the the in the me ah, hello and welcome to part for the most part, living in history for people is a bit like swimming in water for fish. both species are too far side had to comprehend what's immediately in front of them. but recently the scale and the speed of transformations have intensified so much that it's impossible not to notice the change though the question of what to do about it still remains open. what the charge on this donovan i'm now joined by the board. the program director at the vault di discussion club and also of the recently published book europe, russia, and deliver well daughter. it's about a jeff had a great to talk to you. thank you very much for your time. i'm sure you would agree

with my opening statement that the world is changing fast, but you wrote recently that the consequences of such transformations will be very specific, very individual for each and every country. and that in itself presents one of the hardest problems in foreign affairs today. why is that wilson do? even though the steve on the road which will is similar, institutionalized, public organisms are, each of them represents its own unique position in terms of the geo politics. stories, experience, and economics, initial economic possibilities. and these 3 factors there form how the stays develop and how they react to the outside challenges and opportunities call the behave from the perspective of today international relations. we are not looking at

the internal particularities of each thing. for us. the most important is how they behave in front of the honesty. so and what you have not mentioned in your introductory remark, that there is chance changes in the words to the influence. each state separately means that we should look at the behavior of each stage from the unique perspective and from, from the perspective or to unique evolution of its own particular. well, let's do that because i think the united states at this point of time presents a very interesting case. i know that many russian animals, many of your colleagues were surprised by jo biden's recent speeches on the american withdrawal from garrison. because frankly, they sound as if they were written by lighting were put in speech writers. you know, they focus on national interest saying that security is our bio concern that we should not try to remake other countries through the use of force. i mean, if you weren't saying that that was posted on his social media,

you would be forgiven for thinking that they were hacked. do you believe the american president wants to the fact that he is ready to learn from americans mistakes? well, i don't want to mix the change in american posture and in american way of behavior of international behavior. ways the personal decisions and the approach of for the president combined to i think what you're by the deed on case of dennis done with a great decision over the last 30 years. it was the 1st decision which did not follow the course of the events and history, but was an attempt to change the course of events. and the biggest task on the statement is to contradict history is to change the historical part from over the national foreign policy and what actually drove wide . indeed, even though i'm not or that their presence conditional,

then american status hodge is so functional that the decisions the right decisions can be properly implemented. but that's kind of ironic. what you're saying that the united states is still the most powerful country in the world by on many that mentioned that previously if leaders didn't have enough ability to actually change history consciously, perhaps they were shaping it subconsciously, but they didn't have the gods to do or to go against the current. well actually the american foreign policy, after the end of the cold war, was a continuation of american foreign policy during the cold war, winning the cold war. and then living on the victoria doing and extracting of the benefits of this victory. so wardrobe i don't need, he changed this way of behavior. he changed these keep growing, please continue to of american foreign policy. and in this fan,

americans can be optimistic about their own ability to find the leader, which is able to take those decisions, even though, as i said, i shouldn't dis optimistic about the why do functionality of american face. now there were 2 figures that stuck out for me, and by the latest speech on august 31st, the $300000000.00 a day span don't have dentist on every single day. for the last 2 decades. the asian american veterans committing suicide every single day on average in america they, they call it brutal honesty. and i don't think we've ever, at least i have never heard the american president go that far. not even the chunk in that a personality factor bite and being a straight shooter, or is it something more structural perhaps the american state as powerful is it, is reaching the end of its rogue to some extent. well, we will see how structural it might be. i think that may be

a great privilege or for joe biden as a president, he's because of his age. he is not in a position to look after his presidency for a long time. he's free from all the electric over to the ration is free from electro considerations and from the light of the honest as well as joe biden. he is relatively free from the considerations of career after the presidency of in wage counsels of directors. and these charities that allow him to be the leader that allows him to speak relatively freely to, to make decisions which are not dependent or the he is huge, a courier. now, you wrote recently and you said it already a couple of times during this interview. the american state apparatus has reached a point where they can still make foresighted decisions,

