so we are looking for it again under the condition that the damage allows a real meeting much because this is one of the problems i think we ought to experience in official, in our private life that we don't have enough conversations. well, i think that's been a lease of our challenges for the time being given the scope of problems that exist, been at russia and the west. i you said in the recent interview which figure that you have eliminated the term be west from your vocabulary. what you have replaced it, where we all remember the east west confrontation calling for the cold war ended in 19891999. and since then we don't have more and we all have to have

a work that is not confrontational. and what i hope is that no, the effect is something from the, from the past. what right now, it should be the orientation line is the international space to order it in the charter of the united nations, the universal declaration of human rights. and what, what should be the orientation and not the thinking in that category of the last century? well, you're being very diplomatic in this interview, but in your interview, the speaker, i think you were why more direct them? you said the, it's a little bit about a dispute between the west and the east, between states that up here as you start to rules based international order to be united nations charter to the universal declaration on human rights. and those that

do not cool all what i do is do's and don'ts during the wasn't the security council between the 1999 there we i was the place it was after the 2nd one or 2 to maintain peace and security. and there we regularly criticize those countries, and among them, the permanent member social security council, charter of the united nations. we criticize the united states for recognizing a embassy there because i think of a security council resolution. we criticize your country, russia for the invasion of ukraine because this is also against the un charter. so

this is what we criticize and we say, please obeyed by international law. go and accept binding security. while you make it sound that you disperse this criticism evenly and fairly, but from the other interviews, i got a sense maybe i'm mistaken, but i got a sense that you tend to associate germany with one group of countries who supposedly respect all those and norms of behavior, and then there's another group of countries that presumably russia, china and all the rest who supposedly don't. is that the wrong impression on my part or you do believe that germany is sort of associated more with the forces of good and my country happens to be more in the category of that a close 2nd or area and know after jeremy did to the rest of the world was the 1st word reset or

were 20000000 russians a me we committed after the 2nd or 2 from the law. and this is in trying to our constitution and try to day after day a lot we do it. if you're here, you know, we have the, or you can all the spirit piece in the history of europe and we know resolve our problems in the european union. we don't go to the go to the european court of justice and that's what we say on internet. don't go to war, but go to security, come to go to the court of justice and this is what we preach. and please give me examples for germany in here to that principle. well,

of course i have a couple of examples here, and you mentioned your experience of growing up in, in germany. and in my professional experience, i covered the number of complex, including the conflict in libya. as you perhaps know, in that particular case, the un mandate was greatly overstepped by some of your closest western partners. it's true that germany on that particular home voting on the resolution 1970 me, abstained and found itself in the same group with russia and china and voted against the preferences of what say franz, the united kingdom, the united states. but that were preceded, known to last and turned a relatively stable and prosperous country into essentially a failed state. i don't think we can argue over the fact here. so it is just interesting to me whether and germany chance to associate itself more with the

western camp, even if you don't like the word class, despite the fact that it's been western countries primarily that have been responsible for most of the conflicts as a plate. thank you. thank you very much for this example because it shows you know what i tried to say. and as you write it in 2011 when there was a security council, a resolution for many turn to mention. and some time set this up to write the forward, you don't see where this is going to and therefore we are saying that we didn't participate in the work would be due on the country is that we now with our reputation at state, we have a lot of credibility in the region, while beginning of last year,

a actually led to a situation where now we have a cease fire and yeah, i think we have a certain political tract. unfortunately, there are still people who are not hearing also to the sanctions. and i come back to what we were very even i remember april 2019, when our story is offensive, we try to get a security, a press release condemning it, and the americans block. now today, when you look at the situation, it is your country record violates the id a and we are using a,

a lot. it didn't happen if you wouldn't get all these. we would, we would be in a much better situation despite being a very welcome advocate of arms and bark on leaving germany itself. have supplied weapons to countries that are intimately involved in that conflict. b, egypt or some other neighbors. simply b i, b, b, we're talking about more than 300000000 euros in our shipments to this countries in this year alone. but i want to ask you a slightly different question because the more strategic question that you will be dealing with not said arms into areas of conflict. we supply our store in natural predators and otherwise we don't supply . and yes, we didn't apply to the agent by the way, russia also get

a lot of troops to provide them with some navy material. and there is no navy cost in the, in the country to live on the side of egypt. so we have not delivered weapons to any of the parties engaged in the company. you have not deliver them directly. there is no direct delivery on to the country to your country that is directly involved in that sense, to want to commit crimes with violating international well. and that has to be proven in the court of law unless you believe yourself a document where russia officially is criticized for sending the militia to, to libya. so it's, it's not to be proven. it is proven, believe in intervention without any doubt created a host of major security challenges for the european continent. from if you make

that migration to human traffic came to elicit drug trade. and it's pretty clear that the content will have to bird. and we have to deal with those issues for that if it's not for centuries to come. you like praising and germany for abstaining from that crucial vote on that. but don't you think that germany could have done and should have done more to persuade its western allies to persuade its western partners from using that force in section distractive and broadly consequential way? because that intervention 1st and foremost, came back to haunt to europe. yes, i mean, i share with you and share with you that this was not the best. actually, this is why we are staying with them. that's look at the end of the intervention. and as you, as you rightly say,

