disagreement about how many diplomats each site is going to house. well, you're going to go on to the business department. i have to go there. i am your, your sales research. i never let me, let me just say one other for sure. it is good news that after russia produced its draft treaties and it's such a demands, the west united states in particular, didn't simply say, get lost. what it said was, okay, let's talk and it's good news to that, the west. ok, we can get on to what they disagree with, but they have offered some things which to size can discuss constructively, like arms control, like where people put nuclear weapons like those sorts of things. now, you're about to go on to it. yeah. the, those good things about the good things or miss al deployments, i should say, of course, for our audience around the world with britain is in the leadership crisis of sorts of corona virus restrictions. and of course, actually this all was taking place in europe. well, north korea tested the hypersonic missile, the can it l a in 30 minutes, but that,

that aside from that, the polish for ministers, a big me of route said, europe is the closest to war in 30 years. stolen berg says it's the situation is dangerous. possible armed conflict, these are the actual words being used. and i mean, i think sensually adam schiff at the, in the u. s. chief of the us house intelligence committee. claim that the invasion of ukraine by russia is very likely. i do believe it's very likely. i have notes and i actually, i see it, i don't think russia wants to do it, and obviously the west doesn't want it to happen. but i mean, the 1st, once i got that is that even if russia does invade ukraine, it's pretty clear that they would not get involved militarily. that would be very strong and so on. but the idea about the europe wide war between nature and russia as a result of what's going on in ukraine, very like going back to ukraine itself. russia's been very clear on its

determination that ukraine will never join nato. nato has been equally clear on the principle. countries can join whatever alliances. they like. both sides have spent a series of meetings this week saying those things to each other. so i think is the lesson for mr. rob costs it today. the talk so far have failed, and it's an interesting question where things go now, but i wouldn't, i mean, there's a solution to this, which it was pretty obvious one. everybody knows that ukraine, it will not join snakes in the, in the term. the fixture is certainly not going to do that. within the next few years, there's contested territory between russia and ukraine, is of course, in crimea, is a small civil war going on in ukraine. was russia involved in the dumbass in those circumstances? make sure it's simply not going to take it. so a sorry to tell you,

but what would they have if the russians hadn't put a 100000 troops across the border in russia will be 200 miles and i think away from the ukrainian border. yes, i mean, the presence of those troops is ineffective. had the effect of getting the discussions that are taking place going. they haven't shifted anyone's positions so far as i can see, so far at all. and the fear is that those troops will actually be turned into an invasion force, which i say, i suspect that both sides would vastly not to happen. it's a matter of finding an elegant solution to the difference of view which prevents that happening. and if i, i don't wanna, i don't shop for too much like for let me just say there is an obvious solution to that. as i said, ukraine is not going to join nato for the next decade to decades because of differences of crimea, differences about the dumbass. so it ought to be possible engineer and agreed statements between nato, the west and russia, which says flash,

says ukraine is not going to join a so for she is for some time i. e, not an offending against russia's principal, is never going to join a so nor offending against nature's principle. we can't say it's never going to join nature, but establishing some agree ground a few years, which then give us more time to sort out the disagreements between the 2 sides. well, no sign of any statement like that from a store in burg, let alone blinking at last time you were on the program. you said, i think i challenged you and said, why is boris johnson sending in warships into the black sea? what, what is going on, and you end russia can send its troops where it likes, in a sense, saying in international waters and recognize international areas, they can do what they like. that's not true. we realize from statements coming from the white house, from the, by the ministration, but russia is not allowed to move its troops within its borders in russia,

according to the way they do things. no, no one said that they're not allowed to. what people have said is that if they behave as they have done, that raises tensions and raises questions. and, you know, if you want to maintain decent international discourse, particularly when the question of noise involved, it's helpful to have some transparency and predictability and for people to know from russia why it's doing what it's doing. so if for a similar situation to, if russia based it's warships and so on, no send special forces to mexico because the united states and britain have special forces in ukraine as far as i understand it. if you look at the parallels and make it all things being equal, that's a situation. you know, you're quite right there are parallels. and i think the reason why our special so i don't know that we have special forces, but we certainly setting up a training facility in, in ukraine at the moment,

