a ah, it was a blower report. serious flaws in pfizer is called the vaccine testing procedures and says, u s. officials refused to listen jo biden's branding u. s. a. democracy the envy of the world. but the world increasingly disagrees. as a poll shows a sharp dive and global percept perceptions of american democracy along with its health care system, we president putin pledges that russia will be carbon neutral, no later than 2016 and a message to delegates at the u. n's climate summit in scotland as the west pushes for action at comp 26. we look at how the and gratian plans might hurt nations dependent on fossil fuels. you can get that on our website. as mentioned,

you get all those stories on our website and more watching r t international. i'll be back in the lecture headlines about now with a with hello and welcome to cross top where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle at the moment russia and the north atlantic military alliance have no official links. now there is no official dialogue on issues that concern them both. and one of them is ukraine. washington's relentless drive to admit you crying to nato is a red line for moscow. something is going to have to give cross sucking ukraine. i'm joined by my guest nichol, i petro in kingston. he is

a professor of political science at the university of rhode island in tulsa. we have jeremy whose motto he is managing, editor of covert action magazine, and in london we cross to earns read. he is a political analysts, as well as a guest expert at the russia international affairs council. right? gentleman cross hock rules and effect. that means you can jump in any time you want . now it's appreciate nichol. i let me, let me go to you. i mean, there's so much confusion in the air here for me. um we had a summit of sorts with zalinski and biden over the summer, and the read out was kind of a cool read out, you know? yeah, yeah, i'll make it into nato. but you know, there's no rush here, and then, you know, last week we have, or the last a few new cycles. we have the secretary of defense. he goes to georgia, he goes to ukraine. he goes to brussels and you know, we're right on board for membership. okay, what, what is going on here? what is the policy about ukraine? is it just to keep it simmering? or is there different factions buying for different outcomes? how do you read it?

go ahead, nick, like, i think the u. s. policy is objective is to obtain eventual membership for nato in ukraine. this has been part of a long term objective of separating ukraine from the russian empire, and thereby preventing any reconstitution of the russian empire or of the soviet union. but it cannot be done quickly because of the objection of other major nato members to this. okay, well jeremy, essentially the same question because we know like for example, when things were simmering in the spring, it was the germans and the french were saying slow down, everybody slow down everyone. they were very adamant about it. and then we had zalinski, basically throwing temper temper tantrums, about not being able to get in the club. all right,

and now we have this late latest flurry of quote unquote, a diplomatic maneuvers here. i mean it and also, and nichol. i didn't mention it, but that there is the for knowledge that russia is adamantly against this. it has its own security interest to to, to take into consideration, jeremy, go ahead. i think it is a longstanding project going, going back to 99 in the fall. the soviet union that the united states has seen the opportunity to spread its power and influence in that region of the world. and to try and weaken russia and ukraine is kind of key key prize. and the u. s. has invest in something like, you know, just in a bind administration, $275000000.00 in defense are spending towards ukraine and senior, the conflict seems to be re re igniting in eastern ukraine. so i think at the u. s . was heavily invest in ukraine and the project of nato expansions. and he said that, you know, the goal is to weaken rush and prevent the rising o resurgence of russian empire. and to dominate that region of the world and

control the resource, including the well and gas resource of central asia. ok, well, or is we already heard from nikolai, we heard from jeremy. so it's all about russia. it's not about ukraine because that's what we keep getting all over again. i mean, i find this release story of what, what, what about democracy, you know, what about protecting other members of the a lot? no, it's never that it's always, you know, that this is a way to hinder russians now. so security interest, this is what this all about. go ahead, ernst, a brand list. i guess the reason why it's why taking control of your brand us will be killing several birds with one stone, but it's getting closer rushes bonus. so engineering surrounding russia is the grass specialist name, so that kevin russell, security and read off of yes,

one of the main reasons why russia when's in 2014? i was the last e fleet is u. s. was if the u. s. were to, to go up there and then rushes lexie lease, which has made russia one. so there's, you know, lexi reagan, i mean that's russia would no longer be of any importance. lassie, if you just look at a map, you'll see that the u. s. national law, romania will guerria. it has to as well with holes as it relates to getting all the train would have been amazing us in 2014, following the true care. russia, the great rushes rascal and the crime in guidance happens, and then the resistance and all that region that has asked us to these very