but the ability to implement them. is there a limit that if, if existence at all what makes you believe that? because biden's people would tell you that, you know, we made a decision to pull out from ghana, son in 4 months, and we did. and despite all the convert and clovers opposition, well they did it bod, how it was implemented? made a very big damage to the international positions or the united states and basically to all dimensions of american power is they are seen from out friday, not only from russia, but also from china as a main rival, the united states from europe and from the other parts of the world isn't as what to be expected in this field. i mean, i think in politics and politics in general there, there is no choice between the good and that you always choose between, you know,

i've gotten worse. well, the think is a bottom limitation. so there was role from, of get this done was implemented very badly in the very disorganized, very dysfunctional and very unimpressed way. so the decision was good. the implementation was bad, and even president biden himself, in july, was speaking to the republican government of gun this done his capital to receive to the fans. to tell about it for much longer time. the tale bonnie's north, north vietnamese army, su, haven't, haven't made a right decision in his after statement in july, she was already part of the wider dysfunctional picture of american politics. now, speaking about this dysfunction collectively,

we russians know this condition of lack of a better metaphor. governing impotence, we've been through that a delayed light in agents in denied ninety's, and the russian state has recovered. maybe not the way the the western partners would prefer to see. but if the recovery its ability to get things done, how long do you think it will take the americans to rebound? can they do that without fundamentally changing the system? because the russian system has to be changed? it has no choice. do the americans have a choice about whether to change or not? i don't know. each state is unique. and what has happened to soviet union will not necessarily happen to the united states. even though, if it will happen to the united states, it's not necessarily happened the same way as it has happened to the soviet union. that the united states of america is a nuclear superpower. and do we can, before they add sequences,

all the internal american changes and internal contradictions are not going to represent their immortal chinese for the rest of humanity. now i agree with you that day. each historic path is unique, but i still think that historic parallels could be valuable because it was the collapse of the soviet union in 1991, which ultimately served the united states. this unprecedented opportunity of trying to be exceptional nation, not just i'm exceptional nation, but the exceptional nation, the shining cd on the hill. can we blame them for not leaving after these godly, divine image when we the russians gave up on our cells so desperately at that time? well, i mean we cannot blame them because. busy if we do, it means that we see our future dependence on another stage of the future of each country, either its own business or cause the,

the historic power and comparisons available. but the available in the way that we see a we can for there's certain condition of the state as well as institution. but we don't know how a certain states will react to this same condition for the same circumstances, to the same contingency. and do the reaction of the soviet union to this feed. the condition of the state was connected to the unique particularities of the sort of system. the reaction of american for american as deed, to this condition, are going to be as well connected with the unique particular narratives or the american system in society. you wrote recently that even though in the short medium term, the americans withdrawal may bring russia some benefits and the longer term in the

longer term. and it can present russia with, with major challenges that we cannot even comprehend. now, what are you talking about? it's a major challenge in the us holiday, as will develop and future haul. the american society will react to the decrease of the country positions in the international scene in the international arena. so this is a major challenge because actually the united states is the only country in the world. we represent secure serious security consideration for ration as well as russia is the only country in the world. we were present that she was considered a security consideration for the united states with our this, we can deal with the americans. we cannot deal without taking grease or destroying co manager. so this is why this is a major challenge, not the dentist itself, not the original consequences by the american catholic was the impact of the war.

and what has happened on american society, on, on development for these great, if worse comes to worse, what was could happen? well, in international relations will was said that we always anticipate the possibility of the universe of catastrophic, even though we should believe that our own nation is immortal. well, mister barton, on this uplifting, let's bring but we'll be back in just a few moments. thank you for me or i it's all about proximity. and as i've talked about before, they can tell a fact if you're close to the central bank, you get the money 1st and you get to put it in to things like assets. and then as

the money works is right through the economy. those assets go up a lot and this is how the income gap is created. the families that jennifer mark. i took market function. you go with a lot of people, like i said, well that's good to know. how do i done? got that? i've got that limit and i wanted them to be skilled that you did this on the left me about the less about i get up there for

the me and the me welcome back to all the parts with the same for that your program director at the vault discussion club, and also of the recently published book europe, russia, and the liberal waldo. during mister boy, that your friends we were discussing before the break. joe biden, by his own admission, is ready to turn the page on the american use of force, but he's still, he's the united states as being locked in an almost ontological battle with russia and china. in that same speech, he said that they would want nothing more than the united states thing. and again, it's on, we have another date and maybe even longer. is that an honest analysis?

