say that my life matter, i have to be onto the teeth that that's all america. we can't trust the police, we can't trust the government. we can't trust anyone except or so to protect ourselves in look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except when the shorter the conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. the point obviously is to great truck rather than fear i would take on various jobs with the artificial intelligence real summoning the theme in

a robot must protect its own existence with the welcome back across town where all things are considered. i'm peter bell around you were discussing russia e relations with the ok . let's go back to thomas in national i thomas say, and the 1st part of the program you were talking about how countries like the baltic republics may feel that their sovereignty is threatened. but can't you see as a historian, can you see how russia feels that its sovereignty is being threatened when you have

a client state like ukraine, where lensky is whipping you only a short few months ago, whipping up conflict with in ukraine? i mean, it's an intro ukrainian conflict. it's portrayed very wrongly in the west. it's not ukraine, russia conflict, it's an intra ukraine conflict. and we all of this jingle wasted talk. russia had no choice but to react with in its own borders here. so, i mean, everybody talks about security, but it doesn't russia have the right to talk about its security as well. go ahead. partial certainly have the right talk, but it's security, but russia have seized the crimea and is sent forces in the eastern ukraine. it was, why did that, how, how would i did that happen? did russia over throw the democratically elected government of ukraine in 2014? is that russia is fault whose fault is that? who created reality? what created that reality was the fact that the ukraine was coming closer to the

europe, ian union, and russia years, a democratic rochelle, through the government on its borders, rochelle, been through the government. well, no, i, i disagree. i disagree with your characterization there. i think what i should say are in the great yeah, well, what's happening there in the upgrade is that president fierce having a democratic and functioning ukraine on this order is one that would challenge that type of you was ukraine wasn't craddick before. it was elected to us in the union recognize the election of unicode, which it wasn't a democracy then. why would they recognize the election outcomes look ukraine. the ukraine carried out elections and it has carried out elections recently with governments that have tried to reimpose, re restore its sovereignty. russia needs to respect the men's agreements and stop

right. not rope is not a member of russia, russia tori of the minsk agreements. you should know that it's not a signatory to it, right? it went into the government in kiev. they will not implement the minsk agreements. it's quite remarkable. even at the, at the, the recent summit we had the us implicitly, i think even explicitly said there is a process. it's the mens process, but its proxy, ukraine won't do it. it's incumbent if ukraine is interested in its sovereignty and it and protection of the it's borders it should. that's the starting point. ok. it but it's ignored. well, protecting its orders when roger next is territory from it. well, i don't think, i think that power certainly didn't, and i did not antics it. that is number inappropriate legal term ukraine to rejoin russia. russia didn't take it by force,

it was already there. you got to get the narrative straight here. let me go to dimitry here. dmitri, the ok, russia, security interests are always completely ignored, as if they don't exist. i mean, you have the most powerful military block in the history of mankind, attempting to, completely in circling in russia should do nothing. well, of course, and then there is the predominant narrative, you know this conference as a right to choose their alliances. what is, what is really most mentioned here is security concerns. all other callers like process would also be taken into account and no one is doing the deliver. and 2nd list. well, there's also kind of forgotten the dimensions is the final decision based on most by the confidence who choose their alliances, what they align themselves. and if nato proclaims the open door ball as it was

ukraine, it means that ukraine also wants that's made, or it also wants ukraine, the joint. right. and then russia, the reasonable question, why is the interest in ukraine joining the alliance right on balance? of course we have to call sequences, definitely russia will be present. it will be the existential. if you can enjoy and need though, and roughly read it to, to do almost anything to prevent this and they are the same applies the bellows. and they think that a lot of identify those read lines quite explicitly before the weekend by them meeting and coming back to the role of the european union. and will let me remind also that it was precisely that all of the european union, which resulted to the euro might on crisis in the overthrowing of yellow, blueish report. it was you that are in ukraine to make a choice, right?

it's either or by the way, you know what we want the a cmo pena's for ration the european union with russia and europe union. right as well. be you which of ukraine to make a choice. the choice, the quote which made was for a claim to be, are all for the europe, if you william us there was, they were based on which basically all of this come from these, well, you know, you know, johnny, i'm glad that dimitry brought that up because all during that crisis b e u has its fingerprints all over it. it was in the room when, you know, covert sign, the agreement of a change of power. that would be elections called early and all that. and then, you know, all, during that time the russian said once, twice, 3 different times, we need to all 3 work together on this because you're the stabilizing ukraine and