frustrated. i'm on my colleagues here, said the u. s. invested lawson, money in 2014. i believe it was before in humans. who has voiced the sample, i thought us yesterday with the 5, the 5000000000 was from the, from independence all the way to 2014 nichol. i let me go to you. something that you've written about that i think is so important that our audience needs to know is that the way it's presented in western media, the way western analyst present, the situation with the and they presented is a conflict between ukraine in russia. when in fact it is an inter ukraine conflict, so they obviously and intentionally frame it in the wrong way. because this is a conflict with in ukraine here. and there seems to be very little interest on the part of western powers, but to be nodded states to actually make the government and can resolve its own internal problems before it starts talking about russia. go ahead,

nikolai. i actually see this conflict as a mess. did conflict, which is a conflict at several levels. there is a conflict between the united states and russia. there is a conflict between russia and ukraine, but at its heart, there is also and this is often forgotten and conflict within ukraine itself. between the more western oriented gleason part of ukraine and the other eastern part of ukraine, which has historically been known as model and. and as a result, these 3 conflict are all interlinked, not addressing any, any addressing any one of them individually will not resolve the conflict, but you cannot lead to any of these 3 components hours either. okay, well tell me,

i mean, the senate can me says because you know, we consider what nichol i said, and what you said in the beginning of the program here. i mean, the, the us with its policy objectives at the very least will be dissatisfied to have a cold conflict. that is just a headache for moscow. i mean, that is acceptable to them because it's really actually at low cost. ok. so i mean they, they, they have a ra, a wide array of objectives, but just keeping an approach and conflict is good enough. i mean that's what the cynicism went tell me, go ahead, jeremy. so i guess it boggs the russians down and it's also good for the weapons makers. it gives justification for, you know, huge military spending and another, a conflict with them. and so, but i think this is an intractable conflict. i mean, as he pointed out, that the people of eastern ukraine are more oriented towards russia and they're gonna continue to mean they're not gonna give in. and, you know,

i think the ukraine military, it's been something a quagmire for them. and man, ukrainians don't want to fight their own people. that's why they've had to rely on these private militias. and many are, you know, very unsavory far right when groups and that, that's something that doesn't get along. immediate attention is all, here is the. so you know, raw, neo nazis and the far right in, fighting in eastern grain, you know, earns, it's very low. it's a very, i rarely talked about nichol. i talks about it, but i mean the a, the, which it's a form of what form of nationalism is acceptable and ukraine. and as he pointed out in his previous answer, there are radically different interpretations of what the, what nationhood means are for the people in power. and it's very exclusive area. it exclude, it excludes people on the, in the don bass, for example, and obviously alienated the people in crimea. the what, the reason why they left, okay, that's a narrative that the u. s. continues to push here is that there's only one definition of ukraine and of being ukrainian, which is not true. go ahead,

ernst. as a possibly a recent joints. you asking brains, did he are statements and then released back in september. one of the one closest was respects and nurse and fighting for our fighting for the ryans o everyone, no matter what generates and so on, i think is xena phobia and so on. fortunately, if i set up all the events, we can see that the rise in russian speakers have been trampled on the following. the jewish congress as well and main things on grace. all of those answers for issues as well. you grands of all other analyses in me even in west austin elementary. so it's, it's not a well well, a nichol. i mean they, what about what about minority rights are in place?

it's very rarely reported, but there's a huge assault on freedom of speech in ukraine, primarily russian speaking russian language outlets here. but it and, and there even people in the admin her administration that applauded, you know, you know, this is dissimilar, this whole, this information mantra that people are using. but they're, they're, they're, they're applauding the, the crashing of freedom of speech here without any kind of uproar. go ahead, nikolai. yeah, i think that's of a serious problem that will reverberate in the united states eventually. but it has to be addressed and brought to the attention of people. unfortunately, that's not the case, particularly with the u. s. administration. and that's because the focus, as you rightly pointed out of this policy, is not ukraine itself and not the well being of ukraine, including, i would argue, even the, the integrity of ukraine. that's all incidental interest containing russia.

