tensions i'm joined by my guess, charles bridge in london. he's a security analyst and former u. k. army and counterterrorism intelligence officer in washington. and we're michael ma loop. he is a former pentagon senior security policy analyst, and here in moscow we have alexi. now, he is an expert at the russian council on international affairs, as well as chief editor at r t dot com. all right, gentlemen, cross our rules and effect. that means you can jump in anytime you want. and i always appreciate it. let's go to charles 1st in london, and i'm really sick and tired of all the misinformation and propaganda that is being spewed about these growing tensions. there are tensions, there's no doubt about that. ok, but how they're being characterized is really important for us on this program. to set straight. so charles, i asked 3 questions in my introduction. what, what, what is, what is nato up to? what is the gambit here is that they have to continue expanding to be relevant. what is it american hegemony? because it's picking a needless fight with russia. go ahead, charles. well,

would you have anyone? is she really of a future? of course, ever since the cold war it's been costing around for a roll. it has to remind relevance and a full of course. in the background of old, our considerations, it always has to be borne in mind that there is a massive incentive, a motivating factor for nato, and those that speak for it. remember, there are many in the media that speak for nato, whether declared or undeclared, through vested interest, through funding of a think tank, some selling from nato, and from the, the what might be quality, a mobility, the military industrial complex, in terms of ramping up tension on sort of as constantly needful, ever more weapons purchases. this is another story of course, and we, we know that very well. and there's a company that's always going to be the backdrop to these kind of discussions in these kind of situations. there is tension, but there's been tension study since 2014, when of course the government,

if you claim which i have a threat. and of course i democratic electric oven, we should say of course i was led to detention the situation that we're currently in. i think that you have had any to the way that the media is reporting at sent in the last. and that's absolutely wrong. but let's not forget that again, really, it's not just on a daily basis now that we tell it that innovation is going to take place in the us, of course, from russia to ukraine. that's been happening now for the last 2 to 3 months. but really in, on the apps on a daily basis. but if we think about in a weekly or monthly basis, we've really been told by the same newspapers and television outlets in the west that russia is going to invade almost on a week. he'll much to basis and of course none of that has come to pass. but what i would out on that respect is in that respect, is that that doesn't necessarily not play well for the russian hand as well. because off to russian to west are involved in a negotiation at the end of the day. much of that is behind the scenes,

but much erase, tied out on the airwaves and cleanings cost is higher, honest, and $70.00 those in the west. and that agenda are ramping up. the tension may actually work in rushes. frazier at the moment. in other words, you've got a situation where the west media are actually probably over 70. that's actually how can, where she's course because our strengths in the hand of moscow into negotiations, in the sense that they are heightening detention and making the fear of a possible conflicts seem ever more real. and of course not any russia, but also at the end of the day, the west including, i think most of the people can see push, retention, mercenary people are not seeking. of course, a general rule. you know, michael, it, it seems to me, you know, this is a game of brinkman ship in a way, and i'm really glad that charles stressed the media element of it because the media is egging it on. ok, and, and they want to see who is going to blink 1st. i mean it's, it's, it's, you know, these are issues of war and peace and, and not just a political game of scoring points here. but we, this is where we are here. i mean,

the way i look at it is a nato, and it's, it's genetic code. if it doesn't expand, it disappears because it ends up being a paper. tiger. i mean, if you look at it militarily, it's an empty tusk. i mean, it really doesn't have any it real capacity and whatever american capacity there is in europe. well, it's quite limited to and it's not for a mission like this here. so, i mean, i hope charles is right, that there are a lot more negotiations going on. but michael, i have to stress to our viewers. this has been going on for 30 years, and the russians have della graph very, very clearly. that what they're going to do and what they will tolerate and what they won't tolerate. i mean, i don't understand blanket or maybe we should have another chit chat or, you know, stilton bird, you know, and on his endless, i'm babbling going on. this is real. this is real and it's really meeting us right, right here in the present. and i just don't think the west takes it very seriously

