challenge is the sovereignty of laws that cyberspace is no borders. new sovereignty we ended up with, for example, the national health service. in the u. k, the n h s was completely wiped out from a ransomware attack. if you were coming in to a clinic, because you had a test or you had an operation, they can't find your records. they had to go back to pen and paper. in an exclusive entity with our t rush is foreign minister says that moscow will react to a flagrant attempt by berlin to block parties. new german language channel that off to europe leading satellite provider removes it at the request. if the country's media regulates contribute, we cannot tolerate it any longer and we believe is unacceptable. situation will go on. we will have to respond to it or target our pro fair also questions, the impartiality of the ongoing trial into the down the flight i may 17th in

eastern ukraine in 2014, prosecute is demanding life sentences for the suspects, including 3 russian nationals and arrive radians within the u. s. democratic party, after one of its own senators effective, meet torpedos, jo biden's, lavish infrastructure bill in the senate. we look at why it's feeling a crisis of confidence among democrats. ah, good evening, just gone 5 here in moscow. you watching asi international. now the russian foreign minister, target average has given r t in exclusive live interview, which he does touch upon a number of key world issues. ah, one of the main points mister oliver of disgust was the removal of our german

language channel. archie d. e, from europe's main satellite network provider. it happened just moments before the intervening. hannah move came to the request of germany's media regulator. mr. labrat though, slammed the action against the channel, which only began broadcasting last week, and warned that it was unacceptable behavior on the part of berlin, and that there will be consequences when us conditional just the was nicole, we have been tempted to respond similarly. but until recent times, we were convinced that we do not want to follow the same path and tried to put pressure on media to follow suit with our western partners. but you know the same thing with russian security. we cannot tolerate it any longer. and we believe is, is unacceptable. situation will go on. we will have to respond to it. since i want to give you some context here, r c, d has faced a barrage of resistance and allegation, since it's launch last thursday. sir, keys have not having necessary documentation. to broadcast in germany but are to management, do insist his license was obtained in accordance with all european laws and

regulations. and the channel was also taken off the chief that very day was launch . technically there's no connection between that and the german t. v broadcast dispute, but at the time, an official for a german media watchdog did say that the new channel would be taken care of. this is archie statement in response to what's happened today. the german regulator forced european set lead service util. set 9 to remove the broadcast of our when you must go bays german language channel, artie deutsch from its platform. it is an appropriate for the german regulator. m a b b to overreach, and ignore the european convention or transfer frontier television under which it is subject, thereby forcing util, sat to remove archie deutsch from the carrier solely due to the unsubstantiated and factually flawed claims of the german regulator. we believe this amounts through legal pressure and are confident this action will be,

are addressed by the court. we will be seeking all possible remedies against the german regulator and our audience can continue to access our content across multiple platforms and online. there isn't it happening is because nobody wants competition and we obviously are getting more and more popular. and the online service that we had in germany was phenomenal. a successful i should say. and naturally, no one likes competition. and that's fair for me. we all want to compete, well, trying to compete, trying to win our orders. the problem is that we want to do it perfectly legally. and wet, absolutely, sure. earn. we consulted with our international lawyers that everything we've done was exactly according to the existing laws and regulations. each new channel is getting more and more resistance, which is almost like getting a metal. because that means we are getting more and more successful. they see you see us as more and more of a competition,

but of course they claim something which is totally ridiculous that this is not being produced here in moscow. but you know that ben user room is right across across the corridor. you know, the newsroom is here in the studios here. and the broadcasting facilities care and german regulator is trying to persuade us this is all fictitious. we are available to him. many other options. i don't want to name them all, but there are, there was a number of options for people who want to know the alternative use. and sometimes what we believe is a more accurate version of many events than what they get from the german maze tramecia. we will fight legally, and i'm quite sure that we will get the possibility to bring our version of events, which is total illegitimate, to which we are totally entitled to our viewers in germany, as well as in all other countries as well as tracking the plan that we've used was

not a plan a unfortunately we are not able to use the plan a that we use the plan be that we didn't to work to. and we are going to dispute that in a court of law with another country. so now we're going to plan d and plan e. we have many of them, but one thing is certain people who want to know the different side and want to know the events of the truth that is not being brought by some mainstream german media. have the possibility to do that to do that, and we'll try to help them as much as we can. all right, well let's get the views now of patrick hennings and he's a g i political analyst and join to say from plymouth in the u. k. in the very good afternoon to patrick, we don't want to get him through all the legal aspects of what's going on here. it is pretty complicated, but at 1st glance at least does this look political to you? this is 100 percent political. absolutely. there's no doubt about it. if this was

