he just couldn't stop in as the world celebrates the new year, financial experts come up with positive predictions for 2022 forecasting that the global economy is set to grow, while inflation will start to fall. and in the year, that is just gone. one of the big political spats that unfolded sol, controversial defense deal that left france at loggerheads with its allies. 2021 was many think, but also gave the online world plenty of ammunition to have some fun making means from bernie sanders and his mittens to a boat duck in the suez canal. and other top events of last year deemed worthy of digital mockery. those are your headlines at this hour that does it for me,

don't worry though. my colleague, colleague, colleague cullen bray will be here in just about an hour's time to stay with us is our international ah, in, ah, with i'm ashton retired senior watching a special edition going on the ground on the 1st day of 2020 two's gregorian calendar. the team and i will be back for a brand new season on wednesday, the 12th of january. but until then, we'll be showing some of your favorite shows from this season this week. so a meeting that could have designed the future of our species on planet earth.

virtual meeting between economic superpowers of the 20th and 21st century. the u. s . and china, as the contours of this century, become clear between shanghai cooperation, organisation, nations, and nato. join evan rome by the former advisor to the european union's i representative for common foreign and security policy and x m. i 6 official alice to croak gals to thanks so much for coming back on, you know, biden's, the national security adviser said america is not seeking to contain china. it's not a new cold war. simultaneously briefings to journalists for me, anonymous senior us official said, the aim of the virtual meeting was not to ease tensions a school, but what that means was your day on the virtual meeting, but she didn't bring a job and i don't think it went well. and i don't think i very much was agree up anything on the meeting. and i followed a very ted, she telephone call between bring ah,

and the chinese foreign minister on the circuit a few days for to prepare for prepare for the meeting. and then there's been some fairly harsh words coming out of china in the way of the meeting are essentially and the, the chinese certainly the foreign minister was saying very clearly to bring her listen, you're not going to have a good relationship with us. you're not going to have the sort of relationship competition if you like. well, no competition. while the explosive issue of taiwan continues in the subsequent pos, they made it very clear that what they felt was in an editorial in the global times . they describe as this was hypocritical, what he said was nonsense underlined. the fact that this is a very serious issue,

that the confrontation could come with the united states over the straits of taiwan. but if america, who goes on supporting secession is in taiwan, if it goes on encouraging attitude, then we have long prepared for wool. and i do, we don't know how to get through to the well or it isn't ty paid, but this is very fair. it's very harris indeed. so i think that was it a climb down immediately afterwards, then because the bite was reported the saying, look, there is no way that the usa is imminently about to recognize a taiwan like 50 another, arguable us broccoli nations do. well that's, i mean, you know, they actually have been speaking with 2 phases on this. the president keeps saying, of course, one china policy exist. we're not changing the one china policy. but then again,

you have jake sullivan, the us security advisor in an interview on cnn. with that, korea was saying very clearly, listen, what we mean by managing this competition, is that the, you night estates for the foreseeable future success, the parameters of its own and its allies interest. we set the parameters and then when exactly they said yeah, but what have you actually greed during this time? what? what did you negotiate with china? what come up with us and sullivan said just carried brian pay him wrong question. dollars me that question. wrong metric that was, that was the tone of the the, the sullivan interview and fame equally, you know, not only always going to affect the people order

for the guy for the board of the framework for the global order in our interests. but it's also going to support free liberal. busy mark could everywhere. in other words, if we're going to be, if you like, if you like it was going to be a criteria or a framework for the lease or financial leads to continue to invest and explore capital, where they choose more of the way the china was expected to to manage with this except the global order for this coming period, and then to perhaps to be able to cooperate as biting said to them. and as jake fellow said, within the framework within this new global order. so our interest then there may

be areas where we can cooperate, trump put sanctions, whereas biden is sending war ships along with verse johnson's warship, elizabeth, gruff carey, plus these sorts of threats and saying, cooperating economically. it exactly. i mean, every, every week there is a new move on taiwan, a sort of incremental, you know, chop, chop chop as it moves closer and closer. of course, on the one hand, america says that it still supports the one china policy, and they agree, months subsequently. but every so often there is a new element. the type pay off is a cultural office is going to be designated instead,