. i hope i'm wrong, michael. go ahead. yeah, i think i think you're absolutely correct peter. this, this is mind boggling. nato is once again looking for it's new mission since the end of the cold war. and it's basically a di and dinosaur. and what they're trying to do is resuscitate this, this, this enigma as much as possible in a way that it's bringing on brinkman's ship. and mr. has made a very clear what the red line is. and it is. you got, you got the west coming halfway around the world up to the russian federation. whereas this, mr. newton put it, there is nowhere else for the russians to go and they are on their own soil. and i, even though the west is agitated and you've got to consider the, the media itself, it is a, it is a tool of, of the, by the ministration and the, and the west to,

to push it's narratives of, of the evil empire of russia. and, and to stoke that in order to continue its larger plan of, of containment, of russia and, and also to basically get more dollars for, for defense spending. this is how they justify their existence. but it, but the, it's very clear to me that the nato is head is gone, is pushing it up to the brink. there are, there are ways that they can settle this down a little bit. but i think mr. newton has made it very clear. and the media somehow just doesn't believe it unless there is a problem. my concern is that because of this encouragement by the west, you're going to see elements with and ukraine,

historically neil nazi group. so such as the as off battalion pushing this and actually creating their own black fat lag operation in order to bring in order to instigate an attack that will then prompt a response. and then we're, we're in touch once you start this thing, it's very, very difficult to stop a war, a stop, a conflict because it can spread very quickly. and i, and i'm very concerned that ah, elements such as we see it inside of ukraine are really agitated. into do this and it could just drag us into a conflict, but neither side really wants exactly. you know, and i'm, i'm really glad that you and charles and reminded us of the griffith element of this and weapons and all of that, alex a, let me re go to you. i mean that the general secretary, so morgan nato, he said the following, eyes on their side, reaffirm nato's open door policy and the right for each nation to choose its own

security arrangements except for russia apparently, i mean, this is, is patently absurd. it is hypocrisy that stinks to high heaven. everybody can do it except for russia. i mean, it is, there is no self reflection here, or is this dis, the institution is fighting to continue to exist and waste billions and billions of dollars a year on generating a threat that isn't really there. well, it is. now your are up to the border, you know, somebody has got to do something. the status quo will not stand alexei well, i think, yeah, i think you're right in the, in the way that really surprised me when secretary of lincoln said that like every, every country has the freedom to its own alliances. but when russia expressed an idea of maybe try trying to deploy military assets to cube or venezuela, he reacted by saying that the u. s. will react decisively react swiftly or something along those lines. so what i think it's happening is the native is trying

to justify its own existence because nato, as we know, it was created for 3 purposes. depending western europe against soviet aggression. there is no soviet union, the more it was created to bring together rival powers of france, germany, the u. k. they're not rivals anymore. and it was created to keep americans inside the european politics, which did not happen after the world war one. so all of these aimed, all these goals are actually obsolete. europe was trying to get a foothold in europe, trying to decide its own faith. trying to basically have a role in the international politics. and, and they don't, is, is us is, is it basically is not helping right now. it's not helping anyone. it's dragging the us and europe into another war. it's trying to deny russia so, right for her don't security. and it's basically not helping anyone at this point.

and i think what we see as a historic historic moment where we can have the soul. russia as you have correctly said, russia have been saying the same thing. everything the same things were 20 or 30 years. but now it's the 1st time the west actually listed as the russia and what it took as a massing hundreds of thousands of russian troops on the russian border. so, you know, it's, it's not a sign of, of an ally and that is helpful. and that is to listen, it is a sign of alliance that is in decline, as in the constant search for its own reason of exist. we're going fast coming on the break. charles, is it possible to have pan european security without russia? because that's exactly when they goes trying to do. charles. yes, she writes, of course, is the fact that needs to be taken into consideration. i mean, it's the major security factor external factor, according to ne tape,

