the who's who's i hello, we welcome to cross talk where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle. we are witnessing a significant and irreversible shift in the international system. is undeniable. we live in multiple the world to example. suffice the bike and ministrations, inability to hold the north stream to and the recent china us meeting great power politics is back. the discuss these issues and more. i'm joined by my guests when decent and also use

a professor at the university of southeastern norway, as well as the author of great power politics in the 4th industrial revolution. and here in moscow, we prostitute dmitri bobbitt. she is a political analyst and editor it in us me, internet media project or gentleman cross talk roles and effect. that means you can jump in anytime you want. and i always appreciate it. okay, let's go to glen 1st and low. much has been talked about the, the north stream and the gas pipeline, connecting russia to the german market. here, of course, is in the american domestic context. it's a win for, even though they don't understand the context of the story that it was germany that actually wanted the pipeline in the 1st place. and it is a private initiative, but it's not state the state. so, but you know, it would be if you look at some of the reactions in western media, this is, this is just giving the russians another chance to commit of russia and they chose weakness on the west part. i mean, there's a bunch of mental misunderstanding of this story here,

and unfortunately it's just feeling the worst possible fear mongering that we've been experiencing, particularly in the last 5 years. no, i agree. i think there's a big misunderstanding around it again pertaining to russia weapon, for example, it's quite extreme. again, you want to also have to keep in mind that the point that was a german initiative is they want to increase their energy security in order to in order to make sure that their, their industries remain competitive. energy security, so much defined as reliable and cheap supply of energy. that's what the russians offer. so this was a deal between the russian and german company. and then the next generation states was the see. there is also an interesting narrative because they're not actually a part of this deal. how to enter this whole saga was by threatening or

blackmail in its own hours. because while the germans wanted more energy security, they went in sanctions against their law and attempted to punish and obstruct or ability to increase their energy security. now this is the list of sale that if as well so they've been actually doing that make any real concessions and the pipeline, i think in my, on my day percent finished. so again, it might have been very specifically, this is not some generosity in the end of their, their punishment of germany and russia because they, they fail to achieve their objectives. the pipeline is finished and they came to the conclusion is better to come out of this will saving some phase and allows us our relations with the germans and rushes and more so let's pretend we make a deal and that deal with between the americans and the germans or us listing bus conditions and if the germans were complied and they will stop punishing the

germans. so it's not so much of the deal and blackmail it's. it's quite extraordinary about the but again the, the feedback the really strange because i'm not sure what else they were supposed to do. those of us that know the story, draw the same conclusion, deem of the interesting thing is that the trump administration and the biometric been kept invoking ukraine their new found friend here. but at the same time the trumping ministration. and even people within the bite administration or saying and better buying russian gas, you bought the american l n g, which of course begs the question, well, what about your friends ukrainian. ok. i mean none of this story makes any sense whatsoever. if you give it a western context, go ahead. well, unfortunately, it's not just the american side, you know, in germany, in from, in britain you have roughly the same absurd claims. you know, i'm just coaching. give is. the german newspaper. mrs. merkel has decreed

ukraine. i think just make sure that everyone was political in the united states. and though this article was republished in the, in, in europe, in the u. k, for example, daily, expressly published if someone named maximilian turner call a former advisor to the british defense minas cheap. she said, he wrote in political that basically, while the united states will be having a war with china, think about the time in the war with china. jenn could attack europe and just take your defense just because the space will be absorbed in a wall with china and all of these because over the last few project, team 2 because it will give money to portion. so which would be able to have that. i've gotten just gotten political a us china war would likely absorb most if not all us economic and military

capability. and consequently, credit undermine it's chris ability to provide currency in europe. and because of that such, it will provide you with the much a lot for a peculiar to remedy your ashes. defeat at the handle, the cold war in the 91. i mean, the, if this is more insane than what is and the problem is that the people why such binion pay a lot, guys from the street. you know, they are form advisors to the british defense ministry of their hi, blaze us a few show such as far cause, you know, she, she made similar claims about ukraine being sold out to the, to the russia and just shows you how absurd the western media and the western political boss are becoming the problem is the more essential people they also have to change their opinions because there is such pressure from inside the

army washer. they came to that for the germans. the chance to ship from the sheed you was right. would you believe, you know, so, but until recently i started making claims that the german you will have to punish russia. give russia interprets that construction all last came to i think i and green light for. busy for pressure in ukraine, so i don't know where the some show that you will stop because if you know, so glen, put this all in contact. the last couple of years, been ramping rabbit anti russian offensive that they've been going on. particularly emanating from nato. i mean, they interpret this as a defeat. so i mean this, this very powerful unity, unity, unity. they keep repeating over and over. i guess there really isn't. there is also, it's really kind of laughing. the facade here at the end of the day, you need reliable, cheap energy, ok, and all of their nonsense, of all their,

