ah, ah hello and welcome to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle, focus on ukraine. joe biden says i don't accept any one's red line. russia's foreign minister saturday, margaret says the nightmare scenario of military confrontation is returning on this edition of the program. we examined the significance of both statements. ah discuss these issues and more and joined by my guess, george m u l. e. in budapest, he is a podcast or the goggle which can be found on youtube and locals. and in oslo we have gland deason. he is a professor at the university of southeastern norway as well as author of the book,

great power politics in the 4th industrial revolution, or a gentleman cross hoc rules in effect, that means you can jump any time you want, and i would appreciate it. again, it's glen 1st the in our slow i, i don't think we can eat under estimate the significance of the 2 sentences that i cited in the introduction. i don't accept anyone's red line and the nightmare scenario of military computation is returning. i don't think anything we've heard anything like that since the end of the cold. where am i over reading this, exaggerating this? go ahead. when oh, it's our a dangerous statement to make a step over the red line and that will trigger our response. so, and i think that's always problematic because we're now in the game of chicken, russia, a expansionism is like, you think, substantial threat and it will intervene militarily, if it's red lines are broken. so meanwhile, natal suggested unlimited expansionism is among negotiable principles. so we're

heading towards conflict, therefore, however, at the same time made, it was suggesting it will not intervene militarily in response to rush intervention, which simply means that they don't, i was holding, for example, authority to keep and with promises our membership, which will invite more and then, you know, stand by us, ukraine subsequently collapses the state. so there's a lot of this that doesn't really make sense at all. i, george, i don't think i could say better than that, okay. but basically saying, you know, with biting, i mean, one of the most irresponsible things i think the president is ever said, okay. and the meaning only the us had, has red lines. no one else doesn't. the arrogance and the, and the danger that presents here and, and also georgia, me, the kremlin, has been telegraphing this for a while now. i mean, it seems like washington and nato is of their sleep walking into a catastrophe for ukraine. not for them. go ahead. yeah,

that's exactly right. i mean, the russians have sent this over and over and over again. is that the expansion of nato, and the installation of nature infrastructure in ukraine. and you know, nato military operations in the black sea within the vicinity of russian territory, our existential red for russia. and your native continues to do with blinking yesterday of them on saturday, he was talking about a defensive alliance in russia. nothing whatsoever to worry about anything. and then we sold both of those things. it says the same thing over and over again, but they don't seem to appreciate that for russia, if you keep expanding, you know, inch by inch to roches borders and you keep installing your infrastructure in violation of the nato russia of banking, 97. if you keep doing this, then they do,

does not come across as a defense of alliance, and it was made, there hasn't been a defensive alliance ever since. the end of the cold war. and just simply repeating this. as you know, the russians are going to be persuaded by it is just a full, aaron, which is why, you know, essentially they're just not, they're not listening to what russia is saying, and that's why i think it is leading to a dangerous situation. you know, when the, you know, again, one of nato's mantras that, you know, ukraine is a sovereign state and it has the right to choose whatever lines he wants to join. well, that's a very good can no bumper sticker. i mean, but it doesn't. it doesn't measure up to reality. i mean, you know, george, i've talked about this before. and you go back to the peloponnesian war. i mean, you look at city states, you know, they alliances, they developed in some city states wouldn't be able to join one because, well, we're right next door to your rival, so that doesn't work well for us. i mean, in time and memorial is that what you have is stronger powers make it very clear

that their interests are being threatened here and we're seeing a repeat it here in this case. but you're just saying, no, i mean, you know, our values in closing their eyes to other countries insecurity and growing in security because of their defense of the lions. it doesn't make any sense. go ahead one, know what i think when people talk to speak english, they begin to thinking cliches. i think that's probably because the fundamental principle of international security should be the states to not increase their security of expense for security of other states. now, based on this principle states, you know, the develop specific mechanisms where true can be stationed, how many, this is not controversial yet. and that's why so astounding the want me to suggest is that russia should have no veto in those say, or what happens in europe. this is truly an absurd principle of international security that the largest stick in europe should have no se implies that russia has no legitimate security concerns. while the u. s. market of the other side of the atlantic should have the final say on everything in europe. so also there's never

actually been this principle in international security, suggesting that the expansion on military lines are some in your vote in will writes, and not the a concern of 3rd party. i mean, when the soonest place missiles in cuba, in 962, the u. s. did not suggest this amount of his business. now, instead, it was prepared to start nuclear war. executives prevent you from exercising this, you know, sovereign, right? so this whole idea states should be free to join in the military alliances. this is the source of peace, i think is wrong. i think it's the source of money because it made always monopolizing security in europe, which is why they are p and some americans have changed to retro completely. so what they're saying, the state should be free to join nato ahead because it never goes all the way. is happy to try to undermine this rational and c s d or duration economic union. however, made the, with the basic principle being allowed to join it or should be this fundamental