well, i mean, nickel, iowa, and the 2nd part of the program, i really want to talk about that because some very interesting scenarios out there that as you point out of absolutely nothing to do with ukraine, but actually can be to the detriment of ukraine and even a sovereign ukraine, so we're going to go to take a short break, and when we continue our program or get continue our discussion on ukraine state with our t ah ah, ah, ah,

ah . herman by dreamer shaped bass control center, those with who dares sinks. we dare to ask ah,

welcome back across town or all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing crane. i can go back to jeremy in tulsa. i think we would all agree on this program is that there's a, there's a, a lack of information about what's actually going on in, in, in ukraine because there's something that all of us take for granted. but it's hardly ever mentioned that there is a blue print up plan out there to end the internal conflict in ukraine and it's called the mens records. okay. and it's really simple. we could put it on one page . okay. um but there's scant reference to it. okay. the ukrainian government, what i call official care of signed off on it, but they've never fulfilled it. okay. and then if you read wet west your news accounts of what's going on a ukraine, you might, if you get lucky, they'll make reference to the men sc agreements. but this is something the europeans have signed on to russia is a guarantor of it,

but no one wants to go into the minutia of it. but that's the way out of this, of this a situation inside of ukraine. jeremy, go ahead react. oh, as you suggest yeah, the us doesn't really have the best interest of the cranes at heart. so they're not really pushing for that. you know, solution that within this conflict and, you know, i think part of them it's record offers lago autonomy to the eastern provinces. and that would, you know, wed them more towards russia. and that may be something that ukrainian government and united states doesn't want. and maybe they want an opportunity to kind of this is the opportunity to strike a blow at russia. so they want to sustain the conflict. i mean, that might be a cynical interpretation, but there's, i think, grounds for that system. well, jeremy, i think there's a whole lot of cynicism going off near. i'm glad you mentioned it, earned the same question too, because this is a way out here. we had to push ankle government to pay lip service to it. and then

the lensky running for president paid lip service, who and then it suddenly disappears into the ether here. but this is the way out here. and again, shame on the europeans for not pushing this more. okay. because that, that is a way out here. but that tells me that the reason why they don't do it is they don't necessarily want it to be resolved. okay. be like the status quo. actually go ahead ernst on us unfortunately. and he said there is a matter of cynicism. we live in this world where or is it was a case and the u. s. companies that benefit from it. so that was the case in your son's orientation or he's in the us also very much broader. and it's, it's the case here once a once again, as you, as you may know, us and you and your friend me, that se last class. last,

i think all of this new military industrial complex in ukraine, which is going to cost a lot of money. and the u. s. as in announce even mind literary projects. so there's a lot of money against the main main. simons off as a very profitable project. and of course it, since it's not good for the u. s. o u grain years. if you know the music agreements, let me ask you a certain amount of money. so the parents machines and, and don't last long last. it was. and that is that your brain will know with loss in reference to getting to make sure because don't ask within the crime, owes me lucky. and sam's will be granted. your names are just like with scott is

blocking only it's scholars at times. it was in this way, so it's not good for, for the u. s. a. implement those misgivings because then they will, they will not be able to control it. they would like, and also that was a, which is not a major insurance ah maintenance in looking yours. yes sir. and enroll at its own security. i wasn't sure whether it was francis jeremy's. you mediators, a cesar sent me away, sees martin why? i asked the u. s. nichol, i, i think the nightmare scenario is the following. is that, considering the, the rhetoric that's coming out of care of, with being very frustrated, not getting into the nato club is as fast as i would like. i think they just that

nato nations are just dangling that in front of them. however, he may want to press the issue and that's the nightmare scenario. but this how it, this is how it plays out, is it, there is a military conflict. rushes read lines are cross, there is a conflict. ukraine is a left in tatters. um and maybe even potentially broken up into smaller pieces. but it, what is a loss for ukraine is also a loss for russia, because this is a way to cut russia out of the europeans architecture forever. forget at least generations here. this is one of the things that the people in washington want and what you and what at the end result is, ukraine is the biggest loser and they win their policy objectives. so actually ukraine is the cannon fodder for this object objective. go ahead, nikolai. well hi, think you've articulated as you said, the worst case scenario. this would clearly not be in the interests of ukraine

itself. it would mean the end of effectively its sovereignty or its division into a region that would be very difficult to reconstitute. i would like to say about the means, go cords that are, they haven't gone anywhere. they remain the essential a blueprint. but what has happened is that ukraine has systematically attempted to redefine them. there are, you know, manner that is inconsistent with the original wording. and as a result, it wants it both ways. it wants its new interpretation, but it, it doesn't want to effectively renegotiate, be the initiator of the rigor renegotiation, because then that would put everything on the table. again, let me add just one more thing, while dominica courts has 12 points and seems,

at least if not easy to fulfill at least systematically able to be fulfilled. there is an even simpler way to resolve the ukrainian, a crisis which has been put on the table by russia, both at the outset and continues to be it's, it's essential position in the matter. which is this any, as a present, put in a said, any agreement that the regions of ukraine can reach between themselves is fine with russia. what were, what is that actually mean? it means that the government in kia and the rebels in on boss need to negotiate directly and whatever they can agree on among between themselves. ah, would russia would find acceptable? okay, meant it meant jeremy. i think, you know, it's