their, their propaganda war just goes into copies. go ahead. the core of this propaganda though, it is the key arguments which everyone agrees on and observe to begin with, even the germans americans, they all agree on this under mental thing that they all have to serve you crazy, right? of transit. now this is repeated over and over again, right? so that means all russian gas to your, brushing your right to have this transitive through its territory and collect billions of dollars every year. is quite an absurd argument against russia has any will. first of all, this pipeline makes perfect economic sense. the fact that we have to pay the billions of dollars every year to the greens means about the german. then the rest of that something again from, from, from cutting out the middle and,

but also it makes much more reliable. and this is why the germans initiated, but still they use pushing with arguments of russia unreliable supply, which means europe teams to cut her lines on russia. well, the russia, ukraine, unreliable transit state and would like douglas reliable, it's so this, this is not. but again, this is interpretive of an energy weapon if they deny ukraine their rights of transit because they have this divine right to have russian gas goes through their territory. and it's quite extraordinary and even make it worse. over the past the years, ukraine has made great attempts to cut all social and economic ties to russia to reduce all dependence on russia. mean, ever since binding its books, the stopping flies across the board and the us every turn offloads this liberating and so for russia. but this one effort by russia to reduce its reliance on energy transferred through ukraine is deemed to be criminal. and again,

consensus across the board. this makes perfect sense is, is quite extraordinary where this comes from. it. ok, let's, let's take these, the, the nato argument, you know, needs this, this is a win for, he needs the money. ok as if other countries don't want russian gas because they do so. i mean if it is so very, very important to the kremlin, why would they cut off the supply? see that their logic just fails on every single metric? go ahead. oh yes, i agree with what glen just also because okay, let's take the figures. ukraine gets russian friendship between $2.00 and $3000000000.00 a year. sorry about the population of your credit was near 50000000. it was 4948. now it's less than 40 and a lot of people went to work in russia and the european union. well, the g and lack of whole reduces the population. but still it's a big country,

it's bigger than poland. if it is, of course, bigger than 100 check republic, it's a huge country. and the, and the top $3000000000.00 with a lot feed. what could feed it was using the russian market and being a real bridge between russia and the you that could feed 40000000 people. but then you are a human ukraine that installed and so violently in the 2012, sorry, 2014. they're doing everything and took up any time to rush. i mean, just a people may not know it in the west. zelinski imposed sanctions on the hermitage. museum in st. petersburg. the landscape is both sanctions on the moscow state university. you live in ukraine. you can't cope with these always asians. so this is the 1st argument. the 2nd argument is called you ok. the german green part

u. s. as we learn from the national interest, insists that the, you know the pipeline to be commissioned and they initiate the legislation to prevent this pipeline from operating. ok, do for the greens are so much 40, how are they going to warm and feed germany without fossil fuels the next 10 years, even if the so called transition is a short as they say it really is going to be march mulder. you still need to feed and watch more than 18000000 people before we finish up your plan. also, i think the, the current fans contract ends in 2024. and the agreement that the, the, the germans, numeric russia has the green new. it is what rocky, what our germany say over any kind of transit relationship. russia

has with ukraine. i mean, again, amazing part the americans and germans agreed that they should extend 10 years up to 2024 for agreement between russian company and the premium company is quite amazing. and they didn't even include russia in this conversation to come up with this deal. so like, we're going to restore a break in the mail they say the the join me every thursday on the alex simon show. when i was speaking to guess in the world, the politic sport business. i'm show business. i'll see you then me the job

doesn't look like this. unless of off the field. you feel like you actually puzzle you through that actually use them shape which is a little bit me put your budget ah continues to tell you. because if i didn't get famous from a credit issued by both of us in, in the old days before breaks it because the u. k. was attached to you. they could

do it. other countries do, which is to take all their debts and dump it into this giant shadow banking system that covers the world's largest trading block. and you could kind of buy some time there because the c, b is printing and buying and monetizing debt by the trillion, christine the garden, literally just buying trillions and trying to garbage debt. but now post breakfast, they don't have that way to wash the debts into the greater you laundromat. and so that is going to for the 1st time post bracket. debts are going to start to cause a lot of pain. the welcome at the cross. were all things considered? peter la bell. this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing some real news the the