is that we want to help ukraine to acquire the abilities and itself. stephanie doesn't evidently, doesn't have at the moment. i can't, for example, when the war and dumbass are behavior. and you may disagree with it. russia may disagree with it, but it is entirely transparent in objectives that it has. the pulling together of those $100000.00 russian troops around ukraine. they're so far, no nation for 2. you see, i'm all the of what you've been saying does not tally with the kind of briefings being given to british journalists in this country, or us journalists in the united states, which is clearly the idea that putin is bent on invading ukraine, imminently let alone and his strengthening of expansion of russia in kazakhstan, and in belarus, and the where is your saying look, reason probably not going to do it. where are these where these briefings can, who are these people? these mysterious, often anonymously brief briefings to journalists in nato nations. who is there some

sort of vested interest here saying the opposite of water. prior ambassador to moscow, like yourself a say. not sure that the briefings of that absolute, this is what the press is publishing, and some of our oppressed is well known that is hard over against russia. but what do they want more than to reject? just to say what i suspect, i mean, i don't seen the briefings. my suspect the briefings of said here are these trips. there are awful lot of them quite post to the borders of a much smaller unless, well defended state. pretty clearly, those troops are there for a reason. and pretty clearly that reason is to intimidate ukraine in a case and arguably, nature. we don't know it, but that's what it feels like. and you're saying the truth to me. i mean, rush, rob is, he says that military training, but ironically, all of these briefings and i mean they're pretty straight. and i mean, as i said, the house intelligence committee chairman adams, jeff says we have the intelligence, that's what the intention is. it's not too intimidated to invade,

and of course the i can see, i don't think shifted. he's a does. russian e clay on the invasion is quotes. very likely. that's what he said, very likely. okay. i suspect he's gotten ahead of the. okay. but them, ironically this kind of some might say, scare mongering does have one impact the winter olympics are coming up and ready me put in his schedule to be going to see she jumping. why do you think and policy makers don't realize that every action they seem to take is drawing beijing in moscow in ever closer embrace and seeing nato countries as enemies? so once we agree entirely, i say exactly the same, same weston, the bad relations between western russia, obviously are pushing russia more and more into, into china's arts. and that, i think is a mistake. i don't think that mister putin entirely welcomes it. and i think would be helpful, a key results of our finding better relations with russia would be indeed to

attract russia into a more how can i put this some way could live room position between the western china. now i haven't seen you much on british media. it has to be said, but during the context on appalling atrocities in our mighty and so on with so many people died. what did you think? when again, we had the same kind of anonymous briefing that same report telling us, you know, the fact that the russian troops we divided together on we'll create tensions between beijing in moscow. where do you think such a geopolitical analysis emerges from? again, i agree with the briefing, what the newspapers said felt to me to be pretty ignorant and prejudiced. i mean, obviously the russians will assist you were invited supply trips to back up because ext on government, they went there. now leaving, it seems to me in international terms have been entirely defensible operation. and

on the position of the chinese, i would guess the chinese, i would guess that russia and china incense improve their relations if they were unprovable. there's also because china has lots of stakes. instability in catholic and russia just made a significant contribution to the stability. well, of course, one could think there is some kind of method in this perceived redness. even if russia says they are unsuccessful. all these talks recently we had china, of course, in alaska, that famous blinking meeting went by and became president when china started reading the riot act about native american genocide to the united states. and we saw that tweet or no, it was actually statement by the russian foreign office and replying to blink and saying don't if i read basically don't, if i russians and you houses guests because they'll stay longer than they should. and of course, the russian said you're more likely to be raped or robert, if american stay in your house, maybe the americans, maybe nato, maybe they have their people. they're saying, look, there is

a resurgent and certainly a rhetorical, ah anger from moscow badging that we've not seen for a long time. the best thing is to up the ante. i doubt that i think lincoln statement is actually stupid, sang by the russians in another. i'll never go there, and it is now proven wrong. and surprising to go back to a point you made a bit earlier. america's key as it sees it. your political concern at the moment is somehow containing china and getting into a big disagreement with russia is obviously not helpful to lot. and i think instinct was absurd and hopefully they would have learned from experience so totally branded. i'll stop you there more from x u k, p. m, to any bless former ambassador to russia after this break with

