foreign affairs today, why is that wilson due to 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, historical 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 other 2. and what you have not mentioned in your introductory remark, that there is chan 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 evaluation 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 vladimir putin speech writers. you know, they focus on national interest 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 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 america mistakes? well, i don't want to make the change in american posture and in american way of behavior of international behave. there are ways the personal decisions and

the polish of for the president john binder. i think what you're biden deed on. 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 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 sure that they're present conditional, the 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 dimensions 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 work all the 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 behavior. he changed these grogan, please continue to of american foreign policy. and in this fan, the 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 why do functionality of the american fish. now there were 2 figures that stuck out for me, and by 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 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 far. not even with trump. is that a personality factor bite and being a straight shooter, or is it something more structural perhaps the american said as powerful is it is reaching the end of its throat 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. hope to have free from all the electorate over to the ration you free

from electro considerations. and let us be honest as well. joe biden, he is relatively free from the considerations of career after the presidency of in wage counsel 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 in the future career. now, you wrote recently, and you said that 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 existing at all what makes you believe that because violence 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 of mission,

well they did it bod, how it was implemented, made a very big damage to the international positions or the united states. and basically too old, they mentions of american power is they are seen from outside, 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, and joe politics and politics in general there, there is no choice between the good and bad decision that you always choose between bad. and they're worth while the think is about the limitation. so that was the role from of get this done was implemented very badly in the very disorganized, very dysfunctional and very unimpressed of weight. so the decision was good. implementation was bad. and even president biden himself, in july,

was speaking to the republican government of gunner son. his capital was received to the family of taliban for much longer time. the tale bonnie's and no 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 is this function. collectively, we russians know this condition of lack of a better metaphor, governing impotence. we've been through that a delayed light in ages 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 if 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's not necessarily happened the same way as it has happened to the soviet union. the united states of america is a nuclear power. and do we can before they add the consequences of the internal american changes and internal contradictions. i'm not going to represent their mortal chinese for the rest of humanity. now i agree with you that day. each historic path has any, 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 the 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. 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 historic powers and comparisons available. but the available in a way that we see a we can for the certain condition of the state as well as institution. but we don't know how a certain states will react for this same condition for the same circumstance,

for the same contingency. and the reaction of the soviet union to feed the condition of the state was connected to the unique particularities of the southern system. the reaction of american american steed to this condition are going to be as well connected with the unique particularities, the american system and society. you wrote recently that even though in the short medium term, the americans withdrawal 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, the one comprehends now. what are you talking about? what is the major challenge in the us holiday you asked, 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 the russian is the only country in the world which were present the years continued 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 major challenge north. the dentist itself, not the regional consequences by the american can speak with the impact of the war . and what has happened on american society, on, on development for these great, if worse comes to worse. what, what could happen? well, in international relations will was said that we always anticipate

a possibility of the universe of catastrophic, even though we should believe that our own nation is a mortal. well, mr. barton on this uplifting. let's think sure bring, but we'll be back in just a few moments. thank you for me or the news the, the war on drugs started as a way to come back. a great problem. what's the war on? it's part of the attitude of the nation, not just of north dakota, and it got to be something that you could get elected. this time, the fight against drugs took a check and told us that andrew was a competent short form. this is way too dangerous for him to be doing. clearly they

put him in harm's way. a rural college student interest get shot in the head and found in a river like something else had to be happening rather driven by a dreamer shaped by those in me dares think we dare to ask me. ah,

ah, welcome back to all the parts with the same for the program director at the discussion club and also of the recently published book in europe, russia and the liberal worlds ordering mr. bore that as 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 sees 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 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 for 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 gather some? 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 dentist on the, on the people of afghanistan and on the other, on the, on the external great powers of this scenario. which you describe it to me more,

fairly favorable for chinese, russian interest is of cause to have as part of the village in central asia. and of course, both china and russia are interested in scenario on which their present power on dominant power in getting a phone. we'll manage to consolidate the government and to consolidate the country, making each partner for economic and all the corporate use projects in case of china and both china and russia. of course, the other option is the day to the movement to which has taken control over the country will not be able to do it. and it will open another chapter often or no by and then disorder again is i think that both china and russia