let's change gears gentlemen here, team us. we have the 2nd high love of the 2nd high level meeting that the united states in china had. this is on the back of the disaster in anchorage earlier in the year. a lot of up language went into them from both sides and fences. that was intentional, it was a maximum list, and of course they're playing to their domestic audiences. but they both came away from it. probably with very little understanding, almost certainly no agreement. but there is the recognition that we have to really start talking and start talking seriously. am i wrong? maybe this is a opening for some realism here, or is this going to just spiral? cuz we haven't hit bottom yet, it's going to continue to spiral your thoughts. go ahead. i think there's going to continue to spiral because on the american side, we're not in the logical pregnant. we're in the laundry or ideology. i mean,

from the big major point of view, it makes absolutely no sense for the united states to have a quarrel with china or to have a quarrel with russia. but i guess logically, yes, these are authoritarian countries and by then keeps repeating every week that there is going to be a huge confrontation between democracy is and all the craig resumes, if unavoidable, you know. and if he says it's no dog. yes, it's, it is no dog because even, you know, that way just you will be the 3rd. yes. you know, the russian bolsheviks who are absolutely, i go with the will. they believed in peaceful coexistence, where the gold capitalist readings, then you, i ga, the ultra liberal ideology in the united states use. i don't believe in it, you know, we have the 2nd crowd of american chinese talks. you know, that was when to sharon debbie detectors they stayed on the american side. the chinese were put off by this because they expect that at least someone like anthony

blamed if not mr. barbie, i'm so ok if they sound such a lower level official, the chinese also represented by war level official found you know, the deputy foreign minister or china, the main foreign minister. and basically what did we hear? the chinese just said that the united states would stop if dangerous, or if it's dangerous, because economically it's a disaster. i think everyone themselves and militarily and so just because the states are trying to check chinese aggression in south china seas and east china seas. i mean, just look at the geography chinese aggression in the south. china sea is prevented by country. what gave you tens of thousands of miles away from that? right? how can this be, where is the water here? glen? go to go ahead and shove it because i mean countries or at loggerheads,

but i mean at least even in india is absolutely right to point out a lower level than probably should be. it's not is it wasn't appropriate. and i think that the chinese, that, that as a slight here, but there is a reckoning on both sides that did they, either we continued to spiral down with unintended consequences or sort of facing up to the fact that this is going to be a long log ahead if we want to avoid a serious conflict including a military. com, go ahead. yeah, no, i think there's a recognition that they need diplomacy. but again, what, what you're diplomacy achieve and how much rooms for maneuver is there because us has been there open that it will have the same format in purpose for diplomacy towards china. us with russia, which is that us will corporate all in areas where the us interest in all other areas will seek to come from china and that's kind of limits the, the scope of diplomacy. and i agree to a large extent would be my,

i don't think ology is the driving variable here. i think the u. s. it's rather it's instrumental for him on the policy because the, the care, the strategies are openly based on global him on his much everything black and white. so the rice of china itself becomes the problem is not merely that there are some competing interest in china itself. that has to be cut down in size and sorry that was supposed to develop and grow under the wing of united states supply. every little thing. good thing now is trying to taking this technological leadership, living industry and building infrastructure around the world is getting the growing footprints in global finance. and this is very problematic as the u. s. does not recognize eagles in a world based on global dominance. so it's the size of china itself, which is the problem. but here's the diplomacy. we're trying to map out. our strategic interests was yours. can we mitigate or harmonize interest or at least respect the strategic interest and try to reduce the area of sarah rivalry in here

. very mush clear that the child has to be cut down and, and that's why it is often expressed in the language of ultimatums and threats, which of course, is very familiar to the russians. and so the corporation doesn't pay, will china making a lot of unilateral concessions? and again, this is hillary clinton, the famously wrote that i don't want my grandchildren to grow up in the world live by china. so it's not simply that the r as in interest are always competing. it's the mere price of it. so i think this has made the chinese very defensive, the field. there's that they're being circled much like the russian. so that's good reasons. i mean, the u. s. s launched economic war undermines economy military containment of china, which is nuclear aspect. and also, unless you think you're only interested in human rights interference in hong kong, young and both, which is not merely principled on human rights,