now we have e cigarettes, i just heard that it was a healthy alternative to cigarettes. do we trust tobacco companies with their message that these new products are actually going to reduce? these are making the tobacco happened over 2 years so called enhanced interrogation techniques used by the u. s. officials were basically designed as techniques to break down the human mind. if you force a human being to stay in a certain position doesn't take very long to the pain involved to become absolutely excruciating. but nobody is lean finger on you. you are doing it to yourself. we started adopting those techniques when i was station in mosul, among them wordpress positions sleep deprivation, a type of thermo. there's already beginning to be evidence that these

old techniques are now being used on immigrant children, whatever you do or more comes home. nobody has been accountable for the torture that happened in the past. the moral authority, the made america leader. sacrifice the sham of effective inter yes me. i didn't know if i were you. i lisa typical, there is only 9, but already university students that away m slash a seems a new model. but when the, let's see. yep. you got the doors to deal with or did it then? no bluetooth enabled over. yeah, but that's with the human come come, no recalls and he with now bush 9,

nebraska and of course with level your special i was the yeah my what i say the 1st way in that particular certified like was thinking that she was in your mind. it was i'm the leader with the with soon lose with, with his teacher was reason is with. 6 mm welcome back. i'm still here with ex u. k. p. m, tony blair's former ambassador rogers attorney brandon. sorry to keep harping on about the media element of this, but that is after all, where normal people are normal. people informed their impressions continually the idea unchallenged. i heard on the b, b, c, the other day that nature is a defensive, a defensive organization. i know this is

a point that russia and china and went to the global south and says, how can they call themselves a defensive organization? how can journalists not challenge that idea, given iraq, afghanistan, and libya, yugoslavia where i think you're wrong, nature is the difference is ation and specifically. so in the european context is found it some doing things overseas that there's no other western organization to do. like i keep buying a gas done and getting involved in iraq, you say, but in the european context, i, in our dealings with the rush, they said it is very much a defensive organization. and one depressing fact, coming back to the current disagreements about ukraine is each side is treating the other as a threat to security. whereas in fact, nature is never going to attack russia. and similarly, russia is never going to attack, makes it nice for both sides to recognize that fact and begin to get the

temperature down. yeah, but i mean, they donations avatar china and russia having the, i mean, i know it was a mistake when they bought a new guest lobby. that was a mistake when they, when they attacked russian installations in syria, that sort of stag liza nato nations, as well as you could say, rather, nato as a whole. but there's no doubt that they donations of attacked russia and china. no nato nations. well, i know the incident, your furniture, which was, i think it was a nato bombings. he was plain, but the nato bombing off serbia, in the run up to the war to, to, to liberate cost of. i was already turned into a mistake and i was a bad mistake and the chinese responded really quite dramatically to it. and i hope that nato learned from that mistake, but it wasn't america or nato attacking china. it was an error in the course of a war which was entirely justified given what the service of doing it was over at

the time. well, there's all this talk about an alleged chinese intelligence agent here in westminster, in the house of commons. christine lee, you're a diplomat. what do you make of britain saying? they're not going to send diplomats to the wind to games in china as the global. so there's vladimir putin arrives there. a good idea? no, i think it's a mistake. i mean, you get to choose a slee stub. we don't do to see your choices, the snob, anybody, but you certainly don't good choices, the snob, the 2nd most powerful national plan. yes, but the british government, as you know, says it's not gratuitous. it's actually a response to alleged human rights abuses. yeah. and those human rights abuses are real. but nevertheless, we need to maintain a constructive relationship with china. and i think doing this sort of thing is petty and does not cheap and thing. yeah, in a week when guantanamo had its van diversity of its 1st detainee, i think human rights are pretty relative is all countries seem to be saying and

