the hello and welcome to cross park where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle. on this addition to the program, we discuss the ongoing nato, russia tensions. we ask, what is nato strategy? also, what is russia? the strategy dealing with nato e sport expansion? and what are the likely outcomes for both the cross sucking nato rush attentions, i'm joined by my guess, charles, who bridge in london. he's a security analyst and former u. k. army and counterterrorism intelligence officer in washington. and we have micro mom, p as 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 hog rules and effects that music and jumping 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

tension. 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, why would you have this guy perennial? is she really of a nighttime, a future? of course, ever. since the cold war it's been costing around for road, it has to remind relevance and i 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 photo whether declared or undeclared,

through the vested interest through funding of, i think tanks and so on from nato. and from the, the what might be quality, a mobility, the military industrial complex, in terms of ramping up tension. so instead of is constantly needful, ever more weapons purchases. this is another story of course, and we, we know that very well. and there's a consequence that's always going to be the backdrop for 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 are the threat. and of course, i democratically elected government, we should say, of course i was led to detention the situation that were coming to him. 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're telecon innovation is going to take place in the us,

of course, out from russia to ukraine. that's been happening now for the last 2 to 3 months. but really on, on a daily basis. but if we think about in a week, your 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 retail much the 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 and not play well for the russian hand as well. because off to russia to west are involved in a negotiation at the end of the day, much of that is behind the scene, but much of a tight out on the airwaves. and cleanings cost is far honest. and certainly those in the west and that agenda also ramping up. the tension may actually work in russia at the moment. in other words, you've got a situation where the west media are actually probably over 70 and eventually how congress, 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 conflict 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 for attention. most of those 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's 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 grabbed 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 burke, you know, and on his endless, i'm babbling going on. this is real. this is real and it's really meeting us rate 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 its 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. and put it, there is no where 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 its narrative 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, has 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 in ukraine, historically neo 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. to 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 soleberg of 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 just fighting to continue to exist and waste billions and billions of dollars a year on generating a threat. that is it really there? well, it is now your are up to the border. you know,

somebody's gotta 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 blinking 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, you reacted by saying that the u. s. will react decisively will react swiftly or something along those lines. so what i think it's happening is the nato 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 on foothold in europe, trying to decide its own face, trying to basically have a role in international politics. and, and they don't, is, is us, is it 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. i think what we see as a historic historic moment where we can have the soul. russia, as you 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 once a lesson, it is a sign of alliance that is in decline as in the constant search for its own no reason of existence. if i were gonna rep fastly coming on the brake. charles, is it possible to have pan european security without russia? because that's exactly what i was trying to do. charles? yes, you're right. of course his heart that needs to be taken into consideration. i mean, it's the major security factor external factor, according to ne, a part of the say, i disagree and also i didn't want to speak as of set out there. another reason porsha ne t be constantly costing around for this new role in the uniform mission, is the internal fractures within itself. that your search, right? it's huge hip hop something that we can come to remove that. ok 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

t. ah, ah. join me every thursday on the alex salmon show, but i'll be speaking to guess of the world politics sport. business. i'm show business, i'll see you then. mm. yes . oh, i will. at least the typical there's only 9 but already a university student that away on national a. yep. you got the doors to deal with a i think

with a brochure. and of course with level your special i was the yeah my i had to get what the plan was to get up. so she was in your mind getting this i'm delighted with with this teacher was reason this one is a good time . ah

ah, welcome back to cross talk where all things are considered. i'm peter labelle, to remind you we're discussing nato russia. tensions. ah, okay, is go back to michael in washington in michael in my introduction and as i left the 1st block and 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. u. okay, to do to 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 does how ins, 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, for 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 built road initiative, a whole economic environment separate from the west. and you're seeing that, given the fracture within the u, within 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 neo conservatives 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 in biden's news conference. when you 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 miller calling his chinese counterpart saying wrong, stable. everything's okay here. i mean, the state crafter of the elite in the us and nato. it's just unbelievable. i'd like to point out also, michael mc chrome. he frances taking over the rotating presidency of the you. he's on tim overtures, the german chancellor. also, we are doing this and then, you know, you're not on the same page, get back in the law and get back to the,