but others say, i disagree and also added to walk on. the other speakers have sat awed out the another reason porsha ne t be constantly costing around for this new role into uniform mission is the internal fractures within itself. that video starts to read at future, perhaps something that we can come to more depth. okay, gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on nato rush. attention, stay with our teeth. ah, is the earth's still large enough to satisfy the ambitions of jeff bezos? you know, it's got its tentacles in so many aspects of the economy. there's nothing that amazon isn't trying to get into the step by step. the amazon empire has extended its group on the world that walks like end up being quite like a dog as a dog. so amazon looks like monopoly trades like a monopoly makes money like

a monopoly, behaves like monopoly. amazon essentially controls the market place. it's not really a market is a private arena, a wild where a single company controls the distribution of all data products. and the infrastructure of our economy is loose the world. according to amazon, the new physical universal synthesis will form everything got started and all that needed to be done with it before actually. and then universe stuff expanding so where those new creations come from. and i hopefully the switch is not a contribution to science can. so there may or may we serve all mayor, may we so all be angry? oh, what's going on right noon?

can't understand united states history and the role that slavery play is already very formal institution. anytime united states became a nation, it actually to find the nation. the rise of capitalism is clearly on the backs of flight and the sleeved efforts. if you best. glitching said a great extent. you can't believe that really in the country. and the country still stands in brick. i'm from the south. everybody know, know what this figure. to some extent, i would argue that we're still fighting the civil war and the south is winning with . i welcome back to cross talk. we're all things are

considered. i'm peter labelle, to remind you, we're discussing nato rush attentions. ah. okay, is go back to michael in washington. you know michael, in my introduction and as i left the 1st block came into the 2nd block here. i never mentioned ukraine because it's not about ukraine. ok, this is the thing that really irritates me about western policy makers, the think tanks and media and all this. this is about european security structures . okay. and this is what the russians, when they sent 2 documents, one to nato, one to the united states, not to the e. you okay, to do, to a decision makers. ultimately, the decision maker is in washington. and it's about how to create a security structure in which all states are given security. this is something that nato does not confidence. they, they say that, that, huh. no one came to have a veto over magneto membership. well,

that doesn't make any sense at all. russia isn't in the nato club, so why should it obey its rules? okay, is, is absolutely nonsensical. there's nothing historically relevant to that statement that no one can have a veto. now it says how and threatening your security, you're going to be to all you want. plus more. go ahead, michael. yeah, i think your, your analysis is correct. it's, it's, it's, this is something much larger than just ukraine, right? this is the, the di and spirit of the u. s. leadership, a u. s. role as the leader of a world order that is seeing its own demise. and nato is just 11 aspect of this. and what, what this, with this threat of the, of decoupling russia from swift and from the western financial system that, that is, that is, has actually given the impetus for the who are russia and china and others to consider multi polar world order in which they develop their own independence,

financial system, and that seems to be rolling right along as well as creating through the belt road initiative. a whole economic environment separate from the west. and you're seeing that, given the fracture within the e u, and with a nato that they're seeing that the us leadership role generally has diminished and they are shifting more that way. that's why you're not seeing the unified position right now within nato, toward this ukraine incident. and toward russia as a whole because of that dependency and inter interrelationship, that exists and they are, and you're not going to and i think that this is something that moscow can play off on in going to individual members. i mean, who is going to be afraid of a date, danish warship? nobody and, and it's, it's in the, in the broad scheme of things. but it, this is

a much larger thing of neoconservatives within the, by the administration. trying to push this narrative again of containment of russia and to and to try to keep alive it's allusion that it is the leader of the so called free world, whatever that means. and this is now coming to a head when you're coming up with an actual threat. and i think at the end of the proverbial day unless someone starts something independently, as i pointed out a little earlier, i think you're going to see a back in off a little bit of us just us insistence. we saw this just yesterday and biden's news conference when he said, well, if there's just an incursion, it's not as bad as an invasion. and you have the white house quickly having to correct him correcting the president united states. i mean, it's like what, what the president meant to say was and it has sent them, it has sent some,