have done for long time. what about the role of germany nord stream to the russian government? very angry about the noise is coming from washington and from brussels. you see the new chancellor change leadership in germany being better for us go, well better than they do. i used to really to judge. i'm not stream to is probably not the ideal subject to base it on. i mean, we've been around the north stream to circuit before back in 1980 s. when with the question 1st to rows of russia exporting gas to germany and other nations, the americans try to impose sanctions to stop it. the new european nations, and particularly germany insisted that they needed the gas and eventually the americans act down. now, if all the other noise it's going on what's going on, i would be reasonably confident that's the way this would go as well this time. but it's been come bound up now with

a whole ukraine issue. and i suspect that at the moment that the 1st russian bomb drops in ukraine, which let's hope it doesn't. at that moment, no stream to the dead for a decade or so. and 40 percent of europe's energy. no, you're not seeing too is that it is not just not seem to obviously the other bible . no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no rushes performance on delivering gas to western europe has been impeccable. russia signs contracts and deliveries on them. and it is pretty clear that even through all of the current, most it's going on, russia is maintaining that policy. got an argument about what they're doing on the side and not shifting as much gases for marketers to continue to. but they're entirely within their rights to do that. and i assume we'll want to continue doing latch until unless something goes dramatically, dramatically wrong and all price to them for maintaining that position. i'm not fin

to for the point of delivering current deliveries of russian gas is not necessary, but we'll have to see how things evolved from here. oh, yeah. i mean, the former u. s. u s. senior advisor i would look back was on the show, this week we were going watch it. and i started by saying to him from moscow and b jane's point of view, they're looking at the u. s. is continue destabilization of latin america as they see it. they're looking at the theo pier in the t p. a left. they're looking at obviously a resurgent military presence around tie one. they're seeing a continued attacks on china about what's happening and jin chang. how long do you think the shanghai cooperation organization? states which include russia, of course, on china. i just going to say, here, allow this to keep on going before they start to militarily engage with the

warships, nato nations ascending to all these places and, and armaments. i don't see the shanghai corporation organization, wonderful organization that is actually challenging the power united states. and it's obviously a bit of an arm wrestle going on at the moment about control of the c lanes in the south china sea and so on. that's principally between the united states and china and, and as well, those 2 countries will have to decide what level of competition they're ready to engage in. and how much further they're willing to go. the 1st one is actually taiwan. and again, let's hope that has been assigned to say that a peaceful solution to i don't see major deep disagreement can be found, but i don't see united states wandering around the world destabilizing places in the south china sea. it is protecting international see ways which are open to everyone. i mean,

some believe in the humanitarian intervention and often point to those who are converted to the policy by the rwandan genocide. you think there are parallels. i understand the libyan elections are again being postponed. that libya to be jean and moscow was a kind of red line. they can no longer allow nato countries to no longer trust them. obviously they, china abstained on the olivia un resolution that libya was a line in the sand and no longer do russia and china or take for granted the words coming from washington and brussels. i was quite everything boldly minister intervention policy. and it felt right at the time, there are a lot of really quite nasty governments around the world repressing brutally repressing massacring there in peoples that included of saddam and iraq that included in that fee. in libya,

that continues to include syria aside in syria. and the feeling was, and this is partially related to, at the time the absolute military dominance of the west and it. so there is a feeling that we should intervene to help these repress populations. now, in retrospect, it has not been a very successful policy in iraq. it produced isis. and a lot of subsequent was in libya and produced anarchy, which continues to this day in syria produced very nearly a war with russia actually, and syria remains in the cooling mess. at the moment, actually, i think there's a lot of chin scratching going on in the west, right. whether this was an entirely sensible approach to life. now let's see what comes along next. but for the moment, i think you're looking at something of the western pause and interfering for humanitarian reasons. in however, got countries on government. and i was conspicuous example of that obviously is the rather abrupt us and therefore nature withdrawal from afghanistan. there. what were

your feelings about that? because i have to say, and i know, i mean even with cove it so you don't get to go to as many diplomatic parties as you might have done before. you know, those hawks are still out there who aren't in scratching. we're just saying actually people are defeatist when they complain about the interventions that you just just delineated. they're not, i'm not, i don't get it done. i think that was all this right. i was involved right, beginning i've kind of start. i was in washington d. c. time and evolve since and it started off. well, 1st of all, it started off as a result of $911.00 of the check on the towers exam, avoidable. and they then turned into an effort to turn afghanistan into a western style democracy, which i always felt was bound to fail and has failed. and we would biden, and therefore we were right to get out. but i don't exclude the possibility that somewhere around the world, you have a nasty dictator repressing his people in

