not a, a part of the conflict, but now we're getting from brussels in washington and now they've reinterpreted these records in russia. is a member of a party of this conflict that something new and very dangerous. go ahead. yeah, i agree and, and again, i agree that it's a complicated conflict. i mean, it was in 2014 with roku, and then the east on, on mazda refused to recognize the legitimacy, and then came launched an anti terrorist operation. so obviously the wisdom backing the government has stolen the wes in his cave and russia are giving support for intervals now as a bus. always a truly a conflict and has to be dealt with at some point b, the western russia to deal with how to organize your dr. kim agreement, which is it's our minsk agreements in terms of how to resolving the conflict that deals with the internal conflicting parties. so keep them on boss is very, very explicit. so, so, and this is the foundation for how to solve it. and not only about the agreement,

that means is quite explicit, but it makes clear. and this was written 6 years ago more than 6 years ago on the one. he was also established dialogue with don't boss. and to work towards a certain degree of autonomy for the bus. now everyone find disagreement that runs in full consensus. now the problem is that the west and it says that officially support and they wants to honor it. but at the same time, in work stores, undermining him a he mentioned the, the us but we recently have the same case now. you as well. so, you know, the macaroni, france, and germany as our medical of germany, the coal, moscow, and the fully firm their support for the means going green and says keep, must abide by it. which means talking to them bus, which to have refused to do and, and also recognizing that russia is not part of this deal that however, thereafter, i mean, you need to have her after the u. s. meeting with cylinder, give you credit, the hail him for how he has carried out the application of the key agreement. then that you signs a common statement. naming rushes in, aggress,

not the only reject thing, then taught him these agreements. it is quite extraordinary. so the next step now for you is pushing a button to meet with zalinski to move the agreement forward. but again, this is only a way to remove it from an internal issue between even boston, instead of conflict between ukraine and russia to the crime. you know, legitimacy away from the bus and the, and this is the direction we're going. and meanwhile, the target means to me means as throwing up the window. so no rush of quite a bottle. what is it supposed to do? i mean, they haven't done followed the commitments of the previous agreement, and now you're suggesting we have to move forward. what are the really things i'll build on the past? they're saying must throw it all agreements. and let's begin with an entirely new script. so it's sending oldest, very conflicting messages. so you know, mosque was beginning to see you beginning assisting you more and more in a somewhat unreliable partner, because they're not doing what they're promising. want to saying in the same time

they're encouraging. give ok, george. i mean, this has been the fundamental problem, because if you look at western analysis in analysis, in western media coverage, what's going on in ukraine, they always conceptualize it as a conflict between russia and ukraine, when in fact it is an internal conflict that needs to be resolved and rushes up because it's on the border because of the ethnic makeup of the dumbass, primarily russian. they've had very little choice, but to get involved a particularly after up to 14000 people who have been killed in the dumbass by the key of government. so it's the conceptualization of this problem, that is the fundamental issue here. and it is, it is being framed in the very destructive way. so essentially, it can't be resolved except for maybe 2 conflict which, you know, this is something with the russian side says, i don't want in all other parties to one degree. another kid is in a different category, but europe is set to say thing. so, you know,

lynn is right here. i mean the, me, the contradictions here create uncertainty. uncertainty gives the potential for conflict. go ahead, george. i completely agree with you. because as you say, this is a conflict with ukraine between here and the dumbass, and it flows directly from the events of february 2014. when the legal, legitimate government was overthrown. and the people who are supposed to go with the people in the dumbass rejected the illegal regime. but as far as the mens go to go, russia is one of the guarantors as is germany and france and the germans. and the french know is that everybody knows this, and you know, they go on attending the russia, is a party to the conflict of what's going on in the dumbass is a conflict between russia and ukraine. and so that's all to see how the media