some serious reverberations here in this country. frankly, it's like general milly calling his chinese counterpart saying they are all stable . everything's okay here. i mean, the state craft of the elite in the us and nato is just unbelievable. i'd like to point out also michael mc chrome. he frances picking over the rotating presidency of the you. he's going to him overtures the german chancellor. and also we are doing this and then, you know, you're not on the same page, get back in the line, get back to the, the fraction you're talking about is very, we'll allow alexi. let me get, let me ask you, i mean, you know, we have stuff that nato is just a defensive alliance. i mean, you know, hit the f one, and that's what he says. it's speed dial for this guy here. ok? but i mean, if you have a huge military alliance led by the united states, you're sitting right on your border. it may deploy advance missile systems. how, why, how in the world can you define that as a defensive alliance?

go ahead to like say, well, especially when you consider that nato acted as an offensive alliance and li be offensive alliance, and syria is active an offensive alliance when he's been creeping towards rushing waters for, for the last 30 years. this is the, the us, you know, the, the problem with inside the minds of mr. sullivan burgundy, site nato. i made a functionaries that they actually do not understand what nato is. sport they'd understand with nato is all about. and they can never grasp what nato is. when it's viewed through, through the fruits in russia, west of the russian ice, russian perspective. and that is the problem that they're stuck in this cold war mentality, the mentality, they stock, their 2nd this and this mentality that is dictated by its own charter that as well . it says here in the document that it is a defensive alliance. how can it be offensive, alive? and yet that is, that is the problem that we have. and that is

a problem i hope that can be solved by us actually by russia, actually talking to me, you know, and making this point across, you know, guys, ok, you are defensive. but take a look through this russian lance. maybe it's not as simple as you may made. sounds so i think, yeah, it's, i mean, even if you talk, but i want to you, alexei, all chance. yeah. like say no. no, but the europe you're absolutely right. and we can tear a page from the cold war because during the cold war, both sides looked at it to the lens of the other. and i got, i see your point. ok. i thought we got arms control agreements. okay. with communism is coming to an end. it's an, it may be an ideological conflict, but it's only coming from one side. michael in watching you want to jump in here. we don't have a respect, michael, you want to jump in in washington? yeah, i was just going to say that it is, it is, natal describes herself as a defensive alliance, but it has nuclear weapons on european soil and,

and in turkey i how, how defensive is that every $100.00 that's, that's often so that is offensive. and with these missiles and mr. brewton has every right to be concerned with their advancement of these missiles, a defensive missile can easily be made into an off of missile. i don't know what they're talking about. well, it's michael. luckily. oh good. they did what look good nato did embrace the legal breakup of yugoslavia, the destruction of libya, and it's a defensive alliance. ok, this is nonsense, charles. let me go to you. there's a way out here and i think there's the, that the problem is, is that nato, it doesn't want to see a win win one has to win and must one. the other one must lose. that's their approach to this. ok. but charles, we have the example um, austrian neutrality. we had the example of finland ization of finland. i mean, these are not new ideas. charles and everybody could win. why don't not? they can't, can't they even conceive of this? because he's at a called appeasement. it's munich all over again. why are they stuck in this mind?

said, go ahead charles. i live on the i looted to this or hopefully the fact that behind the scenes negotiation to taking place it, a lot of this is in public, which as we've discussed is one of the main problems here because it encourages brinkman's ship and also means that people tend to repaint themselves and see a cone is that funded and funded difficult to extricate themselves from this. and this is particularly so on the west side, when we say largely because as we've discussed the road of the mainstream media in exacerbating those tensions. but really, i think the problem comes where people then put forward positions publicly that and then become red lines that can't be negotiated away. because often when we're in a negotiation, people are always going to put forward presumably more than they might expect to get. for example, an indicator of ukraine lamps that you write that is about fall more than you kind of dog was select, emphasize at my cause any point that the fact that there is these whites