principle in international security. so i just, i think is very wrong. and i think we will see more of this in the future. congress, i guess china rises. i mean, if china has stomach a partnership with latin american so, and so let me go to a molecule. our mexico will really the united states still stand on this principle . so no, i don't think it's a principle at all. it is a claim for him on the most of inch. george, it seems to me that it's really all about nato's dilemma. because if it doesn't change his position visa be ukraine, then it really doesn't really have a reason for this. and this is they, they're fundamental nightmare for almost 30 years. isn't it? why do we exist? well, we keep looking for threats. they've identified one, but a and, and trying to enlist a new member on russia's border. they're not giving you crazy guarantees. ok. i mean, this is one of the most absurd things i could ever imagine because i take the gremlins

lines very, very seriously. ok. anyone that knows anything about history is in, in the, in the 20th century alone, russia was invaded twice. we add the 19th century. we have napoleon, this is right up to the doorstep. ok, george. and i think that anyone that doesn't take rushes read line seriously or not serious people go ahead. no, i think that they are no serious people. but you are absolutely right. you can see how this rhetorical inflation that has come from natives, and later on we are defensive alliance. russia is the rest. so what is your evidence that russia is an aggressive? oh, look what he's doing to ukraine. what you great isn't a member of nato. so, i mean, it's you who's trying and push your way into nato. you who was trying to run to go right up again into russia's borders. and now you're saying, oh, it's russia that is the in wrestle. and they, again saying, what was the rest or in georgia, but it will be events in georgia, in 2008. we're

a direct consequence of nato's ridiculous promise to both georgia and your brain that they will eventually be members of nature. nature is continually kind of creating its own problems and then why justifying existence or defense of life as an horrific aggression threat, that is a emanating from russia. but it's something that is, has actually been triggered by nato, despite the warnings that have come from moscow. they say, well, the days of spiritual influence over russia has no right to see as of implant once a week. i mean, it's moving into georgia, ukraine. i mean, i know when is the north atlantic treaty organization and they're going to be moving it, they're happening in their way and do a central asia. so we're getting all of this rhetorical accesses from they do. and it's glen pointed out when push comes to shove,

and they have to justify themselves to the western public as a say, well, we only have sanctions in mind. we're not actually going to go to war because it was the western public is going to go to tolerate with russia. you know, one quick thing. this argument that if made us expand the means granting russia sphere influence, we hear this over and over again. so influence actually has a meaning, it's a chest exclusive influence. so if you expand nato, that's a tool for fear of influence. russia think no expansion. that's not sphere. influence. that's it. you know, that's, that's a really turn the language on its head. it's quite remarkable. yeah. well, it means when i tell you it means and you have really what it means. and what is it? the irony from all of this is it? we look at what's happened in ukraine since 2014. it's not russia that is compromised, ukraine's sovereignty it's western powers, nato powers ok, because we know victoria new and same as f u. and then, you know,

we start seeing the disintegration of ukraine. it's not russia. the student is that the empty promises, the nato is giving the people in care of. and again, i want to stress everyone for the 3rd time. if there is a conflict, you still do nothing for ukraine. ok, sanctions. i mean tweets that's going to be about it. it's a very cynical game to play and then blame it all on russia. go ahead one. well, i guess the has about us one of the additional layer, so she parker, she under all of this because the argument for rejecting all this principles of international security is to respect the democratic decisions of your grand. but keep in mind or made offer membership to ukraine in 2008 only 20 percent of ukrainian ones membership. the only reason why they wanted to join me now is because there was back the call in 2014, and the new authorities in chief have, you know, in

a position leader that cracked all the media disenfranchised me. live some orders. a protesters. i mean, this was really the sovereign, the will of the people. surely they have to be have to manipulate the claims assigned to do this extent. i mean it's, yeah it's, it's insular this on a slip or a shop with the 40 seconds here. i mean, if there is a conflict, ukraine is we are know it now will be a very different place. go ahead, a very different place, because if there is a conflict, it will lose a very large chunk of it. and we know the way russians operate. i mean, they basically punish ukraine for it's refusal to abide by the men's cause and to try to resolve conflict with the dumbass. peacefully answer there is a complex, you're all listen, extensive territory will be lost. russia doesn't really want to do this,

but ukraine will have to pay a price just like you brain paid a price by losing crimea. i mean, that would be, they refused to accept the agreements, and they overthrow a legitimate, let legitimately elected governments. all you great, they pay the price, paid the price are a gentleman and we're going to go to hard break here and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion on some real newspaper. ah. join me every thursday on the alex simon, sure. i'll be speaking to guess in the world of politics, sport, business, i'm sure business. i'll see you then. awe.