a way that we the west could stop and are therefore deciding to go it. what i would say, however, is that the mistake in a lot of these interventions so far has been that you go, it's easy to when we got massive armed forces, you go in, you, when you throw the die out, that's very straightforward. you can't then just turn your back and walk out again . you have to rebuild the society somehow. that was the same time, not becoming the enemy domestically to, to whatever politics or just all, just stay out to stay out of it. and, and i mean, when you say that, that kind of idea, is it precisely wine level happened in the 1st place, of course, the machine and so forth, which leads me on i supposed to be asking you at the moment in the past few weeks, israel armed by britain in the united states is of course when bombing, syria, and garza and so on creating incredible a inspiration are acting as

a recruitment sergeant for islamists all around the world. which would mean another $911.00. who knows this here, given the hatred for the west, that these kinds of her actions inspire. so again, when we see the same mistakes being played out again of, well we take out a dictator out here, or there are a terrorist leader as they would call it. and then try and rebuild societies in, in their own image. wasn't hagel, who said the one thing we learned from history is that no one ever learns anything from history. we conducted these operations. they have not been very successful, but it is not difficult to imagine. as i say, some nasty dictator, all over the televisions worldwide, murdering his people and the west feeling constrained to act, meeting with russia. i mean, russia is a country with an international conscience to do the trick. yes, but surely. but the point is britain in the united states helping the mass murder

of people in yemen on pay. i mean, is a, you basically say, i know, and i don't think so the pressure on the saudis now with the people who really foul assuming that the saudis couldn't do what they're doing without britain. and we know morris johnson reputedly jokes about the civilian casualties in yemen. if you use exactly the same ideas you're using to me, there, majoring in russia could say right enough is enough. these atrocities being committed with british and american aid deserve a response. and the regime change in london in washington. i mean, i think that's from the change of us attitude is very visible. i have not followed this closely for the u. k, but the united states is now criticizing the saudis for what they did to because showing that unfortunate journalist a did and then you turn, they are pulling back on various arms supplies, deals with saudi. it's quite striking the saudis and not having to go around with the big in bo, to other bits of the middle east who have the rockets that they need. i suspect that what you're looking at is robert colder climates towards saudi,

at least from washington, d. c. my suspect or so therefore for i haven't gone into the details over to the saudis, did i any a wrong doing? and they say, actually they're the army. when contracts are being honored, former ambassador, thank you. q. that's over the show will be back on monday. when after golden globe successful squid game, we investigate the rise of korean pop culture. 15 years to the day, the doomsday clock were set to 5 minutes to midnight after north korea's 1st missile test. until then, keep in touch viral as social media let us know which side you'd be on in a war between nato and russia and china july, an annual festival in st. petersburg dedicated to dust. i ask you a great right to think around. psychologist,

people often turn to his work to understand russia and russians, perhaps even themselves. they put a single note here to see what they think about the writing vehicle. anita, why do you need them changing a reader, transforming them as they read that? does di estes unique ability to stay ascii wants to tell us, you can better yourself. he makes you face your true self. why? we keep man beyond conventions, rules of schemes, beyond boundaries in the time, just a aski is a global brand whose classics. everyone knows. i'm never out of style with it really is happening here and i was on day on the door and then to be known globally as the home of big coin city and were witnessing the demise of gold as the

monetary demonization. thanks play with it is breaking use this our on our team international at a massive chemical fire in passaic, new jersey is sending large plumes of potentially dangerous smoke into the air and could now be headed in the direction of nearby new york. moscow slams washington for alleging russia is preparing a full flag operation to justify it. suppose it ukraine invasion glass guests in the program size up the chances of, of military conflict. nissan still come in was always going to weeks detention. we have here in ukraine. the plan for b miss all 5 minutes from moscow. the question is, how do you, how do you deal with a bully?

also in the program, the leader of the indigenous shoshone nation tells.