land, anybody's going to push and push it. if i had an event, i could somebody somebody a few minutes. that was 3. so what i still was a sub listed at the, but i looked on the local me in your school because you believe about it will give you hope, all right, somewhat, you will be with you a follow up on it that you like it by prosper. any weaker, lia, from a brush your project, mr. indian blues. ah, ah, ah.

hello and welcome across stock were all things are considered on peter level. there are many reports, u. s. intelligence warns of a russian false flag operation to provoke an invasion of ukraine to those of us who are skeptical this sure sounds like still another weapons of mass destruction. conspiracy theory also, how bad could things get? ah, to discuss these issues in more i'm joined by my guess maxine should golf. he's director of the center for advanced american studies at moscow state institute of international relations. and we also have dmitri barbara, she is a political analyst and editor. it was me, internet media project or a gentleman cross stock rolls in effect. that means you can jump in any time you want. and i always appreciated. i was going to maxine 1st of max, you know, in lieu of my introduction here, i'd like to read some of the words from the national security advisor,

jake sullivan. he said, russia is laying the groundwork to have the option of fabricating a pretext for an invasion, including to sabotage activities and information operations by accusing like using a grain of preparing an imminent attack against russian forces in eastern ukraine. how do you replied that? because my introduction, i also mentioned weapons of mass destruction. 2003 go ahead. met, right? well, as were, remember, president putin promised to quote unquote, military technical response should be in nature. we know pale to address the proposals unsecure, to guarantees that the russian delegation put forward in geneva. and i think there is a lot of focus on the military in that phrase, in the western media. but because there is a lot of uncertainty of what exactly this military technical response may be. there, all kinds of things in this discourse, you know, one day they, the date they're, they're talking a lot about the quote unquote, univision,

ukraine before that as well. remember couple days before there was a lot of hype over russia deployments in latin america. so i think that's, it suggests that the, the us side is not entirely clear of the russian intentions. and there all kinds of ways to pump up the domestic discourse on the russia threats and to show that the administration is actually aware of what actually is going on. and what exactly the russians are letting victoria newland was talking the other day about the quote unquote 800 scenarios that the us intelligence play that's that's like 18 scenarios in part to memorize. so i think that's, that's quite telling us the kind of moods in the, in the see at this moment. but that sad, i should say the situation is very serious. and then indeed, precarious, and hope we don't end up in the cuban missile crisis. 2.0, and that is exactly the analogy i've been using for weeks right now on this program

in kamer, 18th and heresy. i mean, it was the last week of the 3 meetings, you know, us, russia, rushing the nato russia with the always the, and, you know, and now they're looking at 18 different scenarios. i mean, why don't waste the time that was, and it sounds like a level of paranoia, in my opinion, because a where the russian side is that, you know, if you, there is no, no, no real meaningful negotiations, no mutual understanding, then there's going to be a military technical component to this, we already told you this to happen. i mean, why did anybody be surprised? go ahead demon. well, i think that the negotiations were still useful because let me remind you what the 1st time since 2014, we were talking serious. you know, it wasn't real serious. i'm sorry, i have to disagree with you. i mean, why did they come out from it? ok, me. this is the strategy. well, let's have more meetings,

but we've been having meetings for 30 years and then continue. it's doubled in 5 years and we should continue talking. i'm sorry, my friend, but convince me i'm wrong. well, of course, unfortunately, the west did not accept the rational proposals, even though that indeed minimum, the minimum full credit that sick your situation in europe. i mean, not all the american nice. i've seen the brain american, we styles, important as the board is government. this is welcome in american nuclear weapons and the down and step where, where quite willing to have, you know, it's too bad. we are not members of nato, and they just 7 when the found in that relationship in russia and nato will sign, we didn't sign it. so we will welcome to american nuclear weapons. so basically the rational proposal, this is not a dream, it's, it's the minimum. but ok,

americans are not accepting the nature is not accepting it, but at least there may be some points that don't building measures. there may be some progress on short that need to meet the new styles and, and the response. but i agree that basically the american side, everything to what these negotiations, let me remind you all the evil with any vocations. mister blinked and made an anti rush and ran to you. you'll progress. so as speech you'll brush everything. this is the way you ruined negotiations. your basically affect the person that you are talking to. this is why people and that's where your appeal shields and the uniforms on national costumes. you know, the great, the distance between the person you can do and the subject, you know, we're not talking who has human rights. we're talking about security, okay. by the way, mister burrell, you know,