the taiwan representative office. there are more visits by senior american officials to taiwan ships go through regularly leave the taiwan straits to sort of to emphasize that freedom of sailing. and people come like the australian prime minister come to taiwan and say, well, of course i can see it would be possible either for australia or, or american not to support our taiwan. should china attack it or invade it? okay, well, so synthesis was causing them the chinese just great anxiety about this simultaneously while that's happening in the south, tennessee or the im do pacific as as we now call it of the august feel the pull out of afghanistan. i mean, obviously the weaver easton took his time, is nomic. the movement has been taken off the u. s. terrorist list and you, china is putting $2000000.00 of boundary of investment to have got has done one f,

b i whistleblower sybil. edmund said, need to see is jim jang is the next tie. one is actually it happening simultaneously. is that credible? that neo isn't look ahead. i think this is very credible because i me and part of thumb sullivan's talk. he said, part of setting the part of setting the q global order in the c n n interview. he said, he said also that it would be based on enshrining the text of the declaration, the universal declaration of human rights into every international institution. as well as into the order and i think it's very clear that it was what can i vision along with climate change is a weaponized ation of china. and yes,

i think that precisely this process, what do i call it? i would call it the cost of i is ation of taiwan ukraine and also probably jamie, province, justice, kosovo, was started or was getting full diplomatic support saying we support if you write costs of law internationally allied. and then it moved to the next stage of asking that they should be going in every part of the international community. i think it's just infused to stay from what she said. exactly, but he said there's no reason why taiwan shouldn't be in all those committees. and institutions of the united nation, they should be there on the civil aviation, on trade and in every institution. and we support their inclusion in a substantial way in the united nations at every level. of course he says,

you know, they can't be representative of china. but they must be included in, or this is the cost of all playbook being repeated if you like. but for taiwan and ultimately i suspect it hasn't done it yet, but it changes the problem will be, will follow probably from, from best. so yes, i think that is a correct assessment. i mean, i want to get back actually to that conservation that phrase you're using the quick sidebar for some of you is watching. when you use phrases like weapon, zation of human rights or weapon zation of what is the city or what, what does the weapon ization of human rights mean to those who are watching so called mainstream media, of course genocide, engine j let alone anywhere in the world where nato opposes. oh, there are, i mean, the question of human rights for chinese would say very clearly,

how we manage our human rights is indeed a matter for us and how we deal with it. just like every country has its own human rights problems. the west is not immune from having human rights problems. either. we only have to look back at the things such as rendition that took place in the middle east, where the west would kidnap a hosted people and then render them for torture. in foreign presence, i think that would be classified as a human rights abuse. so the problem with is essentially, is that, is it being used to sort of target a particular contract and a particular in a particular way? is it looking for human rights abuse in order then to hold china accountable? and then to put sanctions? that is a process we're talking about more sanctions being put on china,

more isolation on china, trying to push it out of the international order and then twice relation on a counter who of human rights. and of course, although human rights speculation, i'm sure it's a very fine document, but different countries, different civilizations have different view. china has to prize social cohesion, the community as it is human rights. i mean the rights of communities, the rights of the people as a whole. we in the west enterprise, the individual human rights, individual identity rights can to rights. well, if you, i mean, now we have so many more of these identity issues coming up, all of them can be used to put sanctions or penalize or indeed other forms. so if we write punishment on the state,

that's what weapon fashion of human rights speech. i mean, i think i supposed to put all of them, but i suppose the point is it's in the i have the eye of the beholder and goes guantanamo is, is open as to greg. i'll stop you there. more from the former advisor of european union's hi representative for common foreign and security policy. after this break . with one of the worst ever mess. shootings in america was in las vegas in 2017. the tragedy exploded a little of the real las vegas, where many se elected officials are controlled by casino owners. these dank is shooting, revealed wet deal vm, p d really is. and now it's part of the stem machine. most of the american public barely remembers that it happens that just shows you the power of money in las

vegas. the powerful showed that true colors when the pandemic heard the most contagious contagion. there we've seen in decades and then you have a mayor who doesn't care. so here's kara goodman, offering the lives of the vegas residence to be the control group. to the shiny facades conceal a deep indifference to the people buys could have been saved if they were to take an action. absolutely keep the registering and keep the slot machines. dinging vegas is a money machine is a huge cash register that is ran by people who don't care about people's lives being lost. welcome back. i'm still here before the british diplomat allister group. why do you think the biden administration does not understand that if you empower certain groups that aren't necessarily pro washington's values, it can blow back after all the failures in reese decades. i mean column pals,