well, i think this is, this is one of the several possible analytical options. of course, under certain conditions, someone can, you can say that both china and russia would love to they not as these to continue this 4th. because the exhausting american capabilities and helping china and russia to survive and to ship that goes on the global in the global level. now it seems to me that at least for now, both the russian and the chinese leadership believe that they can come to some sort of an agreement with the taliban in more optimistic scenarios. there. there's even the talk about joined the economic development and the mining of rare earth materials which of denison is very reach in. and many countries are speaking access to those deposits. is that too rosy of a picture? do you think of gather some? can ever return to normal state of things where business

the some limitations could be done with their should. it depends on both on the, against, on the, on the people of afghanistan and on the other, on the, on the external great powers. and this scenario which you have described is more favorable for chinese, russian interest is of cause to have as part of stability and center of your asia. and of course, both china and russia are interested in scenario on the which their presence power and dominant power in getting we'll manage to consolidate the government and to consolidate the country and making each the partner for economic and other corporate use projects. in case of china and both china and russia, of course,

the other option is the day to the movement which has taken control over the country will not be able to do it. and it will open in other so often or no violence and disorder against them. i think that both china and russia prepared for, for both of you know, about a month ago i spoke to a former dentist and present because i was in moscow for consultations that had been american patrol. and he was very positive about the russian chinese synergies and their ability to solidify shrank from eurasia from the outskirts in the war. it's sort of literally middle. do you think it's more feasible now than let's say a year ago, this whole concept of integrated your region space from lisbon to do

a song that the russians are so normally with do you think it's more likely? well, i think the conditions are favorable. i think that the international conditions in eurasia are good for them and for the, for the general stability in the center. and we need them to what is it only about the americans withdrawal or? well, the problem with the america is that america does not have direct security considerations beyond mexican and canadian border. so the only region in which the united states are interested vitally is the mexico and canada. the for the rest of the world for the issues and the rest of the world, the united states can look not from the perspective of national security, but from the perspective of international diplomacy and the united states. look at situation in a central regional central asia. i didn't know southeast asia from the position of economic interest bod, 1st to fall from the perspective of its felicia shapes,

with china and russia. it's not about the regions, it's about the great power of the game. and that's, that makes american participation less productive. then we could have believed that makes the united states nor to solution, but the problem in the united states and many of its doctrinal documents is describing russia nowadays as a disruptor and disrupting power. and do you think that's essentially a projection? they're describing us in a way what they're trying to do to this region disrupting it for their lack of better word who i don't think it is a project. so i think that is normal diplomatic practice for the great powers. if we recognize that the other great power is the contributor, not to disrupt her age means that we have problems about establishing our own

position. because only between the great powers. we have very limited possibilities to recognise the positive contribution of others without limiting our own plays. in our own positive role in international, it's really limited because the russian and the chinese example, i think are all for some inspiration. and that's great. i think that's why we call china resolutions the you unique strategic partnership for the 21st century. we will see how it will develop in future, but for the time being these 2 countries established an excellent next one relationships in eurasia we. she is absolutely free from any substantial contradictions, and we contribute to the stability of kenneth dunn about which we have been speak

just a couple of minutes ago. and i think this type of relationship defies with big neighbors in sky. used to write about that no single great nation should be allowed to emerge in eurasia because otherwise would be trying. in this case, we're going to try and it was, it was pipeline in 1039. maybe he borrowed a product with us. well, because if i'm talking about the idea anyway, was that if there is one here, german, one regional had jam and it would try to reserve the whole, the whole continent and therefore present a challenge for the united states with russia and china, we are seeing you know too strong regional actress and global actress trying to work from different poles and trying to leave the center together. seeing janny and benefits for, for each and every one of them. do you think the americans could ever be converted to that logic? that it's actually, it could be very beneficial for them for strengthening their own power to work collectively with others, you know, to, to least have not only eurasia but the rest of the world. well, 1st of all,