the fractions 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 advanced 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 active 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, what else 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 for. they to 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 the problem i hope that can be solved by us. actually, my 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 you had i that was respect michael, you want to jump 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 of us, that's, that's all fences 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 leslie. 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 on it on. i alluded to this, 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 the funding 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 and in exacerbating those tensions. but really, i think the public comes where people then put forward positions publicly,

that then become red lines that can't be negotiated away. because often women in negotiation, people are always going to put forward, presumably more than they might expect to get. for example, an indicator of ukraine where you apps that you write that is about fall mode and you kind of dog will like to emphasize at my cause any point that the fact that there is these whites pretensions anyway. and he's institutional issues between nature and within nature itself and nato's relations with the outside world. that 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 started last 23 months. and arguably, either the last 8 years that those tensions exploited for a very low co er benefits. and of course, and, and that some coaches 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 and hopefully it stays a posse flash point, for example. russia has that's how it's read lines that are, this should be known i to membership that should be no troops deployed notes on that. that should be great limits and exercises within former warsaw pact. countries that already within dietary, i suspect seminars. red lines will be, were turned out to be flexible. some of them, as in d, will be some of the demons, not necessarily nature, because nights are, as you say, always pushes for a 0 sum game, whereas you've got biden, i think it's a bit more shrewd often and he's not. but i think in this case he is, i think he understands. and as indeed he recently met slip when he talked about that, if there was an incursion at presuming to you kind and a response might not be as bad as if there was a for an invasion. so he's already made that distinction in these or so, of course, inadvertently, or perhaps deliberately reveal with those divisions that exist between the western

and ours and particular option seen himself and what nato itself would actually want. and so consequently that there is, i think, room for compromise and at some points 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 i got compromised to be reached at the lawson they want is a remove of that to flash point that currently exists in eastern parts of you crime . michael about we have 50 seconds left here, isn't it? that kind of ironic to you that the more the west helps their ukrainian friends, the smaller ukraine gets, you have the illegal qu than they lose crimea. then they attack 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 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 and give, especially when you come right up to the brink. i think at the another proverbial day, unless someone instigates something from within, ah, ukraine, that you will see more flexibility. and if not, then i think you're going to see russia doing much more proactive make legitimacy. great. i'll read, man, maybe will read, be convening next week. to see how this is moving on here with that all the time. we have gentlemen many thanks. so my guess in london, washington and here in moscow. and thanks to where we were for watching us here at ortiz, see you next time. remember crosstalk with ah

ah ah ah ah ah with so ah with ah think we'll find out about the skill

courtland, anybody's keith is going to push and push it. if i had a fever there, should somebody sound like a few minutes? got really was 3. see what i still love with it at the but i looks like when your school was like you believe about what we did get hope. all right, so um what you, what would be if, if you know what you discussed, i would recommend that you like it, but you offer a pretty weaker lia from a body shop for documents that are in your body with them. i missed your call. yeah. didn't this possible form i was and got started and all the 3 dollar someone with it before actually. and then

universe stuff expanding so where those new creations come from a switch. that's is another kind of question the science can oh is your media reflection of reality? in the world transformed what will make you feel safer? isolation for community. are you going the right way or are you being led to somewhere? which direct? what is true? what is great? in the world corrupted, you need to descend a join us in the depths. or remain in the shallows.

ah ah, useful meeting with a candidate exchange of opinions at a critical moment, thoughts how the russia u. s. foreign policy. she described their talks in geneva. they come on maids arising tensions over ukraine and nato expansion. we recently notified congress of our intents deliver, and 17 helicopters, the white house analysis, it's sending military helicopters to ukraine just hours off. the de escalation talks with russia. other nathan members are also ramping up weapons supplies to key if it is enough to scroll through a couple of random pages to be sure. none of the provisions stand up.