x yourself, larry wilkerson saying, vito afghan, as don, very aware the see i was very aware of the week as being able to, we used to destabilize beijing directly. these guys know the dangers of supporting is the mist extremism. for some notional idea of a geopolitical supremacy. i'm not sure, i mean, posted for, i think they're all great day, very much stuff in your christ, taiwan, and then other places. they're all great dangers that this can get out of control. it's very hard to manage the things when they stop, particularly ukraine, because the government there is not in control. the administration is not really who has control of the country. but what i'm really trying to say to you is

that i think what we're seeing is an attempt by certainly parts of elements in washington to create the fence that america back, americans on paul. so, and to do that, they want to be quite aggressive and forceful. and so they put to these issues such as ukraine bell arose with russia and they're doing that, the key, russia on the back foot off balance to keep china off balance. but also particularly to try and give the vitamin ministration a success foreign policy. even if for foreign policy success into a strategic blog. i mean, it depends of losing the wall to gain the political advantage to come back and say this was a great success. and this is really some of what's been happening in a way the night is paid is strategically way. but sometimes they can go back

domestically and say, well, you know, we really gave the iranians. what for in the last talk we ready? did. we tell china we coach or by what happening and we goes and it's genocide and it's not acceptable. and that's very important in the domestic context of the united states. does it help you? does it how the united states strategically probably the office is actually seen over this period because that sort of process started during the clinton administration. and actually america called week if you're in spirit, has from gods congress. look at the middle east, look at the whole of the coming together. i think it was even 20 years ago. people want that the sort of short term success. it's all it would do would be to turn china and russia against the united states and even possibly could have been working together against us. that's what's happened. and when it comes to the

conservation that you were mentioning earlier, this time around, obviously, i mean that china will remember, it's embassy being destroyed, as nato broke up. your love you at that time in the ninety's and poochie. and i think roy's remembers that russia should never have abstained on that un security council resolution on libya. so it's a bit different this time then major in moscow, up, up to the tricks that washington my play and room will react differently. i mean, this is what china said to, to, to bring them to, to support sullivan. you know, we're not doing this ala carte foreign policy where you just pig, we'd like to cooperate with us. but on the other issues, it's a open warfare. we'll just go for you on human rights on trade, on whatever us stealing our secrets, we will, we will proceed. and they said,

sorry, thank you. we don't do that. i don't, we put all the issues and we have a discussion. and we do not accept neither russian, china, except the right of the united states to determine the global or rules based order that the united states does not have the right to determine the rules for a global order is not going to be acceptable to either of those state and they rejected very clearly. this is a big change because they say this very, very, very clearly when they send n voice, when, when the sharon goes to china or victorian newland, they say look, here's our interest. when are prepared to, to talk to about this, if you want to talk about taiwan, you want to be talk about these other issues. there are private or internal masses, hong kong, in turn, by, by victoria and be very tough, be begin, look at her elite phone call about the european union on line. i suppose i don't

know about the refugee crisis there, but i mean, here the english channel enormous numbers of people fleeing well from the was started by tony blair and, and george w bush all that time ago. but actually the news here is not mean about the refugees across the english channel. i'll give you far more going for france. it's about, of course, as you mentioned earlier, the better bruce poland border is putin responsible for hybrid warfare, as we're being told every day. here is a vanguard of this kind of opposition to washington's research and imperial policies. i mean, obviously dissolved with something of a standalone diplomatic stand or taking place between bella ruth and the european union. but when it started all pewter, we were told to have 4000 refugees on the other side of the fence to poland. now it turns out that there are only 2 has that,

let's put this into context. is this going to be this hybrid? was this going to bring down the or can union you would know better than me, but it have been experiencing one of the refugees arriving in a day. not over this period. i think the rhetoric you think is funny being deescalate, you know, wiley. busy refugees going that if not someone is recruiters of the refugees have in mind there are certain countries set up, you know, you get to open germany. obviously what britain united states from the thought. so why should you try and find whatever would make and get and they will start off the refugee sitting on the roof side of the border of made a very clear that destination is not. poland is the last fear,