that kind of european diplomacy insisted that participate, but want to talk about human rights and you can talk about it for the next 200 years. you know, this is exactly what i was afraid of. but talking about what the max max in arrays, you know, very examine it. you know, there are certain over the united states about russian military technical response . well, it's natural because let me remind you of the rational needed to budget is 14 times smaller than the american. it's for slower than that combined needed to partnered of that, or the european allies of this is the data from stock only to piece research. so if you have a force which is 18 times smaller than the other one, what can you count on unpredictability ambiguity? and this is the only way, you know, this is basically the reason why we increase presidential policy in russia in the

last 20 years. for the same reason why rules both of late the neg, do mom. the rights for the president, for immediate decisions. you know, without waiting for the congress is confirmed security. so this is today's war. everything was decided to meet. is this big down on that security match because it is about security. but the way the western media and going to speech was just on becoming of a secretary of state. i mean, it was just on believable. but i mean, the way it's, it's constantly being brain, victoria new and an old hand at ukraine for the wrong reasons. i would like to point out, is there the, there are different narratives, the nato and the head of nato. the united states wants to constantly focus on ukraine, a member that is a country that's not even a member of nato here. and russia with its proposals to nato entity, united states were sent out in december. this is about pan european security. the

americans just don't simply want to talk about that. but it's all they want to talk about is ukraine. a country that is not a member of nato. go ahead. well, you know, the, a few things i'd like to mention in this regard. one, if i were to use a sports analogy in the talks in geneva, i would say that the talks produced, you know, like a and football or soccer as because in the u. s. you to try to, to, to produce some free zones into which you can pass and from which you can score. so i think the talks rebuild that there are some free zones that the, the, the western side, the americans are try to create. but these are not the results from which it can score from which you can actually, you know, produce results in that sense. you know, the proposal was let's discuss, you know, the things such as the number of forces, you know, they, the number of military exercises. all of this is important. but at this point, as you pointed out, we've been talking about that for 30 years. and it's not exactly the thing that the

russian side once the concrete proposal on the russian side was the during the madrid summit, which is to take place in june 2020 to the nato. if it was serious about security with russia, was supposed to roll out the statement that would denounce the book or a statement of 2008, saying that quote unquote, georgia in ukraine will one day become members of nato at the time. indeed, it was a kind of consensus or a compromise, rather between the george w bush administration that wanted ukrainian georgia in nature and france and germany that didn't one that you for those countries in nato. but it created so much ambiguity in terms of what the western countries could do in ukraine, in georgia, in terms of, you know, threaten russia security that moscow when ballistic, i'm not sure if that's the right metaphor to use in this sense. but would be, will be he right, that's, that's, that's one thing. and right now the russians are demanding concrete, you know,

little commitments, if not legal commitments that you know, that would really dispel the 1st this uncertainty that's, that's one thing. the other thing is obviously the, the u. s. does not see russia as a pure power except for strategic stability and now perhaps cyber domains. and that is exactly the, the, the point that moscow was trying to convey that you can, we can have any meaningful progress on these areas. because these are areas important to you, but also to us. but we need to, you know, make sure that you address our security guarantees the way we try to address your security guarantee. so in that sense, in all these discussions over rational potential military deployments in your brain or around ukraine or even latin america, i would personally look at it as a, a rushes way to return real bullets equal realism into the thinking of the american policy making. because over here, so far as just political statements,

including the ones made by secretary clinton. but the 2nd thing is try to kind of move geopolitical frontier closer to the united states. so it's felt more like a real threat. because right now, it doesn't feel like a real threat for the united states, which grades and all kinds of maneuvers around brain that the brother russian in it seems to me, given the rhetoric and the lack of seriousness on the part of nato. and it's a member countries, is that they're provoking russia, it's almost kind of a game. it's a bluff, it's a game of chicken. and, and we've always pointed out on this program here is that if there isn't going to be a straightforward response to the proposal, the russians are made, they will have to take matters into their own hands. no one else is going to protect russian sovereignty except for the russian steamer. well, i think that this is the right way to stick to ation and picking up on what my team

has just said. it was, need to be the unpredictability. and then when you read the 1008, you know, when at the summit of nato they promised to take your brain and ga, intimate. at some point, this is a big you, this is predicted. so russia is trying to reform with less unpredictability. for the reason that i just mentioned, you know, was so much weaker. however, we have certain special kinds of weapons which, which make it possible for us to dissuade the wife from a taking and the, and picking up on what you said that the beginning of all the states. and that's all reminds me of my destruction of our sub down thing because the american lady, switching the conversation wrong track, you know, the real problem is nato expansion to rain or just boy month or blessed

thought we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break will continue our discussion and some real mistake with our p. o. the 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's lean finger on you. you are doing it to yourself. we started adopting those techniques when i was stationed in mosul. among them were stress, possession, sleep deprivation. inducing hypothermia. there's already beginning to be evidence