strictly the issue, for instance, then you would see the same sort of protestations about r t spanish language broadcasting countries like spain and so forth. but this isn't about anything to do with rights are issues, right? that is purely geopolitical germany is really the front line right now. geopolitically and we've seen. and from the last few years, the united states especially is using germany as a cudgel against russia. mainly because of the large stream to pipeline that has massive significance notches geopolitically. but it does affect the overall energy policy agenda that europe seems to be moving towards away from hydrocarbons and towards green energy and so forth. so you add all of these things together, and it seems like the last thing that united states once in its allies and the nato allies, once is to have russia, having

a saw our presence on an english language market domestically in europe, in a country like germany, that seems to be what the agenda is. it's interesting you bring up the usaa because we now have even i would tell it is not linked, but it was also taken awful. hattie sushi channel taken down by you keep the day it was launched, tay again, suggesting perhaps in a great a coordination. i that and i would you say it is coincidence? no, not at all. and that was definitely was the prelude to what we're seeing now. so there's clearly, this is clearly a coordinated effort. i am pretty certain by the sequence of events that's being pushed by washington. and the united states has a tremendous amount of way in germany, of politically and at the government level. of course it has since the 2nd world war. so there's no, there's no secret there. but what's really disturbing about this is the total abrogation of what is a european wide broadcasting treaty. so effectively with german officials are

saying here is that serbia is not legitimate signatory for this european broadcasting agreement. so that's really how they're treating serbia in this case, if you really want to drill down to the argument that's being made by the german media regulator. so, i mean, what is the serbian government have to say about that? you're not being treated as an equal party in this, in his and european broadcasting agreement. so this is interesting. why do you think that he comes under such pressure? because when we hear in the west, it's all about freedom of speech and we need to apply to your views out there on the west and narrative pretty much dominates most news networks i r c comes along no matter how small and it's treated like this. i've, i've made this remark in the past and i think it's because of the style r t does broadcast, does a slightly different format,

then all of the other standard english language broadcasters, especially in the german domestic market. so if you're flicking through the channels, obviously the viewer is the king and will draw the ratings according to what content is the most interesting. when you pass by ortiz format, you look at their news format, the way that they do. the stories that they've covered tend to be slightly different than the stories you see on all the other majors in the german market, in the a, the u. s. markets, the same and all that. but the documentary channels of coverage is different, different types of content. so that's naturally going to draw a wider viewership. and so i think they're looking at the numbers and they've seen the trends over the years. and as your ceo had comp, rightly commented earlier, this is also about competition. it's about competition for narrative management. it's about soft power and the west's will not tolerate competition regarding so our on, on european domestic shores,

especially with the sort of situation we're seeing right now via nato and ukraine and russia. so that narrative management is very, very important right now. and they're looking as, as a, as a threat basically, to have russia, russian language channel, a russian english language channel to have a voice inside. germany is clearly as a threat. very interesting. okay. patrick will leave it. that was patrick henderson . geopolitical am i speaking to a staff in plymouth in the thank you, but apart from ortiz, jim and channels being cut off from the european satellite network, much attention was also devoted to the escalating tensions between russia and nato . is to leverage says that moscow has lost its trust in the west. thus the rebellion among the will. they've lied to us on a regular basis from oral pledges to even political obligations enshrined in the russia, nato political act. so this time, as president putin said,

we want to have legally binding guarantees. at the same time, we understand that the west can violate such guarantees as well. if it wants to shield garage, it was a very in depth interview. i'm here in the very studio where a to play, so beats and a slot reduce format. mr. lover of covered a real her spectrum of salient in the national topics of the day, from the presence of foreign troops. u. s. troops in syria to the ongoing nuclear negotiations in iran at the main focal point. now, as we said, was that escalation, the ongoing crisis on the russia, ukraine border on that's been very much a focal point of much west to media. those allegations of thousands of russian troops massing on the ukraine border allegations leveled at moscow that this is in preparation for some sort of intervention or conflict. miss lover was very clear to say that this is not something that moscow that seeks or wants so that russia moscow wants these issues to be resolved through daughter gone through the strengthening or wins national institutions,