presented, the how the united states presented as glen points out, the europeans go from one to another. so, you know, when, when the last april seemed like it was going to be an explosion in ukraine because of zalinski was threatening and offensive against the dom bus, the germans and the french on the go, very anxious. this will provoke our conflict. and then yeah, they have the telephone conferences with and, and make play. yeah. we're right with the board. we believe that the minister or the should be supported. and then, you know, the very next day they go back on this. but what is happening now is that ukraine is in effect, if becoming the fact. so a member of nato. ukraine is now taking part in nato meetings. so in fact, the, the billing here, zalinski good. i have a good reason to saying, hey, we keep this on pushing this a little bit further. eventually,

nato is going to get involved in that side because increasingly major is getting involved on this side. and so, you know, it's in the interest to keep escalating the conflicts last week. they use the drone that they purchased from turkey against the dumbass. and what so, nature's response is broken. well, he was the russians who started it. ukraine is being acting defensively. so ukraine is making your calculation that you know, we can keep aggravating and aggravating sooner or later. they're going to come in on our side. well, glen, that is a preposterous proposition because that means we're gotten down to a game of playing, playing chicken, or bluff. so that is, that is, that is the recipe for an explosion that we saw in potentially happening in the spring here. so the russians made it very clear that there are red lines here and

the consequences. i'm paraphrase the russian foreign minister lover. he said that this couldn't spell the end of ukraine, and those are not words spoken lightly. i mean, you know, we, when we had the defense secretary, us defense secretary go, he was in georgia. he was in ukraine, went to brussels and then we end victoria new and show up here with a very bizarre meeting here. is it a game of chicken that they're playing, glen all it is because the role is kind of problematic, because on one hand, they have to tell the russians, you know, we're buying by agreement. and the same time the, the mission will go on a cushion towards that are changing the means agreement. i mean, the policy over the past 7 years has really been pushing in this direction. so over the past 7 years, the west coast all is anti russian sanctions. and weakening, trying to weaken russia,

obviously didn't go and hope and the same time popping up your grades. and then at some point, they should be able them to change the power balance and them being able to renegotiate. and this was supposed to be back in april and you know, your credit again, mobilizing his troops or along the us border us, you know, the west comes with stern warnings, nasal says do not there to do anything. russia and then russia mobilizes and you know, turn i think the means is more so then they have to step back and say ok we, we will follow minutes, but nothing changes is do with your credit. and this is kind of in the post cold or experience between russia, they don't, all along. nato's continues to rush. you know, we're not going to expand and insure we're not going to put the new troops in eastern in europe and then gradually they have all this agreements and begin to make incremental changes on the ground and step by step and one day the saying, well, these agreements belong to reality. that's, you know, there was the present and it was got a wide rush was kind of fed up and the also doesn't seem or it is. so it doesn't

want to start to renegotiate from scratch from all the old agreements. so it's kind of drawing this clear red lines. i mean, you can agree or disagree with the russians about, but this is kind of, it is not going to move anymore on this because you know, when, why should they? i mean, if you're going to constantly be changing your mind and what is the, the value of your current position of this moment? you, george, with the dangerous thing is that you're getting into a wag, the dog situation. i mean, is kept going to be determining nato's policy. and it's a very dangerous proposition. and i think, you know, the, remember, the adults were supposed to be coming back in the room. i mean, this is, this is, this is a very, very dangerous path because it is a wag the dog situation and i wouldn't put it past image zalinski. this is the way to turn the corner. he'll do it. yes. yeah. i think that's right. and it's clear that had europe, me clear zelinski and an the sage that you have the only pass code is for you

to abide by them in support. to change the constitution to give the dumbass a special state to see better relations with russia. zelinski would have had no choice. the writer's zalinski thinks that he has a choice that he can just continue to aggravate the situation, means a recycling your hasn't told him that. and as glen pointed out, that that's the europeans position that they keep pushing and pushing and pushing. and then, you know, when the russians say, hey, we have an agreement, you know, we, we sign this agreement, okay. well, that's, that's all news. you know, let's get on with new use. i mean, they use the same argument whenever the russian says, hey, i know you made all sorts of commitments to gorbachev. they would not expand these words and what happened to that? well, it wasn't on paper. we never wrote anything down as a, as in any kind of an argument. no more for you for believing us as him. but that's kind of the way they're operating now. and i think that zelinski now season he,