that these old techniques are now being used on immigrant children. whatever you do or more comes from home. nobody has been held accountable for the torture that happened in the past and the moral authority the made america awarded or sacrificed . but the shimmer of effective interrogation with

the welcome back to cross stock were all things are considered non peter lavelle, this is the home addition to remind you we are discussing some real news the the let's go back to here in moscow. you are litigating on a point, i want you to finish it off. go ahead. yes. so the conversation is switched to the wrong path. instead of talking about security as possible with your boy a month or american and british weapons in your brain. and that's very mindful that your brain is as far as just 500 from or school at one point. you know, so this is really dangerous. because rash will have to switch to the nuclear option in needed in case of a place where, you know,

the enemy is just 5 minutes away from your, from the hotline. so that's which of the conversation to do can, is going to invade ukraine. this is the same as in 2003. the real problem was, when call will do night states attack your rock. but then when the media switched it to the saddle map, you know where dusty find his weapons of mass destruction when it's going to use them. it all correct up to be just a huge lie, but no one was held responsible. so why not repeat this now? you know, and that i think those mobile, the, in the american press, the european press down, you know, you, you are right there is someone named the old black, you know, mr. flack, jonathan flag. he is quoted on europe to prepare for a real war with russia, with huge casual ways, not only distance tribes, probably that divisions, you know,

collide in on the territory waste in europe and all of that for the well you green . she says, well, ground the stand, that's not grain is for a bunch of garage guys you know, on i will run in your pre, came to power via by while and means who steal, you know, greg up to be the real beneficiary us off and say that the real beneficiary, panama, panamanian, or shaws. they these guys are all, were you know, the, the, the, you know, these are out democracy. oh my god. people still believe this after all this stuff it met. see what is really in play in my mind at least isn't a symmetrical response to this because his demons pointed out a western so called diplomats because they're not very diplomatic anymore. and of course the media, they focus on this mean of invasion. well, of course russia has no intention of invading the ukraine. it would be pointless. however, if it would be determined in this is my opinion, in my opinion,

only if it is determined that there are a weapon systems, for example, that would create an existential threat to russia. security rep. russia has already gone through the motions of meeting all the significant stakeholders in this. they didn't want to listen. russia, security comes 1st for russia, and russia will take action some military technical reaction or reaction to what could be deemed as a potential offensive missile system, for example. and it will be dealt with and then nato has this quandary. i mean, do we go to war over this missile system? they didn't actually invade the country. i mean, what, what they're doing make us putting everything in. i mean, this is like one big bet, and it's going to play out very, very badly from not that it's going to play out well for russia, either your thoughts, right? i will, i think the, what's, what we're seeing now is a 3rd attempt for throughout his presidency to negotiate this

a pen european security infrastructure. the 1st was in 2007 during the prudence, many a speech where he was talking about the dangers of the uniform world and draw and clearly russia's ledger read lines on ukrainian, georgia. and that speech was actually seen as russia's own revenge, just ambitions. and what happens at the end of the day, year after soccer really adventurous strike south cynthia and the war. and charles said here the 2nd call for serious discussion about the or be in security was in 2012 and put in this article about russia security guarantees. and that was also in other turbulent environment. after the spring, they pull up the duffy nature's intervention and libya. nobody listen to that either. what, what we saw year and a half after it was the crisis in your train in the crimea spring as they came to

call it. now this is the 3rd attempt to do to, to draw a clear line and say, look, there are security guarantees. there are important that are security concerns that are very important to us. a lot more important to us than it is to you. ah, let's, let's, let's, let's get serious about that. and so far that hasn't been very serious. it's partly because nature in the us are, are short of their own dominance and, and, and, and on. the buttons. which in a way, i think is dangerous because it involves some of this. so of so both both leaders in the post so that countries still act in a way that presents challenges for western decision making as much as for russian decision making. so i think all of the russian military deployments over ukraine are not about intervening in your brain because worse or after all part to achieve some political goals. there are no political goals in ukraine that russia could

deal with room military force. there are other ways to achieve them, but they are exactly in my opinion, to a compelled, the west to serious talks and be to deter ukraine from attacking numbers. because the number of offences and on bus have increased over the past several weeks, including because of the western supports and rushes view. well hopefully we'll, we'll see more diplomatic way out out of this. so me, in all the background of this last week's meetings, i would say pointless meetings, but meetings, none the less and we have the events going on in context on and that, that was no coincidence whatsoever. i mean, it's interesting there. again, there's another, it's a symmetrical. russia doesn't like the, the behavior and rhetoric of the regime in care, but it has no intention of trying to change it. but then as we were going up to