it was a, you remember in 2011, the situation was very bad. there was a civil war, you know, good afternoon, this is true, was marching on it. what would happen if the intervention have not place? we don't, i don't think that maybe at that time when you look at the, you know, when you look what was right, i think it would have been a big instability in the, in the country anyway. and what we have to do is jointly see to it that we stop that situation and see to it that, you know, suffering off the people as well. i'm better with all due respect. i was on the ground in guys the back down. and i know that many of the western reports were simply false about the killings and they abused by the army. that was just a lie manufacturers where they say and their ranch. and putting that aside,

you said that there was a need to come together, and indeed, the international community seemed to come together and russia did not vote against that resolution. china did not load the guns they abstain. they seemed to be willing to join forces with the west for the sake of peace and see what they got out of a country destroyed. and major migration lost, major instability, malicious running all around the continent. do you think that was just a misfortune, or do you think that could be some strategic lessons drawn from that effort on the part of russia in china and you know, many to work together with the west on solving a conflict in a country. and you know, i, i read, you know, the way i do agree with you on what you said before is reason to sit together and work together and see on,

on how to live. yeah. and can be meant if you know this is coming back to your opening question. this is what the unique situation is also about. people come together, we have our chinese partners unique and so that you can see how we can resolve what i can for me. what i said earlier to this, the best thing to resolve complete is go by the rule of law and say, what international law it says about situations and follow a lot. well, ambassador, we have to take a short break right now, but we'll be back in just a few moments in ah ah

ah ah 0 one or to present to germany, you must be in a city delegated. and as you want to talk to, we stand together will continue to stand together against russia, even in germany. repeat some of the areas that we doubtless made,

say no to severely that shockey daughter. it's about their ability to influence other nations, france, b, u. k. and even latin america and other countries in future than maybe knew where to high from walk cycle alone with members of your household. so please, please, please, please. we're going to continue to fight. don't do anything i just need to to do. russia must not be allowed in germany. i've already out through common leave it to show up today in altino, facing the 5 and the yes actually ended outside the in office missiles guns and 2 sons. join me every thursday on the alex salmon. sure . and i'll be speaking together from the world of politics, sport, business, i'm sure business. i'll see you then.

ah, one come back to with joe boyd's get elected chairman of the munich security conference ambassador. just before the break, we were talking about the rules based international order. and in fact, you use these terms or rules based international order and the un charter interchangeably as if they were synonyms. but legally speaking, they're not because it states that signed and ratify the un security chart there. where is what you call a rules based an international order is really in the eyes of the beholder, or in the eyes of the most powerful. why do we need that rules based international order? when we have international law isn't, isn't it easier and less than big years to just comply with the letter we have to

be in the university, right? i see documents, you know, documents after work or worse catastrophe. and i think this is the basis, and then on that basis on the, you know, the un security council resolution resolution to on that basis. but also that through on treaties, we've also been notified. this is all the international rose based order. so in treaties all the, all that, so this is, this is for this, you are now criticizing germany. let me also turn around and say on, on your credit, you know, we started with this, you know, on ukraine. we had, this is part of the route space international order. we have no

a rush or guarantee certainty and integrity of ukraine, and you gave up its nuclear weapons in return. and then russia, ukraine, despite the fact that this was a good of this memorandum, was by transmitted to the security council for or that was a lot. today, the foreign minister in russia is, i know, every day ambassador, you make it sound as if a russia, as you said, invaded the ukraine because it had nothing to do. but you know that the security situation in your crane, i was very intimately connected to russia,

security interest and would have passed. memorandum is not the only document that it was broken and russia is not the only side that broke a previous arrangement. there were many promises given to russia with regards to nato enlargement after the cold war. they were also many promises given to russia by the german, many of the german politicians who are pretty open about it in that memo or that the berlin wall will not be moved to the virtual girl in will not be moved ever closer to russia. but this is one of the things that i also wanted to ask you about, because i'm sure in the korean conflict, this is something that you will have to deal with a lot. once you come to the chairmanship of the minute security conference, you were one of the architects of dimansky graham and unit gosh, 8. and on behalf of germany on behalf of angle america. or do you think that agreement still stands a slightest chance of being implemented?