estimation is me quite yours, german and maybe pull him in the way we get the we got the idea on our tv screen. this is putins monster plan. it's not, it's not. i mean, you know, to have some refugees. i mean, germany's let in a 1000000. i mean, it's not. and anyway, it won't happen because they're slowly re penetrating them and put in shanker to the high representative of your sources are less manager. we need some help and we'll do it. and we'll, we'll manage this, i think actually trying to sanction the airlines is actually going to the europe shooting itself in the foot. because if they do that, then not only belarus but russia will probably cut off the space to european airlines. if that is what is done to them, and then are, all those british airlines trying to fly to asia will have 5 hours extra flying

time. whereas emirates of the other asian airlines will be flying direct. the or appearance will have a big loss on tourism and on passengers flying to asia. i mean, i know i mentioned my 6 earlier. i know you got to talk with my 6. what do you think the fact that journalists to report about all these things about may jing about moscow in these ways are because they are influenced by hollywood ideas of james bond. is it this idea of the evil bond villain that goes to journalists heads, it is, let alone politicians ads. it is a problem. i do think there's an extraordinary sense where you have been sort of me such taken up these narrative and they go, or even when there's no real basis of it, we've just seen one just now. for example, you've all seen, you know, russian troops on ukraine, border masses of troops on the border. i mean,

the reality is that the troops that have there are 200 kilometers away from the board. no, putin is not intending to take over the ukraine. what he's wired to fight, and what he's concerned about is whether in a desperate attempt to get nato and european support from imploding authority and is going to try and use us as a tool in which to extract further support. nate has already said it also remember that defense defense i present that to about 3 weeks ago in europe has been selling them or women's merican for promising the more weapons to try and reunite really great bass to craig. i'm putin has no desire to go and take on, you know, the mass ukraine, unless there was

a real fear that forces back by the west, we're going to overrun the dog. and then it's, you know, it's the old story that you saw in britain with the falkland islands. it's about case and k, k. most of these people. many, if you go to moscow, most russians have got a cousin or relative that listen don't boss. i mean, it's a russian speaking area totally, russian speaking, these russian currency and they're all closely related. so it's very difficult for, for putin would be to, nor carry on the invasion of the don boss very difficult. and that and that low intensity now battling is continued out for years. obviously, britain arming ukraine. optimism perhaps here the world is finances aren't just from the military. industrial complex, obviously. yeah. could change come from multinational corporations lobbying nato

governments, one k street in washington over here in london saying, look, we're starting to lose money on the considerations of ever more sanctions against aging. and moscow and iran even could it be multi nationals rather than it seems, democratic populations, pressuring politicians, it to some kind of determined. i think the most important thing actually happened in the, in the outcome of the american departure. they bought a couple because what we saw enough to work with something quite striking, the shanghai cooperation organized, they merged with the east asian european economic community, which merge with here. so that is the security organization comprises much of what was he stood southern south asian, a soviet union into

a single unit that embraces something like 53 percent of the global population and 25 more percent of g d p, a fast growing area. iran has, but i believe it pakistan is a member of it. and then saudi arabia has to be a dialogue part egypt to us to be a dial up. i think what we're seeing is the potential potential, perhaps for new security architecture to emerge embracing parts perhaps at the middle east too. and that's quite striking that that could be like the mechanism that could reduce some of the tensions to be used in this way. and it is clearly going to change the prospect for a country like iraq. they'll be a pipeline, i'm sure going across from iran through afghanistan, long border kennestone and china, north of line pardo,

east west corridor. all of these things are ongoing. i mean, that is an area where, you know, development is, is going to move very, very rapidly. rusher is just degree to invest in an oil side in the rain. in fact, the caspian sea, huge amount money. so i think we're gonna see a big change from this, the scattering. is it going to be, i think this is why it is so much more confidence in russia and china, just say to america, know, and united states increasingly are just doing the same. i'm sorry, but we don't accept that you set the the roadmap, you on setting the global rules for, for, for the world. because there are other states who equally powerful and also because

the strategic balance power as shifted. america has a few right, is behind in the military sense, as well as in the technology and in the assay, correct. thank you. that's it for one of your favorite shows of the last see who will be back on wednesday, the 12th of january. but until then stay safe and you can watch all our interviews by subscribing by youtube channel and falling us on all our social media ah ah, ah.