back breaking, toil. forced labor. stress . industrial injury. corporal punishment. oh no. words with which we're all familiar. are you certain that the world you live in? abolish slavery long ago

with ah, welcome back across that were all things are considered. i get a little, this is the home and it to remind you were discussing some real news. ah yes, go back to georgia in good. it has and change gears a bit here. there's another conflict brewing close geographically in the balkans. something that you and i am the goggle of cupboard very extensively and give us the lay of the land here. why is it important here? because i want everyone to know in our audience, george is a preeminent expert on the force destruction of yugoslavia, the 990 s and the legacy of policy

initiative, quote unquote, which started under the clinton administration is coming to fruition, but probably in ways that they didn't whole for go ahead george. yes, what i mean, what happened was, at the time of the germany 1st, then the united states seized on yugoslavia is actually to price it away from any kind of influence from russia and helped to break up this country. what happened was that they created a state that have no real hope of the existence which was bosnia, which is basically divided by muslims. about 40 percent of about 33 percent crowe at about 17 percent. and there was no way that the states could exist, but nonetheless, the united states, all this boss and they are, as it's client state in europe, much as the german. so corporations, levine,

is that by and say, wow, they, you know, there was a war there because, you know, a large percentage chunk of a population wouldn't want to live under most of them dominate the governor. i'm but nonetheless, you know, they coupled together the dayton accords are, you know, clinton on something done a foreign policy is excessive, always re election. well, 20 now now 25 years on this. they really isn't functioning. i mean, it is always a kind of an artificial entity. and the bosnian serbs really now feel very little allegiance to the state and want to go their separate ways entirely in accord with the principles of national self determination. the clinton administration alumni who are back in the, by the ministration really are furious about this, that their price creation. this,

the state of bosnia is on the brink of the solution and are now threatening unspecified action certainly sanctions. and they've already imposed sanctions on the bus in a big but they're also threatening military action. you know, to prevent the dissolution of a state that has never existed as an independent entity other than for the boss 30 years. and, you know, when, when it comes to show, you know, they will, then they will try to push forward with some kind of action against the last infrastructure of propaganda that has already gone into operation in the western media. horrible sounds of genocide, genocide and you know this, this could escalate into, into quite a nasty conflict. now this time i think with different outcome from the 1990 s ross

is thinking a very active in interested role in what's going on in the governor. and there's not, there isn't that great need to unity that existed in the sort of the, hey, dave triumphalism, immediately after the cold war. glenn, you can explain to our viewers here. ok. this buffy hurts of aveena. this, this experiment that the europeans and the americans created it. it was never a viable state, still not a viable state in them, a good chunk of the population. the doesn't want to be in that thing and they were forced to ok. they were me to military force, they were forced to join the state and they didn't want to be part of it. it's unravel the serves in bosnia herzegovina saying they don't want to participate anymore. and so there's the possibility of a war. why? i mean, i don't understand why this is something, something that's so important to the european union, and i even less understand why it's important to the americans go on how your role in the grades are either way, if it could have work of the problem is that the

e u is actually been a great extent there also a lot of this chaos because it has been the primary actor to undermine and the fragile state of the bus there, which was set up because just briefly when the war and also came to an end in $95.00, it had the deep agreements which essentially states and what the cost, what solution in the constitutional b, which was, was there were 2 or thomas entity is supposed to occur on the and a servant. so the set up the special powers to implement this, however, that you then hijacked, did these powers and, you know, effectively ruling or both now, but they've decided the only way boston could be peaceful if it integrates into the u box. there can be cost if you want integrating the year. you have the centralized powers. if the abandon the entity system set up in the bait agreement, a centralized power in sort of you. so again, to summarize that he gets his powers or voicemail to implement the date agreement, but then refuses to restore the sovereignty until until they have their mind that they've agreement by centralizing power. so furthermore,

they were supposed to have this power is victoria hours are 2 to 3 years instead has been more than a quarter of a century so. so, so this is why i was always a fragile state because initially in the war the service went to boston hub. yeah. if does the work that would like to serve in the region start list to see them be able to stay in yugoslavia and then they got their 3rd option, which was ok, we'll be in a coma. and the inside of the session is most now. but now they can't even have this, so they're essentially threatening to ignore the someone colonial power and even break away unless you stop undermining the agreement, which the claims it's trying to hold. so obviously most goes away and it's the mounting wanted scolding effectively. use colonial mentality in this whole project . so it's a big question. what can be done at this point? i mean, you can only use the search and the russian undermining the agreement, but they're the main ones refusing to implement that. so it's, it's a very weird conflict to have, especially for the european. so charge that you can't really bother not trying to