they were warned ok. and then after the coup, the e, you treated unicode, which like they had never met him. ok, the paper, the ink on the paper was still wet and the e u. cowardly just turned away. you know, what they sanctioned the wrong government. they should have sanctioned the qu regime, ok, and the e u has, is, is at fault for every single part of this year. they created the facts on the ground for this tension that was completely unnecessary. and the russians warned them you destabilize ukraine like this, that countries sovereignty will be in danger. and it is in danger because of what the b, e u and plus victoria new and, and her famous words and their policy towards ukraine. peace would be the european union. go ahead, john. peter, i 100 percent agree with you. but we are talking about events that happened 7 years ago, and things had moved on. now we don't need to carry on arguing about ukraine's or about crimea, because i come back to what i said at the beginning. what's going down beneath the

surface is different from the froth that's being generated, the tall. the fact is, nobody in washington or brussels believes that the crimea will ever revert to ukraine. they hardly even mention the crimea anymore. they know that is full, keeps at least for a generational until the wheel of history turns. there is no, there is hardly ever any, any explicit mention of crimea. ditto with ukraine. joining nato that is over biden has made it quite clear that he doesn't want, at least not immediately. ukraine to join nato. he dropped lensky. he didn't let the lens can come and see him before the meeting with a boot in these other subterranean submarine colorless which are currently in play. and however much i agree with you again about the rollover victoria newland and the you and all the rest of it. that was a long time ago and things are moving on. i'm not trying to paint a rosy picture, but it's different. the reality is different from the rhetoric i completely agree

with you, you know, you know, thomas. so, i mean, how do we move forward here? because, i mean, what we saw with joe biden's, you know, his trip to europe. i mean, obviously, top of mind for me and the binding ministration is not really russia, though. they have to play to this russia gate conspiracy. nonsense. because they had painted them all themselves into a corner on that. but their real message was china. and so, you know, i always find it really curious, you know, every once in a while the new york times will say, well, maybe we should have a better relationship with, with russia because of china. well, that horse left the barn so long ago, i'm amazed that anyone actually says it, okay, because if you want to have a more stable global environment going forward, you have to have great powers communicate with each other. but when you have one major block like the european union, they just fold their arms and say, we're not doing anything because, well, because of what navarro me says if anybody in russia cares about mr. about me. i

mean, it says kind of silly. don't you think go ahead, thomas? no, i don't. i mean i think i, i think the treatment of dissidence, bye bye up for terry and regime. he is this a dealer in dates is he didn't use a how do you hold it in? probably you define a different someone will be with crimes. he was ok . so i think that is a crime and not have a committed what is a crime, but that's beside the point. what you're getting at is that the united states does want to have a dialogue with russia. they are 2 nuclear powers. and president biden did want to reset in some manner of the relationship with russia to deal with the issues that do concern the 2 countries together. this is something that goes back to the cold war after all the united states and the soviet union dealt with each other and in those circumstances as well. so that,

that is there. now what complicates matters is that president biden, and i think for reasons of trying to regain support from the american people from europeans, has characterized issues with russia and china as democracy is against the authoritarian states. and so for that reason, the united states is going to continue to be concerned about human rights treatments and human rights behavior of the president regime in russia. and this is going to be a continuing irritant. i think, just as in the cold. ringback war, you can still make agreements, but what, what the invasion of cry me yet, russian aggression in ukraine has indicated, is that they're going to be continuing caution about how to deal with russia. you're not going to have a very warm relationship, but i think, you know, thomas, i hope it are. you know, the way you used to wear a dissident, i suppose. the january, 6 rioters are dissidence in the united states. and the whole world should be watching how their rights are being violated,

left and right. so to can play that game. but i agree with you. one of the better we got it in the note when the program on conciliation. ok. anyway, gentlemen. all the time we have, i want to take my guess in paris, nashville and here in moscow. and thanks to our viewers for watching us here to see you next time and remember cross back room. ah ah the it wasn't, you know, probably you're not in my back on that. i was like, i was lucky you lucky but i got your so you'll

have a lost his bus because i just got then you just got to go. we will be on monday, my thought, my daughter, but the so i said, you know, put it with you or not so much barbara, almost what, i'm already whatever sped up. i read me just go to me. i mean, we're going to go, we went up and i really, he was, i just don't get it until then it's fitted to handle that one of this, but i'm like obviously this is kim, i'm on my side and we can go to kind of home i just spoke with him. yes. at west village and he thought of the thing i was calling with you and your team, samantha katie. yeah, my thought a lot of problem. we just got to go to the

headline stories this digging deeper into canada is dark. another 182 on mark graves of indigenous people are on earth near a former residential school site following to similar discoveries in recent weeks. we speak to the leader of unintentional community and it was a genocide. the whole point of the residential school was to take the indian out of the me. a lot of them are. thank you and a session with public revealing after a weeks of speculation that he held the sputnik viva scene on stating russia will be dictated to by social media platforms such as facebook, the red cross phase, and it's ready to deliver the sputnik job to conflict areas or run the world.