a pandora's box and i think it's already been hinted to here because the downside of the men sca cords and away is that the don basket special status. then the people hadn't caught a couple say, well, what about us? okay. and then go lead, see, it says the same thing. and so this creates a cascade effect that it's one of the reasons why cab is so hesitant to do this because they see it as a slippery slope. okay? because if one region gets preferential treatment, all the other ones will ask this for the same because as nichol, i have talked about personally when we've met. is it, you know, what would they're pushing a nationalism on a, on a country that doesn't have a nation and per se, okay? and so the, once you open up the pandora's box for some, everyone else will want to go. and then central authority and cab will dissolve. jeremy your thoughts? yeah, i think you make some good points there. i mean, you know, i think we have to go back to 2014 and, you know, i think opened up this pandora's box and you know, the,

the interference by outside powers such as kind of created this real massey situation that's will be difficult to resolve a sh, i mean i think ultimately, you know, i mean there is hope that you know, the men's record would, would solve the situation. and i agree with what you're saying and i think and then you know, you have these extreme nationalists who seem to be dom name, ukrainian government, it's not clear how far they would go so well. even if not, i can i say supplement nichol. i go ahead, jump in. yeah, i federalism is not a danger for ukraine properly understood. federalism would be ukraine salvation if every region could a determine it's local cultural policy as it wanted, it would feel great. her attachment to the center, this is the,

than it does now. of the problem is one created artificially by kia. this has been the history of federalism and federalist systems throughout the world. and ukraine really needs to learn from that experience, a global experience. okay, right. okay, that drawing upon what we're nichol, i said your earned say, but does that do the people in power want a win win situation because his whole conflict is built on creating the other, creating the enemy. ok. what nicolai's that makes perfect sense, but as to my has as too much blood been spilled that too many problems created for them to say, hey let's, i'll sit down and sing, come by are, because i can tell you that the u. s. nap definitely doesn't want that to happen. they don't want a resolution of this. go ahead, ernst, a futurist, united states, and then

a peaceful resolution mister agreements. there is no interest on the currents ukrainian means a favor of the no, no one's here before mass meetings. but even though those meetings go back, a lot of 2019 was not seen. where landscape, man, we're pretty much go wrong in paris in 2019 initially it agreed. so they said the agreements about putting back troops on the line of contacts all the way for the whole lot of trucks. and then zelinski on a day says an extra, you know, what i'm going to go with that actually is all the,

i want to get all the troops from 3 locations. and later on he didn't wish to show that the currents in reaching not only is not only not a gentleman. we have run out of time. we just have to avoid south us at the august 2008 situation. everyone knows what i'm talking about. many thanks them i guess in kingston, tulsa, and in london. and thanks to our viewers for watching us here, are the see you next time. remember, cross topicals ah ah, ah ah

ah, ah ah ah, ah, it's been 30 years as the soviet union collapsed. mom, miss colorado. laura chill on to what the problem yet? no clue. no. ok, so, so show me where your swore trussel montoya from ukraine was one of the independent states that emerged from the ruins of a super bow. i'm doing awesome. good. would you also get on google greens? come on board. surely confusing some of the i can last new lucian, west indiana better. one more law. totally different or else what as a, as a resource shopping with

water. the past 3 decades, green light for ukraine. eye witnesses, recall the events. this will be more or less of judiciary with our new admit ownership. it's, i'm not sure, but about 4 months with motor windows and what other forces were at play. producers whom you show in shin mushy. and those in you are in the care what it occurred to when it shows up in the ocean. jordan is, take a look at ukraine, 30 years out, the gaining independence, organizing your phone with us for dinner unless you mean, like unity retorted live, but a will ethridge if you could be issue ok of lush williston, holding for one

have state aspire to use luxury cars produced in their home countries. it's an unspoken rule for all official events, and everyone's abided by for a very long time. the head of states car isn't only a symbol of the nation's prosperity. it's a matter of national prestige with joe biden uses the so called cadillac one nickname, the beast. it is an arm and bony and weighs 10 tons bars. johnson gets driven about in a jakya queen elizabeth rides in a bentley angela marco's car choice is an audi, while a french nita emanuel micron uses a converted citron diaz, 7 ah, in russia, this cause of car was discontinued more than 20 years ago. it took 5 years to close the gap on the.