you know, he makes this clear that ukraine is increasingly becoming a, de facto member of nato. is sort of saying, hey, if we continue with this. but then at some point, they goes, article 5 who come into operation with the scary thing is for ukraine, is that they put themselves on the front line. they want to start account like they're going to be on the receiving end, a bit more than anyone else here. again, playing with fire, hearing that it's a conflict that i hardly anyone wants except for maybe the ukrainians are gentlemen. i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to what you're breaking up with that short break. we'll continue our discussion on some real need, stay. ah, the british and american governments have often been accused of destroying lives in their own interest. well, you see in this, these techniques is to stay devising message to essentially destroy the personality

of an individual plan by scientific means. this is how one doctor's theories were allegedly used in psychological warfare against prisoners deemed a danger to the state. that was the foundation for the method of psychological interrogation, psychological torture, this year, disseminated within the us intelligence community, and worldwide among allies for the next 30 years. then down the victim say they still live with the consequences today. ah, and i make no, no borders line to nationalities and you are ish as a merge, we don't have a therapy. we don't have a vaccine. the whole world needs to take action and be ready. people are judgment,

common crisis with we can do better. we should be doing better. every one is contributing each in their own way. but we also know that this crisis will not go on forever. the challenge is grateful to response has been massive. so many good people are helping us. it makes us feel very proud that we're in it together with ah, russia, this class of car was discontinued more than 20 years ago. even though stayed with lou proposal this deal with just important practice. it took 5 years to close the gap on the wound calling industry from the drawing board to the 1st finished model. kepsa will

certify excellent tools to deal with with the machine notions miss law school. well, we'll shoot for shift of commercial then in the crockett, the 1st one with welcome back to crossed out. were all things are considered. i'm peter bell. this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing some real news. ah, let's go back to george in budapest here. let's talk about some more ambiguous foreign policy. let's shift gears the asia. a lot of people, of course, you saw it in our viewers on as well as that when joe biden had his town hall with cnn. and he was asked about taiwan longstanding policy and strategic ambiguity. i

seem to have gone up into smoke as it were. of course, later his handlers talked in act. but, you know, we're getting more and more of this ambiguity is not being ambiguous at all. i mean, just in the last few days, secretary blank in his saying that be the taiwan should have a higher profile in, in you and institutions and things like this. this is completely counter what was agreed to do exchanging diplomatic relations. this issue with taiwan interest, the chicken beauty. i want to be clear with everyone, it's works for everyone, essentially breaking the united states to recognize the government in beijing. it's worked for everyone. and now we have this administration fiddling with again, as we said in the 1st part of the program. this is playing with fire. go ahead, george. you're absolutely right. and, you know, the chinese new spot is mouthpiece global times recently referred to the bite and

ministration as the most degenerate and incompetent u. s. history. so much for america is back and you know that the foreign policy professionals back you're absolutely right. i mean, not only has now the united states twice, twice on with biden committed itself to going to war on behalf of one of the administration officials, including the defense secretary. they're also committed to go to war for these uninhabited rocks in the china sea. so it's very, very strange. what exactly the united states is doing here in provoking china. and at the same time, they're trying to provoke russia. so, you know, the, there are times when they thinking, well, what we need to do is to do a kissinger and reverse. we need to align ourselves with russia and china get separate the 2 great powers. and then they go back to no, no, no,

we prefer to confront russia and china together. let's have our global democracy summit, which we can feel good about ourselves, that we are now dead set against the democratic enemies. it's a policy that is guaranteed to create a, you know, doubt in the mind of the chinese leaders, and therefore it is extremely dangerous. and that goes along with milly's famous or infamous, a telephone call to the chinese leaders during like the days of the trump administration . telling them, well, don't worry, we're not about to attack you, but if we do attack you, i promise i'll give you a phone call ahead of time. so the chinese leaders really don't know what washington is doing, and i think that's why they, there is furious as they are. you know, glenda when i find really perplexing here is this policy of strategic ambiguity is actually work for everyone. type one has everything but independence. ok. it's when