i think of that because absolutely correct. and accordingly took plastic geopolitical approaches represented by the works of nicholas pikemen. before the 2nd world war, no grades power should dominate eurasia. otherwise, the consolidation of the ratio wound is so strong that its wheels isolate the united states from the walls. but now we don't have one power dominant and duration . we have at least 2 powers, china and russia. and do we, we see that russia is trying to develop install and called relationships with india and trying to positively influence the relationship between china and india. so these were 2 dominant fibrous it's what is differently than with one dominant balance. so we will see, i'm not sure that there, that the traditional force of the and of the behavior of this,

the dependent on their national security considerations can change. but i don't know, as you have said in the beginning of follow follow, thought the world is changing tremendously and may be tomorrow we'll see is that the structural ex films wish which appear to be absolutely under testable they, they will, they will change. and now we have only a few minutes left, and i want to ask you about this particular part of their will because we actually recording this interview in stock, which is 9000 kilometers away from moscow. and you made a very interesting point recently. and one of your article saying that investing in this part of the world in russia, as well as trying to build connections with powers in this part of the world, it's far more efficient, makes much better sense for russian than putting its efforts. you know, it's attention, it's capital, it's aspirations towards the western frontier. so essentially i took it away as,

let's invest in far east, rather than trying to get the ukraine back. what made you connect the seemingly unconnected parts of the world? well, 1st of all, 4 east and siberia are what makes russia russia otherwise, it should have been that just one of the big european powers. but what makes russia global power is a possession of to be around for east? that's why russia is been naturally interested in the development of this ratios. and as it has been discussed already today during goal forum and making these regions good for, for, for, for the people who are leaving them. and that's why, from the longer perspective, all fresh from sustainability of the rational stayed it just of course, much more important sounds and then gauging bay or establishing privilege to ration from any european nation including ukraine.

we mentioned versions can before. and i think many people in, in the west as well as in moscow. i still believe him. he's all, he says that without ukraine, russia caesar's to be an empire. and yet you wrote that without the ukraine. russia retains an imperial scale, but not imperial obligations. when demand further saying that having ukraine as part of one state with russia during the soviet times was more of a liability, a burden for moscow than a benefits. are you saying that the west covertly served russia a favor when they try to drive a wedge between them? yes, but no. it was not the feeble to ukrainian people. and it was at the table to the regional stability in europe. what russia wants from ukraine? fresh ones from ukraine to be a soldier in state capital,

both to say to the soldiering foreign policy decisions and the rational decisions based on the political and power considerations. it was written in one of the recent articles published by the president bush. and generally, russia is the major advocate of the independence and severe energy of its neighbors . because russia will always remain stronger than them. but the condition of this is the rational behavior. so the problem was your brain and said that it cannot behave rationally because it does not take foreign policy. if there isn't itself. finally, you come from this group of fresh and thinkers, or believe that moscow should stop stressing and obsessing about if you're a p and identity. and instead embrace eurasian standing in its full capacity. you said that russia would never accept it as

a full fledged european power by the west, but it could be a force, a serious force to reference with as eurasian power. do you think that mental shift has occurred? how this top being sub european? well, i think that to this men, so consideration have been just a consequence from the russian foreign policy, which was obsessed was a go will becoming the part of the european balance of power for the couple of centuries. balance of power is europe in europe was a vital for the food, international security. and for the balance for following the walls. now we're just not anymore. now the balance of power has the global nature. and that's why, for i showed the goal of being father, if you're is not so it's not, it's not necessary in terms of the national survival. and i guess that's why it's makes much better sense trying to lift out this part of the world that far as this

iberia than the stock in the past with the to agree because it conceive is much more to the long term sustainability and survival of the russian station and it makes russia russia, it makes us our ship. and mr. board has been great pleasure talking to you. thank you very much for the time to and thank you for watching hope to hear again. next week on the was the part in the me ah, join me every thursday and the alex simon show. and i'll be speaking to guess in

the world, the politic sport business and show business. i'll see you then me the the the town celebrates taking full control of got a song after declaring they fif is the last remaining armed resistance. however, has counted on scientists to claim the whole part of the country, a province a convicted rapist and several of paris discovered among asylum seekers and lifted germany from us. it's done and a trailer passes a bill to give a tourist.