prepared for for both opportunities. you know about a month ago, i spoke to a former 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 awards. instead of lifting the middle is, do you think it's more feasible now then let's say a year ago, this whole concept of integrated, the reason 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 central need them to pharaoh. is it only about 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 central your asia, central asia. i didn't know southeast asia from the position of economic interest barge 1st fall from the perspective of it's felicia ships, we're china and russia. it's not about the regions, it's about the great power of the game. and that's, that makes the 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. do you think that's essentially a projection? they're describing us in a way what they are trying to do to this region disrupting it for the lack of better word. i don't think it is a project. so i think that the normal diplomatic practice for the great powers, if we recognize that the other great power is the contributor, not to disrupt a 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 place in our own positive role in international got limited because the russian and the chinese example,

i think 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 throw in relationships in eurasia. we. she is absolutely free from any substantial contradictions. and we contribute to the stability of genesis about which we have been speak to a couple of minutes ago. and i think this type of relationship defies. was big neighbors in sky used to write about that no single great nation should be allowed to emerge in erasure because otherwise it would be trying, in this case, try and it was nicholas pikemen in 1030. now maybe he borrowed well,

i'm talking about the idea anyway, that was that in there is one, had gemini, one regional had jam, and i 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 janny and 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 is absolutely correct. and the only 2 classic geopolitical approaches represented by the works of nicholas pikemen. before the 2nd world war, no great power should dominate eurasia, otherwise they,

so addition the ratio wounds are so strong as i did, we'll isolate the united states in the world. but now we don't have one power dominant eurasia. we have at least 2 powers, china and russia. and we, we see that russia is trying to develop a so called relationships with india. and it's trying to positively influencing relationships between china and india. so these were the 2 dominant fibrous it's what is differently than was one dominant balance. so we will see, i'm not sure that there, that the traditional force of the and i'll just say 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 maybe tomorrow we'll see that structural ex films we show which appear to be absolutely under testable that 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 need 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 is far more efficient, makes much better sense for russia than putting its efforts. you know, it's attention, it's capital, it's after ration 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's made you connect the seemingly unconnected parts of the world. well, 1st of all, far east and siberia are what makes russia rush.

otherwise, it should have been that just one of the big european powers. but what makes russia global power is possession of deer and far east. that's why russia is been naturally interested in the development of this. rachel's and as it has been discussed already today, during goal forum and making these regions good for, for, for the people, for leaving them. and that's why, from the longer perspective or from sustainability of the rational stayed it is of course much more important. and then catching bay or establishing privileged 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 thesis that without ukraine, russia sees, is to be an empire. and yet you rode that without the ukraine. russia retains an

imperial scale, but not imperial obligations. and you went even 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, nor was not the feeble to ukrainian people. and it was at the table to the regional stability in europe. what russia wants from your brain brush up once 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 generally russia asia advocate on the independence and

severe any 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. the issue isn't itself. finally, you come from this group of fresh and thinkers who believe that moscow should stop stressing, in obsessing about it's european identity. and it's instead embrace eurasian standing in its full capacity. you said that russia would never accept it as a foolish flash european power by the west, but it could be a force, a serious force to wrestle with as your range and power. do you think that mental shift has occurred? how tall being sub european? well, i think of that to this mental consideration have been just the consequence of the

russian foreign policy, which was obsessed was a goal will becoming the part of the european balance of power for the couple of centuries. balance of power in 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 a global nature. and that's why, for i showed the goal of being father of 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, it makes much better sense trying to lift out this part of the world that far as this iberia than a stock in the past with the to agree because it contributes much more to the long term sustainability and survival. there are some stages and it makes russia russia and it makes us mr. board has been great pleasure talking here. thank you

very much for that. thank you. and thank you for watching hope to hear again. next week on the was apart from me, the me ah, me civic leg around the world. expedition by 1000 ocean miles round the clock and the dead cob. this done as soon as every country close by is like the

crew. gavin's food and water and food. good to chat. those also let me know. i got everybody locked down or no food and no one really sure. somebody either stuck up in the cove it, you're living like the female of home, but in the 21st century, ah ah,

the who's ah, in the story that changed a week the u. s. and 20 a military campaign in afghanistan, leaving the country in the hands of the same harris group to defeat a check ration ago. and as a retreated american forces destroys key equipment, all the helicopters and there are a lot of them that were abandoned the was to be various various electrical blogs removed. yeah, the.