it was agreed that there is a one, china policy, the west, politically, the nonsense recognize that which actually means that they recognize that taiwan is part of china. though it has a special status unspoken, but it obviously exists here. so it is works for her for beijing. ok. they and, and as much as they may, rhetorically. last out from time to time, at the end of the day, this current situation is working for everyone. why is the administration doing this? i mean, the syndicate, me in, i mean, we can talk about this isn't, you know, the intelligence that happens community, they want threatened place and they want more money. they need, you know, budgets and all of that. we don't want to go to war. busy we just want to prepare for war. ok, what are your thoughts? go ahead. i guess the main change happening is the, is the change of the distribution of power now for washing? obviously don't want more with china, but up the record keeping disagreements by the same time they want to and has their

strategic justice against china, which means ripping up disagreements. so they want on both ways. as a part of the main problem with taiwan is the status of the china. so for more than 40 years that us more than 4 years on the youth accepted the so called one china principal. and it's very, very clear. there's only one china, taiwan. it's a part of it and it's capitalism, aging. so this is very explicit and this has worked for 40 years and from china's perspective, obviously it wants to have pie one back, but it can do this by peaceful means because it's power girls relative to us. here, so at some point they can, you know, gradually bring them in with comic incentives or however it is fun, but time is on china side. so really oh, as a resultant the use it's time is mostly on the side over the past few years. you see it's beginning to chip away at the one china policy, upgrading official status. 1 referring to morrison and state, also the from boldly to taiwanese to maybe seek independence. so if the govern dependents,

this is the one scenario where china will intervene militarily. so if you want to the fuel situation, just the found china, you know, we will stick by the one china policy. and this is where the implicitly comes in because it's a button that he calls china explains, we're fully committed to one china policy just combo. but they don't repeat these rhetoric towards the international community. after getting off the call with china, americans begin suggesting by one must have an independent representation in the urine, which isn't just a stepping stone, but it's like the last that before the session. so this know it's a little bit like you can, you want to have it both ways to say we're going to live by the agreements. but at the same time that you throw them away in or through your strategic advantage. so it's very, how can you have diplomacy or, or is this is, must be very frustrated. well in it but georgia, me, where's the, where's the gray hairs in the professional isabel this? i mean, anyone that knows anything about american policy in the pacific is soupy chic

ambiguity that that's the corners the corner stone of it. ok. and that is before the quote unquote rise of china. it's been that way here. and it's as if the, these agreements never existed, this understanding never existed. our invasion, i would be extremely nervous. right now. you have mark miller making that crazy asinine phone call. then you have biden just say, you know, we will go to war over time. want, i mean i did that in beijing, the mostly think these americans must have lost their mind. yes, i think they up and i think that's why that's reflected in that global times. editorial. but this is a point usually why exactly is the united states engaging in this kind of pointless of brand ship on a matter that is really of no strategic importance to the united states. i mean, i want nothing hangs on. i want one at the same time a no, no, no we,

we don't want to call with join. i know we want to relations with china. and then when it comes to something like a on that issue, which actually doesn't affect united states, the origins of the virus that again, no, we don't know what's going on. let's just put that on the back burner. so this is getting itself into unpleasant conflict with china over a matter that isn't of any strategic importance to the united states. and it's a matter that's essentially settled. it is several. and that's why the so strange as to why exactly is suddenly brought this up. i mean, this is, it really was, no, it's not like china was threatening taiwan or, you know, saying we're going to settle the matter at the, by the end of the year or anything like that. so this was not necessarily provocative and create a conflict over an issue that is

a no really united states. and as you say, it was just no need for this. you know, glenn, you know, you're a big geopolitical thinker. ok, i mean is if we step away in the 1st part of the problem, we talked about the frame and then we're talking about china. is this the american hegemony? it's, it's under threat. it's under pressure is this by the u. s. is reacting the way it is, because when you, when you feel your strategic importance and weight begin to dissipate, creates a potentially aggressive behavior. so it's looking for a conflict. we're really doesn't need it that we don't need a conflict in ukraine. it could be resolved any great, it's a ukrainian problem. we have the situation with parent one. the situation that was agreed to decades ago has worked for everyone. so it tells me it's a, it's a, it's a, or a geopolitical. i'm thinking in washington about. it's relative decline in the world . am i wrong? go ahead and the oil,