such as the un and other organizations than he really warned against the danger, all the return or ra, returning towards a might, is right balance of power in the world, insisting that dialogue is key and not just dollars, but also putting any sort of agreements, any sort of dialogues in writing, in some sort of legal framework and that was something with the level of focused on very much, and when we touched upon the expansion of nato eastwood's, mr. navarro for mention know that to russia, moscow does see the presence of nato military data military. the expansion went to eastwards as a threat to its security, and the west has to understand that that is the topic of concern for russia and a compromise has to be reached if the relation is to happen. but it was it a silly global celeste to prove the heads of states and governments of clearly states that no participants of the o s. c e should insure their security by damaging security of others. so when still

some boat may this high brow and arrogant statement that no one can breach the principle, the washington treaty in accordance with which doors are open for any candidate wishing to accede to nato, we can say that we are not party to this organization. we have not signed this treaty, but we have signed a broader pan regional euro atlantic documents that includes the principle of indivisible security. and if you install some burg, believe the nato members can ignore this principle that is enshrined in their documents that are the highest level. then perhaps it is indeed time for him to get a different job because he does not perform his functions very well. he called for the formalization within the legal framework to prevent that expansion eastwards, and that a recent discussions had been actually quite positive that washington had listened to moscow's concerns. and at least a dialogue was happening. so at least that something positive to take away from these tensions which have been rising over the last few weeks. dan hawkins, and i mean while prosecute is in the netherlands, have ended their arguments. in the case of malaysian airlines flight and age 17

damned over eastern ukraine in 2014, killing all 298 people on board. they are demanding life sentences for the for suspects including 3 russian nationals or russia. foreign minister has, once again voiced moscow's concerns about bias in the investigation. just move new myrtle assumes afloat. system were closely following the case because it's about russian citizens who the defendants at this stage of the trial were surely conceive you attempt to create an impression that it's a problem of the state rather than a criminal case. that is completely unacceptable. it should be considered a criminal process, was 7 and a half years on after a trial that has seeped with politics for its duration. and prosecutors have arrived at their version of events. they have now put forward charges against the full suspects that they believe are responsible. 3 of them, russian citizens,

one of them are ukranian citizen. only one of them was represented in court by the way, by my lawyers. but this is, this is a trial that had an agenda from the onset, and this is something that multiple states have said including malaysia, which is for years has said that, that they were excluded from the trial because they weren't on board with the agenda. they said this early on the, there was a very, very clear, very clear angle to the investigation to the trial. and that was to, to blame, rush to shove all responsibility on russia. and now they were arrived at the conclusion that these 4 suspects were responsible for, shooting down and made 17, with a book in missile that was supplied from abroad. and i, for it, we demanded the suspects are convicted each individual, even a joint shooting down of an aircraft which caused the death and murder of o $298.00 people on board to life in prison. even if the suspects did not intend

the consequences of their actions, those consequences still count for their sentence. thank how they arrived at this conclusion is a story ended of itself. because there has been a lot of outrage about some of the evidence that they have taken taken on board. look, they've, they included from the onset ukraine, was included in the, in investigation invited all to the joint investigative team despite the fact that ukraine itself was at, at the time a suspect. and a large part of the case is built on testimony from ukraine, which includes audio recordings provided by ukraine, secret services, audio recordings of the alleged suspects. apparently talking about the jet again from the onset they was suspected of being manipulated. the recordings, multiple forensic experts came out to say the same thing that they were doctor, they were edited and words were put in place and moved, moved around. but again,

ukraine's evidence was taken on board by a slew of evidence for provided from her from other sources, wasn't again, the case was built much and her testimony from social media post. the witnesses were but kept secret their identities anonymous. there was also the fact that for years now, the, the quote that j i t joint investigative team have vos, the united states to provide an absolutely crucial piece of evidence. and that is satellite footage for, from the area from the day. the incident took place to make sure that there was that there was this book missile launcher on site. the united states for years now has refused multiple times to provide those satellite shots are full for the investigation. it was also an incident in which dutch m. p. 's themselves will f, flabbergasted. after reading a report that says ukraine couldn't have known,

