director at the vault discussion club and also the recently published book europe, russia, and deliver wealth order. it's important, jeff, it's 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? we often do, even though the state of the relatively similar institutionalized public organisms are, each of them represents its own unique position in terms of the geo politics, historian, experience and economic, initial economic possibilities. and these 3 factors, their form, how the stays develop and how they react to the outside challenges and

opportunities, how they behave from the perspective of the 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 other 2. and what you have not mentioned in your introductory remark, that there is chan changes in the world 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 emo's, 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 vladimir putin speech writers. you know, they focus on national,

saying that security is our vital concern that we should not try to remain in other countries through the use of force. i mean, if you weren't saying that, if that's what posted on his social media, you would be forgiven for thinking that they were hacked. do you believe the american president went too fast that he is ready to learn from americans mistakes? well, i don't want to make 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, jo binder i think what you're by indeed and guess if i get this done with a great decision over the last 30 years, it, 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 of the statements ship 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 sure that their presence conditional, the american thetis 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 off to the end of the cold war was a continuation of american foreign policy during the cold war, winning the work all the war. and then living on the victoria doing and extracting of the benefits of victory. so wardrobe i don't need,

she changed this way of behavior change. these keep growing, please continue to over 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 should not this optimistic about the wider functionality of the american fish. now there were 2 figures that stuck out for me and bite in latest speech and august 31st, the $300000000.00 a day span don't have ganeth on every single day for the last 2 decades. and the 18 american veterans committing suicide every single day, on average in america, they call it brutal honesty. and i don't think we've ever, at least i have never heard of the american president go, that's fine. not even the trump 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 the great privilege or for joe biden is the president, is 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 free from electro considerations. and let us be honest, as well as job by them. he is relatively free from the considerations of career after the presidency of in wage counsels of directors. and we carry team 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 chicago.

now, you wrote recently, and you said that already a couple of times during this interview, the american state apparatus has reached a point when they can still make foresighted decisions. but the ability to implement them. is there a limit that if, if it's different at all, what makes you believe that because violence, people would tell you that, you know, we made a decision to pull out from garrison in 4 months and we did. and despite all the convert and lovers 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 they mentions of american power is they are seen from out friday, not only from russia, but also from china as the main rival, the united states, from europe, and from the other parts of the world. isn't that what to be expected in this field?

i mean, i think in politics and politics in general, there is no choice between good and bad decision that you always choose between bad and they're worth while the think is a bottom limitation. so that was the role from of gender stone was implemented very badly in the very disorganized, very dysfunctional and very unimpressed away. so the decision was good. the implementation was bad. and even president biden himself, in july, was speaking to the republican government of guns, done his capital to resist the fans of taliban for much longer time. let tale bonnie's and north, north vietnamese. army su, haven't made a right decision in his after statement in july, she was already of all the why the 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 delayed lighting agents in the 1990 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 they did the 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 will not necessarily happen the same way as it has happened to the soviet union

. that the united states of america is a nuclear superpower. and do we cannot, before they add the consequences of 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 has unique, but i still think that historic parallels could be valuable because it was the collapse of the soviet union in $99.00 to $1.00 which ultimately served the united states. is 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 up to the 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 other, if we do,

it means that we see our future dependent on another stage of the future of each country, either its own business or cause the historic powers and comparisons available by the available in the way that we see a we can for certain condition of the state as about as institution. but we don't know how a certain states will react to this seem condition for the same circumstance, for the same contingency. and do the reaction of the soviet union to feed the condition of the state was connected to the unique particularities over the solving system. the reaction of american american seed to this condition are going to be as well connected with the unique particularities or the american system and society. you wrote recently that even though in the short medium

term and the americans withdraw may bring russia some benefits in the longer term in the longer term. and it can present russia with, with major challenges that we cannot be one confir has. now, what are you talking about? what is the major challenge in the us policy us will develop and future haul. the american society will react to the decrease of these 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 serial security consideration for russian as well as russia is the only country in the world. we were present the series continued a security consideration for the united states with our this, we can deal with the americans. we cannot deal with all taken grease. we're destroying ocean management. so this is why this is major challenge is not,

there again is 10 itself, not the original consequences by the american catholic with the impact of the war. and what has happened on american society, on development for the 3rd grade. if worse comes to worse, what, what could happen? well, in international relations will say 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, i have on this uplifting, let's think sure bring, but we'll be back in just a few moments. thank you for me or i my finance. i'm john that

a little about money laundering personally. 2 or 3 different. oh good. this is a good start. well, we have our 3 banks all set up here. maybe something in europe, something in america, something overseas. in the cayman islands, you never know all these banks are complicit in their club piper. so we just have to give me a call. hey, i'm ready to do some. there is my laundry. okay, let's see how we did. well, we've got a nice luxury watch for max and for stacy. oh, beautiful jewelry. and how about luxury automobile? again, for mag, you know, it, money laundering is highly legal. gopi, a cookie watch because the families that mark mark you function, you go with a good way to check the number,

the whole do y'all done? got that. i've got that limit and i wanted them to go back to the work for me about the run, the less about the news and the me i welcome back to the point with him. i said, for the program director at the discussion club, an author of the recently published book europe, russia,