if theorist was quite comfortable in its own position in the world, that is the global dominance was stable, then obviously it wouldn't go in the center change and of international agreements and risk. you know, or with major powers, as mentioned, it is the relative decline of the u. s. a feeling is time is not on its side. in other words, it will be in a weaker position tomorrow than it is today. so it's better to start changing a reality on the ground, you know, bring, you know, ukrainian to nato. this is get independence for taiwan. so you can use as a permanent, like an aircraft carrier which is sunk so, so this is the main goal going for, but, but there's no great genius plan behind this. i mean, because of the end of the day for russia, ukraine is next suspension, rate of china is, goes back. you know, to the opium morrison. this is how they were there in the territory was split from them. i know obviously less of the revolution in 1951, but, but the point is this is being especially remnant of a,

with their power. so when interfering and the not going to give up their own territory. it's just, you know, they, they made their peace with the fact. you know, this, they have autonomy. they sit there the government themselves, but don't go for that last go, don't try to seek independence. and if they do, china will, and that i'm 100 percent sure of will use military force to get it back. and within that closer proximity of china, there's nothing that you can do to really win. i'm like, oh, also just trying to come up. so if they are, this is not a great plan, this is going to hope you're not going to win rapidly running on time. george glenn brings up such an important point here ukraine because the location is very important to russia. taiwan because of its location in history. is very important to beijing, but ukraine and taiwan are of marginal significance for strategic value for the

united states. go ahead. yes, exactly. so these are both great importance due to great power. and if the united states, that is provoking a conflict over something of that of no importance to the united states, getting involved in ukraine, doesn't have no other strategic purpose than to antagonize russia and the same with i one, there's no reason for any of this other than to antagonize the chinese and therefore, it seems very strange because it has nothing to do with the real us national interest. i was in your interest to antagonize rival great powers. and that's why this policy is both foolish and dangerous. for containment though, that's the one interest. actually we call in the program gets a friend of joe. ok, that's all the time we have gentlemen. i want to thank my guest now slow in budapest, one thing our viewers for watching and c r t c. so you next time remember across

hospitals ah ah oh is your media a reflection of reality in a world transformed what will make you feel safe? isolation, holcomb unity. are you going the right way or are you being led somewhere? direct? what is true? what is great in the world corrupted, you need to descend a join us in the depths or remain in the

shallows. welcome to match hazard financial survival guide. looking forward to your best window. yeah, this is what happens dimensions in britain. del at this happens, you watch kaiser report. it's been 30 years since the soviet union collapsed. mom miss called a little chill the month to what the apartment nuclear, you know, talk. so show where your for trust from one to all of them. ukraine was one of the independent states that emerge from the ruins of a super awesome. what would you also get on greens? come on board. the charlotte and she was some of the i can last new lease in west new york. better one more law or else what is a, as a resource for you? the viewer, this is, are service,

but it is a, you know, watch the past 3 decades like the ukraine. eye witnesses were cool, the events. this will be more or less of judiciary with little here. what i knew to know it order. i'm not sure, but i did that for months with marvin windows and what other forces were at play. you have to do so to me. show c inch in machine. those them, you are out in the kid what it i'm going to consume when you did the shows us them was a little versions or at least take a look at ukraine. 30 years out the gaining independence with here. but i'm, we're so much for here unless you mean like it was late, but a will. it could be issue ok of lush will still holding no problem with

ah, i don't think i know as world ladies move on from the g. 20 it isn't all smiles as the french president, their claims is astray, leon came to part was lying about that trouble deal for submarines while delegates gathering soften from you ends crucial climate summit with calls to harvard missions. although there are tries. if a poke receives around $400.00 private jets will reportedly fly in vi pays for the event. and in a decade long case, the canadian court has rules that a canadian didn't cross the line when he made jokes about a disabled child sing. the must be a stock between hatred and comedy between violence and free speech. no one say.