there was a threat to civilian aircraft in the area, despite the fact that just days earlier, a ukrainian military play was shot down. the last of about a dozen in the area at her at hides that were, that were dangerous for civilian aircraft. so passenger jet. and these, combined with all the evidence that was rejected by the, by the prosecutors, has led many to believe that indeed there was bias, a groom luke a leash through. there are large number of discrepancies, impartial, judicial process, rule violations, examination of witness bridges. witnesses classified including the one who could bring facts, ignored by the investigation to light. the fact that the defense attorneys request has been rejected without any explanation says a lot. they also ignored the allmers anti experiments which prove that investigation statement on the mistletoe abused is unfounded. the russian ministry of defense provided the documents confirming that the missile was produced in 1986

given to one of the ukrainian military units and stayed there until it was used. all this information was ignored. and again, despite over controversy all over the missing details about the, the me sal itself, where the launch a was who can control the launcher at the time whether it was on the ukrainian side on the, on the rebels side. all of those questions remain well classified. the answers to those questions remained, remain classified for now. we don't know a lot about the decision making process in the prosecution. nevertheless, the defense is due to speak in march and we are waiting for for a verdict towards the end of next year. okay, well let's bring in cali, merkel. h. now he's a political analyst since he has been following events are very closely to date. say, good evening t what, what do you make of his lab? rob's concerns and essentially he saying that there's been a breach of g process in our opinion, is obvious bias. well,

of course mentioned unfortunately we're not surprised by a decision in the protest. prosecutors decision because they one indeed, we know the prosecutors have been senior pointing russia or russian speaking ukrainian thing that they were responsible. and so, how can we have an impartial judgment practically 7 years after when you know from day one, they were trying to scrap information to show that there was a cooper, i would say, an impartial court should be looking at all types of evidence. let's not forget that in the organization of the joint investigation team, we've got ukraine, and ukraine is one of the primary suspect. how can you have an impartial court when one of the primary suspect as part of the joint investigation team, would know also that wasn't for sure. ukraine has responsibility in the shooting down with mh 17 aircraft as it opened skies. why isn't ukraine being condemned? because it open, it's guys, this is, this is it's responsibility of course maybe didn't do it. it maybe it into this on,

on purpose. but in any case it's because there skies were open and that the malaysian airlines bear pain one over a war torn region. so this is something, 1st of all, which is quite surprising today wise and ukrainian content for the 2nd of all as of day one, they said they wanted to attack, they wanted to find russia, singapore. russia does not forget, john kerry saying that the us had substantial evidence that russia was responsible, that 70 years, 7 years later, we were still waiting for the substantial evidence. where is it? so this is, this is quite disappointing because i think today everybody wants to know who is responsible behind the shooting down the path. we understand that the sorrow of the, the families of the 290 people who died in this, in this fight. but it's a mockery of justice what we've just seen and this, i think this is very disappointing, especially for the families who just want to know what happened and they don't want this political trial. this political court is far from bringing the conclusions that i think an impartial court should being and this is quite disappointing. mr.

lab rules, i said in his view, this try hello, seem to focus more russia than perhaps the suspects themselves. does he have a point that he definitely does not forget that in this trial i've got 2 countries in the netherlands and belgium, which are nato countries. and we know how hyperactive nato is around russian borders. busy and these past years, especially these past these past weeks, we've got ukraine, which is a puppet state or the of the united states, which is also part of the joint investigation team. what is the key bono? what, what their interest is? they're just looking for justice or right now, do they not if they're not a political agenda, whereas to show that russia is always responsible of every single problem going down in, in eastern europe today or in ukraine. unfortunately, that, that mindset that we are seeing through a lot of the, i would say, international organizations were nato members are extremely prominent or funding supplying or paying for. this is something which is damaged to justice. and since the beginning we keep hearing the prosecutor is talking about russia, russia, where is the proof. they have to bring up the proof of freshness behind this and

they haven't, they haven't brought it up. and this is the problem. and then i think this is a political court, this is not at all accord about which is seeking to find justice and understand what really is going on. let's not forget that russia. first of all, i would say the separatists and ukraine, they supplied a lawful effort. they gave over the black box that they gave over other mature they had if they were responsible for that they would be giving they be there. so out of effort for people who would be responsible for the russia supplied also with what was suggested, they would supply evidence that it would participate. the court refused it. why refused information until coming from russia? this makes no sense if anybody has, until whatever the country is, any impartial court has to take a look at it. then the court will say the risk and we accept a refuse. we think this is, this is the, we can use this in the trial or not. if you refuse evidence, this means that you're already, you've already got your idea about what the, the end of the judgement is going to be. and what the trial is going to say at the end. so the, i think this is the damage of all progressive. this is bad, is again,