there is when you look at the text to get it exactly a 72 hours for a cease fire to to start. the problem was that after 2 hours, the russian course is continued their take on the, on the, on the strategic point because they were not able to conquer that during the time that you were given. and this is a basic flaw that the ukrainians and then we went to the product, you know, your so sit with russia didn't do the 1st thing. we don't trust it was draw heavy weapons for russia. never did that. and so it was very hard to convince the ukrainians to do their cars. i still believe that the ministry

agreements are the agreements that the basis but it has to be on both sides and both sides have to so the ukrainians have to go there. but there is the country that was invaded, you know, so therefore they have to trust russian that the russian and we see that on the always see monitors that have also been a good base in the memo. the they are, every day there they have to do their job, they cannot go to the order with rusher control. they are shipment from russia to do that. so there are many, many flaws on the russian side. and then it's difficult to convince you can't say ok, you are to do your, your site now. and that's one of the reasons why the ukrainian country has been so difficult to solve it because it's, it's such a complex, next, offline, cultural, economic, security,

and political military considerations which are ultimately routed in the post cold war realities, all their debilitated militarily and economically debilitated. russia and since you don't like the term west and expanding neighborhoods expanding made. and despite all the assurances that were given to moscow by the german leadership, the time of german unification. now, these realities, this is something russia is no longer going to accept. it will of provided security whether they were the west, once it or not. but i wonder how does it look to you? do you think post cold war security arrangement is still viable? when you go back in the, in the ninety's, there was no longer the cold war. in the ninety's, there were nato, the european union grew stretching out there to to rusher and all that. and you know, for me, so the republics and they were agreement signed were on cooperation.

and so there was not, this contradiction had ended. we came back into the confrontation with president putin when he took off. and there are no creek is there's nothing in there is coming to treat you where it was said that nato cannot expand beyond if you, if you specific issues which have to do with your cation and, and now, and there's one thing that i would like to highlight because it said that the, you know, nato is reaching out to, to ukraine and when one of the major fights. busy chance america had with president bush junior, was in 2008 this so called bucharest summit. at that stage, the united states actually wanted for georgia and ukraine to

get nato membership to start the so called membership action plan. and it was germany that stop that and then said, no, we don't want to do that because these countries will not add to the stability of nato, which is one of the prerequisites in the, in the nato treaty. and there is no move towards you credit membership. there is a respect this intervention on the part of germany and chancellor in particular and did not the united states from supplying weapons to ukraine are sending its military advisors or from interfering very rudely in the ukrainian politics. we may argue about the facts and waste our time on that, but i think what's, what's important to russia send to weapons to, i mean, we just talked about libya and sent weapons into libya is against international law

. there is no provision that prevents the united states to support your cry militarily. it's not, it's not, it's not with by talking about international law. we're not talking about the feelings of people here. and this is something that has to be ready. that has to be talked about, that if you rush or withdraw its troops on your crane, i'm sure that there will be no that there will be a solution, but you have to remember it was russia and the aggressor rusher. i related to this memorandum that we just went through, but i don't want to renegotiate history here. let me ask you a specific question. a question that relates directly to the meaning security conference and your mandate. and these are going to zation because as you know, a few days ago, the kremlin, very directly asked for certain security guarantees, legally binding security guarantees from the united nations from the united states

rather and from made up against further expansion. and i know that this, this question, this request has been criticized by many in the west as a totally impossible or excessive. but the vital administration did not dismiss it out of hand. and in fact, they seem to be quite open to further negotiations with russia on the issue of strategic stability. i want to ask you what is there to negotiate? as i said at the very beginning, and you repeated that, and there's a point where we agree. it's always better to, to talk and discuss and see where the interest, where can we, where can we meet the interest? how can we come to a conclusion? i think that one of the big deficits of the big problems of the corona crisis has been that the people have not been able to meet. i mean,

your president has hardly left the pre chinese president has left the country and the american president to hardly let because they're not enough meetings that the russian president didn't attend the 20 meeting in christian. and this is, this is detrimental. we have to have meetings in person that we really hope that munich will give an opportunity when, for instance, the to foreign ministers, the 2 masters attend beauty that they can talk to each other and discuss these, these issues. i think it's very good. i agree that the i don't criticize that the americans are ready to talk with their, with their russian counterparts, while ambassador we have to live in there, but i really appreciate your time and i wish you best of luck in this very challenging endeavor. yes, no, thank you very much. it was very kind of you to, to this interview and i like the open way that we discussed it. so all the best to you and thank you for watching hope to hear again next week on was part.

ah me me i ah working room or should in the back. she popped in. she said, well, i'm getting ready to go shopping for christmas. i wish there was a good bye to another shooting another safe part of american life shattered by violence. the gunman was armed with an a ar 15, semi automatic rifle. when the issue comes home, it's time to act. when we're filing on this issue, the other side wins by default,

lady that lived over there. i was walking one of the dogs, which is why do you wear again, were you scared with nothing could take it off it. i think the people need to take responsibility into their own hands and be prepared if those kind of weapons who are less available. we wouldn't have a lot of the shootings that we certainly wouldn't have the number of deaths. so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy even foundation let it be in arms. race is often very dramatic development only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successfully, very critical of time. time to sit down and talk with our special again today. the old in the legendary mich fire sign,

author of planet ponzi match, nice to say, happy holidays with the outlines of the week here on our tea and on their con, continues to hit european countries. daily. record numbers are being recorded as medical professionals say that varian causes common cold like symptoms. the whole find that over half of adults in britain, the 2 scared to express their real opinions, openly, the fear of falling victims about a council culture living in a culture. now printing, we used to have a good.