and the liberal world daughter, mr. 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 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 decade and maybe even longer. is that an honest analysis? well, i think this is, this is one over the several possible and then to call options. of course, under certain conditions, someone kalu can say that both china and russia would love to not as these to continue this 4th. because the exhausting american capabilities and helping china and russia to survive and to ship the goals on the global and 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's even that talk about joint economic development, the mining of rare earth materials which garrison is very reach in and many countries are seeking access to those deposits. is that too rosy of a picture? do you think of garrison can ever return to, you know, a normal state of things where business, there's some limitations could be done with actually depends on both on the phone, the, on the people of afghanistan and on the other, on the, on the external great powers this scenario which you have described is more favorable for chinese and russian interest is of cause to have as part of stability and sandra, you're asia. and of course, both china and russia are interested in scenario on which their

present power and dominant power in getting us. then we'll manage to consolidate the government and to consolidate the country, making each the partner for economic and the culture of your 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 opportunities. you know about a month ago, i spoke to a former of dennison's 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. incidents that are literally the middle is do you think it's more feasible now then let's say a year ago, this whole concept of integrated your region space from lisbon to let us talk that the russians are so i normally do think it's more likely 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 say, 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 in 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 the central your asia 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, the we've, china, and russia. it's not about the regions, it's about the great power of game, and that's, that makes american participation less productive them. we could have believed that makes the united states, nor to solution. but the problem in the united states, in 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 as in the way what they are trying to do to this region disrupting it for the lack of better word who i don't think it is a project. so i think that the normal diplomatic practice for the great followers, if we recognize that the other great power is a contributor, not to disrupt her, it means that we have problems about establishing our own position. because only between the great power we have very limited possibilities. to recognise the positive contribution of others without limiting our own place, our own positive role in international it's really the limited because the russian and the chinese example, i think all for some inspiration in the group. i think that's why i would call china rush solutions. the you unique strategic partnership for the 21st

century. we'll 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 about which we have been speak just a couple of minutes ago. and i think this type of relationship defies. were 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 was what i'm trying to get was nicholas pikemen in 1030. now maybe he borrowed well, i'm talking about the idea anyway. that was that in there is one here, german, one regional german and 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 actors trying to work from different poles and trying to leave the center together. seeing genuine benefits for, for each and every one of them. do you think be 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, to 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 we'll isolate the united states from the walls. but now we don't have one power dominant and eurasia. we have at least 2 powers, china and russia. and we,

we see that russia is trying to develop a song called racial sheets with india. and it's trying to possibly influence the ration she was between china and india. so these were 2 dominant followers. it's what is differently than was one dominant ballot. 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 consideration 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 that the structural ex films wish which appear to be up. so under the 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 and let us talk,

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 to get 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, far east and siberia are what makes russia russia otherwise, it should have been just one of the big european powers. but what makes russia global power is a possession of the directions far 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 the, for the people who are leaving them. and that's why, from the longer perspective, all fresh from sustainability of the rational stayed it is of course, much more important. and then getting bay or establishing privilege to relations with 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. i mean, yet you wrote that without the ukraine. russia retains and 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 benefit. are you saying that the west perversely served russia a favor when they tried to drive a wedge between them? yes, but no, it was not a fever to ukrainian people. and it was at the table to the regional stability in europe. what russia wants from ukraine, russia, 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, which in january and russia is the major advocate of the independence and severe energy of its neighbors. because russia will always remain stronger than them. barge. the condition of these is the rational behavior. so the problem was,

you bring and seen that it cannot behave rationally because it does not take foreign policy. the issue isn't itself. finally, you come from this group of fresh and thinkers who believe that moscow should stop stressing and obsessing about it's european identity. and it's instead embrace eurasian founding 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 your range of power. do you think that mental shift has occurred? how 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 falling for the couple of centuries. that on the so far was europe in europe was a vital for the food,

international security. and for the balance for following the water. now we're just not anymore. now the balance of power has a global nature. and that's why, for sure, the goal of being father for europe 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 up this part of the world as far as this iberia than a stock in the past with the to agree because it contributes much more to the long term sustainability on survival of the russian station and it makes russia russian, it makes us. 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 it was apart from

me in the me. ah, i can't read the drugs are essential for millions of patients or are they, they want that pill that they hope will take care of their problem thoroughly and rapidly in the short term they really work. the problem is in the long term, they're mostly disaster. suddenly stopping a drug can cause withdrawal symptoms more serious than the condition it was meant to treat instead of the beneficial effects of these different medicines, any up to something wonderful, very often they're harmful effects and up to something terrible can pills. so of

all ills, or are we trying to mitigate life itself? i just think i was and i was just scared, scare little girl of 24. and like, didn't have to be so complicated in the story that shape the week of the us and it's 20 year, a military campaign, enough dentist leaving the country in the same terrorist group. they vowed to defeat a generation ago and that's parting american forces. ravage capital international airport, their final refuge, all the helicopters and there are a lot of them that were abandoned the was have been caught various various electrical blocks removed.