showing that we're having this is political justice and enforcement is not the 1st time this comes out of the hague. we've seen this in the past and the war against the war then and you go start with the impartial court funded by the way, paid funded by they don't need a member. countries are always, they're not impartial. they are part party political decision is not decision based on justice. ok. yeah. just very quickly. me not this stage. we should state that. it's the prosecution that's put in the case and the defense will have a chance in march. so there's a chance there is a lot more information could come and i'd like to say, so i like to believe that, but this past 7 years, i've been following this case very closely. and i have seen no real, i'd say occasion to try to try to find real, to find real justice. i'd like to me, i mean, you never know. we can believe in miracles, miracles do happen. but why haven't we seen any so far? why refuse evidence or why refuse proof why she's in? tell,

talk about this. just talk about why refuse intel is you're going to be biased court . i don't see why this is going to happen in the, in the months to come. if you look at the current situation in ukraine in eastern europe, we see that the potential natal countries are bringing on the russian border. unfortunately, i don't see why natal member countries ukraine, which is a bank to what washington is saying to date, would a change within joint investigation to communicate what, what their position is. and i'm, i'm afraid there's not a lot of hope for justice more. right. okay. mikaela nice to see this afternoon that was in the kind of military that she's a political eminence. thanks for coming on. you know, the news in fighting is broken out within the u. s. democratic party, after one of his own sentences, to the balance in the senate by refusing to vote in favor of jo biden's, near to trillion dollar bill to back. better bill chair manchin, immediately though drew fury from the white house as his move is seen as a fatal blow to the president's flagship plan. although apparently not by biden

himself, we mentioned were you how do we build your party adapter legislation? not some people say, maybe i'm not iron speech, hold a grudge, but i want to get things done. i still think there's a possibility. can you feel back better, john? although by now to see ma unfazed, it did take away for a rift further shift in american politics to the democratic party. now, facing an apparent crisis of confidence as ask is higher, explained by didn't promise to build back better than long time friend, joe munch and went to the fox news and blew up the president's campaign promises. and i cannot vote to continue with this piece of legislation. i just can't, i've tried everything humanly possible. i can't get there. you're done. this is, this is a no. this is a no. and with it it seems his whole party. we all knew that send or

mention couldn't be trusted. you know, the, the excuses that he just made, i think, are complete and let bristle america explain to the people of west virginia why he doesn't have the guts to say, look, the powerful special or what senator mentioned did. yesterday represents such an egregious breach of the trust of the president. and it's also, you know, this is exactly why it's an outcome that we had warned about. we have been saying this for weeks that this would happen and we took the hit, our leadership needs to step up. now politics and finger pointing, go hand in hand, nothing new, right? well, not quite because wanted tradition for the reds and the blues to spit to each other across the aisle. here. if the democrats spitting, i didn't, chapa, i didn't even take that much, just one man, one veto. and it all came down. what made mansions, treachery, aldermore, unforgivable, was that he was biden's body. a friendly face will say that from the president's

viewpoint and i saw him this morning. he's worked with senator mansion over the course of decades. they share fundamental values. they're long time friends that has not changed. that's how anything biden's policy is apparently become long time friends, decades of shad find use. and mansion still broke rank even though p. the loyalist, even though build back battle was biden's baby. and even though he knows that without the bell, the mid tubs may be a blood off. if we could get the build back better plan past, democrats will have a strong possibility of lease, keeping the senate. it's tough, it's a tough reality. in today's america, where it's party above all mansions, vito spells trouble for bite and i really couldn't have come i was time yes. canister withdrawal on the contrary through the us. hi, petra price says a supply chain still in crisis record inflation on

a historically low popularity rating of just 41 percent. at a time i did, you need your people move and that's why you need a rallying cry. what does bite and have a party and boiled and fighting has signature legislation and the dot, and now defecting democrats with rumors that is just the tip of the iceberg member, we had an individual reregister from democrat republican and i think there are a few other democrats out there that are thinking about it, why not? because they've changed, but the party has changed with what appears to be a crisis of confidence in this change party. the last thing that democrats can afford is a crisis of confidence in the president himself, but looks like that's exactly what they've got. so the real president, it is country, joe mentioned joe biden matter wife for the charlemagne. i really my job and i can't no, no no no no no.