is also. busy efforts to the stimulus, china, so it's all of this lecture. it's not simply trying to learn about china and make compromises, but rather to see it to, to undermine china. and i think in order to have proper diplomacy that can really look at the strategic level. if the united states willing to move from unit to multiple or system, it's not. i think they will only spiral out of control and diplomacy will have little meaning. ok, we get a demon. let me go to you. i mean we can take it. we've been face value that basing as made it clear that it would be having peaceful coexistence with the united states. specifically in the west, in general, be acceptable to them, but that's we don't see that coming out of washington. another western glenn is framed that perfectly. the mere existence of china, the weight is

a threat because it is a read to germany and who to alleviate or address chinese rise and gemini, you have to have peaceful coexistence. and then i'm going to buy a little bit more with the money because i'm always, he won't let them do it. that's the problem. you can't help people co exist. if you bring it in an ideological setting. you know, the bro, my point of view, let me just call what the new york times rolled into 1000. well, so just 8 years ago, china is almost banging back was to show its peaceful and good intentions to what's safe. and actually the whole editorial, i think it was written by mr. was that was about how china was better than russia and this was before crimea. this was before. ringback there was a new in the domain, it was new relations between the west and russia. and indeed, i mean, you know, the chinese course

a peaceful rise of china. we are growing economically, but we're not going to invade anyone by willing to have actually by willing to give you money by went to give you a unit. that was the message from china. and what did they get the richer? so, i mean, if the united states are so concerned about all this live the bad publicity of the back yard and i just base and there was i create and around on is enrolling in this? i mean, the whole idea of hong kong was being a bridge between huge mainland china and the west. that's how this process. and then getting this, you know, the chinese, the west side and the book and about ideology here. talking about your moments. you, you know, unfortunately they're not just becoming an anti married for the chinese also. good governance is not based on democracy as it is understand in the west. it's,

it's based on the choosing the best and some co chinese kind of been able to choose some very competent leaders, otherwise, china will not have become so comically successful. oh, cool because of their medical side with choice between hillary clinton and donald trump for the seat. you know, when you, when i was and i'm really talking in the states and this is one of the reasons why diplomacy come to work here. these people are more creative, i mean, you have to be stupid to come to encourage and literature. they chinese, their on their, on the merits of american democracy. and this is exactly what the, what tony blink. indeed, it's very interesting. i'm glad i brought that up here because again, you know, if we look at the, the, the, the rice of china get getting into the world trade organization. and then you know, the hope that yeltsin will deliver russia to the west. i mean, all of these fantasies and dreams that you know, and it's particular,

it's an american peculiarities that everybody wants to be like us and everyone wants to like us. okay. and it's all in tatters. it didn't work out the way we thought it would, which was any lucian in the 1st place. go ahead. yeah. and i think the other kind of why they collapsed yet again at this meeting because this recent meeting between the chinese and united states, you have the same. they have been china and america lecturing china again. and also china outlining always complains because from the united states perspective, china not respected this unit polar world where it's tried to remodel itself out. the u. s. also position itself under the us, not challenging is leadership. and also trying to solve excepting the so called rules based international order, in which the us makes rules for trying to do, but it does. so it's so this created, it will explain a lot of the apartment from, from the china, the china, on the other hand,

is starting to look towards us. well, in the way of a model s d, my point out as well. it's a political system can't really do much at the moment. it's very much polarized, seem to be undergoing a cultural revolution. technological they're, they're, they're, they're struggling as well. they're economy is in bad shape, infrastructures and folding. you have this huge concentration of, well social economic presentation. even america allies, really, as we discussed with nor stream is really taking their orders anymore. and so that they don't see the united states united states in relative decline, which is a reasonable conflict. terese so. so why, why should they be lectured around by the united glenn people in china that remember the great cultural revolution. and they saw how devastating it was for china and seeing traces of emerge in the, in the, in the u. s. and the west in general,

must be quite horrifying for them and everyone else. right, gentlemen, that's all the time we have here. i want to make my guess and slow. and here in moscow, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here are see you next time. remember the ah. ah, the ah, ah.

the know what would you do me the good them and by that can mother can while we're on by now i should of i know i should know moment the new york on mon tesla deals on the one and then that will allow you to go for have an initiation with which i shouldn't be a bit off more than 100 people in the no, i mean, i mean i saw it in my in my name

is the theory of the whitening code that measures and mandatory health policies. raleigh, across western europe, where the number of infections is still on the rise. bluffs and your rages against restrictions. coby cases in the united states, increases 6 poles in july, while politicians and mixed messages about how to deal with the pandemic, leaving many confused various political choice involved in it. i just wish you would come around because it's a politics. this is not a little israel has it now has proof that iran attacked a tanker off the coast of a man killing to last week. the claims which.