pretensions anyway. and these institutional issues between nature and what would in nature itself, annotate relations with the outside world. mean those tensions can easily be exploited for the benefit of sectional groups. and some of those are cuz we did, you kind of south, we seen that, and that's absolutely been the case our last 23 months and arguably over the last 8 years that the attention to exploited for a very local er benefits. and of course, and, and that's in closures, tensions to exist. but we might find it, for example, in the case of ukraine, that some compromise might be possible. because that is a common flash point, a posse flash point, for example. russia has, that's how it's read lines that should be, i know it's a membership that should be no troops deployed notes on that. that should be great limits on exercises with informa, warsaw pact, countries that already within the i'd say, i suspect some of those red lines will be,

were turned out to be flexible. some of them, as indeed will be, some of the demons, not necessarily nature because nature, as you say, always pushes for a 0 sum game, whereas you've got bite and i think is a bit more shrewd often and he's not. but i think in this case it's i think, into stance. and as indeed recently met slip when he talked about that, if there was an incursion, presumably into your crime and a response might not be as bad as if there was a for an invasion. so he's already made that distinction and he so, so of course, inadvertently or perhaps deliberately reveal at those divisions that exist between the western allies and protect, keep absentee himself and what nato itself would actually want. and so consequently at every start, think room for compromise and at some point or that will hopefully be cheap, but we need to be aware that there are those vested interests always behind the scenes. and absolutely, i would agree that within you kind especially there are interests who do not want whatsoever got compromised to be reached at the lawson. i want is

a movement of that to a flash point that currently exists in eastern parts of ukraine, micheal, and that we have 50 seconds left here. isn't it that kind of ironic to you that the more the west helps their ukranian friends, the smaller ukraine gets, you have the illegal code and they lose crimea. then they attacked the don bass to don bass leaves. i mean, how much smaller is ukraine? good. again, because of friendship with nato. got 40 seconds my what i said. yeah, i think, i think people are beginning to realize going to war over ukraine. what is in our national interest? what is that we just pull? we've been engaged in war since 2001. and what, what does ukraine offer us in terms of national security? it's more of a european issue, but europeans are creating their own problem unless they, they do as your other folks have said. begin to understand and realize that there

can be flexibility built in give especially when you come right up to the brink. i think at the and of the proverbial day. unless someone instigates something from within, i, ukraine that you will see more flexibility. and if not, then i think you're going to see russia doing much more proactive make legitimately quicker than maybe we'll read b convening next week to see how this is moving on here with that's all the time we have gentleman many thanks am i guess in london washington and here in moscow and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at ortiz, see you next time? remember, cross lock with ah yes ma'am. oh oh. where is, is that where you,

at least the typical there is only 9, but already a university student that away means rational a point to let's see. yep. you got the restore to deal with a team with now brochure new passcode personnel. you're special, but i was the yeah, my i was thinking what the plan was to get on to him. was anyone shipping something with his teacher or was or reason to spend a good time?

i look forward to talking to you on that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such orders a conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about our personal intelligence at the point, obviously is to great trust, rather than fear a very job with artificial intelligence. real. somebody with a robot must protect its own existence with a gothic will further help all patsy skid. accordingly, the debris skis the push and push it ahead of you both or just somebody somebody

from a few minutes ago, but it was 3 to what i still a good at the but i bought a vehicle right from are you will be with you about this was a way of like it, but here for, for, for pretty whitaker leah from a brochure project with can welcome to max hazards, financial survival guide, looking forward to your beds window. yeah. this is what happens. dimensions in brittany del, at this happens. you watch kaiser report with

in human falsehood and stupidity that's most goes view of the relentless disinformation campaign by the u. s. establishment. the head of crucial security talks between the countries top diplomats on friday reports claims former pope benedict, the 16th failed to take action. i the allegations of sexual abuse among the clergy and the german cities of munich and friday, a victim of sexual abuse by a priest says how church officials okay unconcerned when he reported the incident. and.