keep trying, doing the wrong things. because the very predicate is a, is something that can come to fruition because you have a chunk of the population that doesn't want to agree to this colonial mindset. and of course it's been rush oh my god, run to the hills. i hear that every single time, you know, it's always looking for an external excuse for their own mistakes. go ahead your yes, yes, the other, that's right. but of course and points out. i mean, you and nato have push for bosnia herzegovina to be a member of nato. and in order to be a member of nato, they wanted to create a centralized government and a unify as well. that was always a non starter because the reason why there was a war in bosley in the 1990 is precisely because they wouldn't accept

a unified centralized warranty, which was always liked it to be dominated by the bosnian muslims. and so by pushing for this, there was always likely to trigger a reaction from so many one immediately precipitated this current crisis. was the a hi representative of some suddenly amending the criminal code and making it on a crime punishable by prison. genocide, denial, which is essentially a code for you know, whatever the, so think about their performance in the war. so a said, well, you know why, why do we want to be part of a state that is inherently hostile to us? and i think, you know, now with all the threats that are coming, you know, how dare you. busy violate the data in the course, but of course the data was never provided for a unified army. i mean, you know,

you go through the date because where does it say that the governor should have a single army? this is all invented off to the fact of the data, but, and of course the media on hand to fuel the conflict by saying, oh, the subs are violating that they can of course, that they really on the, you know, nate. so essentially there's, we just push for this, which is violating the nature of the goals. so they're just, they're just making up the rules of the game as they go. oh, is that what you're saying? yeah, exactly. you know, like i mean this, the service in bosnia herzegovina, they, they want to call it quit. why doesn't the international community let them do that? i mean, i, as far as i understand they don't have any terry towing ambitions over anyone. they just want to get out of a bad deal that they were forced into, into a failed state. it wouldn't exist if it wasn't pumped through a full of money from outside international organizations. i mean,

it's also everyone, one of the most corrupt places in the world, go ahead when. well, this is the problem because usually when there's a dispute, we can look towards international law in principles. but again, there are no rules and source of legitimacy incentive, hard to keep in mind that the breakup of the stores mentioned was larger and to a large extent, driven by external powers as well. and when did choose between the principal of sovereign their total integrity and self determination of the people. you know, they conflict them. it's always independence. i mean, if you're most, you should be allowed to see it from, you know, from yugoslavia. but if you were the service territory you're not allowed to remain in yugoslavia, customer should be allowed to see from, from them from serbia about northern northern calls should not be allowed to stay. crimea should be allowed to come up to see it all depends on the,

our interest of time. and that's the problem is there are no uniform rules, it always goes back to power politics and has begun to say the distribution of power is very different now than it was in the 990 s role. it's very similar to conflict problem in ukraine and both actually because with this idea, logical format for what to call your integration. and it's kind of the only way for it to work. it's making north eastern craniums or at least of call them, you know, rush me agents or we ignore the service impulse now by simply calling them you know, nationalists, the naval so there's yeah, there's the head. it has, it has like this. i think it wasn't gonna work. yeah. i mean, george, you can finish it out here. i mean, it's the golden rule, those that have the gold make the rules right. that, but it doesn't look like ok. yeah, that's right. what's it by common to all of this? is that nato and the western powers a favor. so session,

when it was to their advantage, why don't they want the well, the bosnian serbs too as to see from boston? well, because that would strengthen the sobs in europe and that was strengthened russia, which was always the goal. why as to why that was so keen on breaking up yugoslavia because i was so you just love it as rushes little brother in europe so that that's why they've always been attended to across any sort of aspirations. because for russia, the loan of the principles, their goal. at the end of the day, we cover 2 major topic to ukraine and serbia and, and as far as the west concerned, they don't care about either as long as it's only a defeat for russia. that's is their money. that's very colonial, isn't it? i gentlemen, that's all the time we have on, i think my guess in budapest and in the us on, i think our viewers are watching us here in our t. c. and it's, i'm remember across ah,

ah, a wrong one. i just don't with howard dean because the african and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves will depart. we choose to look for common ground. oh, driven by dreamer shapes bankers are those with

who dares sinks? we dare to ask. is it no, no, no, no, no, no, but they just did a valuable thing by high middle now i own my head up my lap and i had a knuckle buckling. my, well, i'm bob again thought now along a bit a well, i mean a relationship with sonya here long. i've been with who

bought ah, with an except anybody's red lines is the message from joe biden. i had talked with his rushing count upon what's the media is going to overdraw with allegations of anybody. invasion of you crime, oscar that says it's later that he's causing friction in europe's in the grip of a winter of discontent. over soaring energy prices are group monitoring, fuel poverty walls, household heating bills in the u. k. it's soon double canadians stranded in south africa, so they feel abandoned by the government have to auto us new post on the chrome restrictions upon returning a branded over complicated and confusing it really.