these meetings, and during these meetings, we had what appears to be for regime change and conflicts which failed here. so you have, you know, russia and the military block a very much it off. it's an opposite principles and goals here because back theme is absolutely right. i mean, what with the political goal for russia is security and have secure borders. but the, the aim of nato is gemini, emer. wow. it's just amazing. what happened to the west. the reaction to cover start to rush him next name. alex don, let me just go, you know, the headline all around the, these article in the look when you know the french medicine declared war on europe . and then the south side, the ukraine. barrows, cars are where will well, the whole point was that c s your collective security organization because there

was a real quick cause and several 100 people died. dispatched the force of 2500 ma'am just to help because up to god, you know, the government buildings which was badly damaged by the way, during that disturbance. and the west. this is the patient. this is russia, you know, restoring its following kind of stuff and then because the president said in a week, i want the stoops out in well, days. thank you. in 2 days the withdrawal starts are now better troopers are returning and the worst is not the one the poet judge. and you know, this is the same sort as with the sort kelly. but you know, if you read the west press before it was all about homosexual as leads what terrible faith is going to weigh them in. so, you know, they're all going to be rounded up and then the rest, the nothing happened to them and no one was apologized. the truth is, russia is not inexpensive. you power, not only rational people is peaceful. the rational lead does not 13 by hand with

area 3, where quite a bit with that, with what the west the narrative is that what you want to restore the soviet union . i read condra. so articles about it since since january 1st this year. and people just don't see the facts, you know, we, what we want is not necessarily allies. we just don't want or style regimes around the regime and or style and steal. we don't want to do the reveal change, the american wait, we expect ukrainians to be given a chance to to replace this regime peacefully. and i'm not sure the you don't either, but you got this job because after my done look, the whole package structure suddenly change. you know, the whole rhetoric suddenly change monday's peaceful protest. policemen while they enter the rather the bottom of fatherly, all the def, it just started to speak differently. no wonder. so policeman killed. and the

wes, this is the more christian, this is the moment when you great became lost. maxine, where does this, where are we going with all of this because i suppose what depresses me the most is the lack of serious, but i mean like it has already been brought up here when the russians come to your house, they did they, they never leave i mean, what a projection, i mean, there's so many countries around the banking group go and they never go home and the rush. i mean, it was only a matter of days. the russian troops were thanked and they went back to their barracks, back in russian rest has no intention of occupying conflicts down or any other country. ok, i mean, and it also showed resolve. and i think my opinion, that was one of the reasons or whatever was whatever operation was being conducted against causing look more at how russia would react. russia did react and it did quite forcefully. so again, where is this all going? how does this end?

well. 1 i think what have what we saw in cuz it's on the western reaction to that was a subconscious desire to see russia get stuck there beyond what, what, what demon just was talking about the, you know, all kinds of reactions. i think the, the bottom line was there will hopefully russians will get distracted. and because it was happening in the run up to the geneva talks, the expectation was that the information kind of ambience around that would be really bad for, for, for moscow. you know, so the russians walk in the stocks, but then even even more kind of damage to reputation and stuff. and what happens within 2 days, russia demonstrated very weak and soft results in and fixing the situation. and you know, in and out that ultimately played out well for, for moscow, you know, raise the profile of c, s t, o reinforces reputation as the only provider of strict secured instability in

eurasia so far and also the power that is able to operate equally well on both fronts and it's quote unquote, near border that i think mixed some expectations and make some fillings here in the west obviously. so i think so far at this moment, russia has a stronger negotiation position and is speaking from this kind of real real rate. realism point of view, when it comes to, you know, assess security and priorities. hopefully this will be enough for the west. but in this conflict, we haven't like the logical side. we have a pragmatic sign and they can't, we can't understand it. or i gentlemen, that's all the time we want to thank my guest here in moscow, and i want to thank you for watching us here to see you next time. remember, oh for

is your media reflection of reality in the world transformed what will make you feel safer? isolation, whole community. are you going the right way? where are you being that somewhere? which direction? what is true? what is faith? in the world corrupted, you need to descend a join us in the depths or remain in the shallows. with

kobe protest wrapped in europe. other countries, rochester, new restrictions making the lives of vaccine. hesitant people, ever more complicated. scientists protect all, may cromwell rapidly become the dominant strain of cobra. globally, this year, the world health organization tells us medics are going to get the little relief tweaks in increase the number of nations around the world. we see a dominant area. so the sheer number of infections will ring more people to put it in a quality kale. so phase of the world can richest. people are fine to double their . well, during the pandemic.