unlikely to do so before 2025, the survivors and the bereaved erecting another high rise building while lessons haven't been learned, is unforgivable. we still haven't finished with the enquiries social their proposal to be given, or even new laws or recommendations or whatever it is. it's like is if we carry non profits before lives, i'm that this can't happen. when will they ever learn the still nothing has been learned. they say lightning doesn't strike twice. but is this really the place to build a tower and with questionable safety precautions, as the community is still in morning and awaiting justice charge, edwards dusty archie london. 29 minutes. that's when i will be back with another full and fresh look snooze this is our international that, that with that

all you have a food stamp of possible form. everything got started and all that needed to be done assumed which of literally bus plan and to 4 actually. and then this stuff expanding so where docent creations come from and hopefully the switch is not the congregation the science can so ah with hello and welcome to cross talk where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle . on this addition to the program, we discussed the ongoing nato,

russia pensions. we asked what is nato strategy also, what is russia's strategy dealing with nato, eastward expansion, and what are the likely outcomes for both? ah, cross knocking nato russia. tensions i'm joined by my guess, charl shoe bridge in london. he's a security analyst and former u. k. army and counterterrorism intelligence officer in washington. we have 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 t dot com, all right, general, across our rules and effects, 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 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 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 future? of course, ever since the cold war it's been costing around for roll. it has to remind relevance and a full of course. in the background of all our considerations, it always has to be borne in mind that there is a massive incentive 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 the vested interest through funding of, i think tanks and so on from nato. and from the, the what might be quality boy elite mobility, the military industrial complex,

in terms of ramping up tension on. so that was constantly needful, ever more weapons practices. this is another story of course, and we know that very well. and there's a consequence that's always going to be the backdrop to these kind of discussions and 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, sam democratically elected government, 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 telephone at an event he's going to take place in the us, of course, out from russian to ukraine. that's been happening now for the last 2 to 3 months. but really on, on the apps on a daily basis. but if we think about on 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, months 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 grace tied out on the airwaves, of course, is far as honest and 70 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. and let's see 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 comic 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 come see push retention. 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 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 it 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 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, but 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 it 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 its 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. or this is how they justify their existence. but it, but the, it's very clear to me that 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 and unless there is a problem. my concern is that because of this encouragement by the west, you're going to see elements within ukraine. historically neal nazi groups such as the as of the, again pushing this and, and actually creating their own black fat flag 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 are 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 griffin element of this weapons and all of that, the 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, this, 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'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. react decisively will react swiftly or something along those lines. so what i think is happening is the nato is trying to justify its own existence because nato, as we know, it was, was created for 3 purposes. depending western europe against soviet aggression. there is no soviet union anymore. it was created to bring together rival powers of france, germany, the u. k. they're not big 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 it just isn't. 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 film 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 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 itself and reason of exist, we're going faster 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 notate, but other disagree. it also added to walk on the other speakers have set up the another reason shanae to be constantly costing around. for this new role in uniform, bishop is the internal fractures within itself. that video starts to read at future pop. something that we can come to remove that. 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 russia tension. stay with our team. ah,

ah, ah. 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 clean finger on you. you are doing it to yourself. we started adopting those techniques when i was station in mosul, among them were stress positions, sleep deprivation and do some type of therm. yeah. 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 leader sandra fudge. shimmer of effective interrogation. ah, ah, ah. ah ah.

just welcome back across the dock were all things are considered on peter labelle. reminder, we're discussing nato russia tensions. ah, okay, let's go back to michael in washington. you know, 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. okay. 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 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, and there's nothing historically relevant to that statement that no one can have a veto. now it says how it's threatening your security. you're going to be to all you want plus more. go ahead, michael. yeah, i think your, your analysis is corrected. it's, it's, it's, this is something much larger than just ukraine, right? this is the, the dying spirit of a u. s. leadership, a u. s. role as the leader of a world order that has seen 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 impetus for the, for russia and china and others to consider a multi polar world order, which they develop their own in depend, our 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 worship, 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 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 the, it has sent us some, some serious reverberations here in this country. frankly. i mean, it's like general milly calling his chinese counterparts. you know, saying, i mean, we're all stable, everything's ok here. i mean, i did state kraft of the elite in the u. s. and, and then nato is just unbelievable. i'd like to point out also michael mc chrome. he out, france is taking over the rotating presidency, the e u. he's made some overtures, the german chancellor, and also with doing this. and then, you know, you're not on the same page, get back in the line, get back to the, the fractions you're talking about is very, we'll allow alexei let me get. let me ask you, i mean, you know, the, we have stoker birth nato is just a defensive alliance. i mean, it's, you know, he hit 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 to find that it's a defensive alliance? go ahead. alexi. well, especially when you consider that nato acted as an offensive alliance in maybe i'd acted as an offensive alliance and syria. it acted as an offensive alliance with it . he's been creeping towards russian waters for, for the last 30 years. this is the, the, the sort of, 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'd understand 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 is a defensive alliance. how can it be offensive? lines, and yet that is, that is the problem that we have, and that is the problem i hope to can be solved by us actually by us, by russia, actually talking tomato and making this boy 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, so sound, so i think, yeah, it's, i mean, if you talk about it when you alexei, all chance alexei noted of 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. that's how we got arms control agreements. okay. when coming him is coming to an end, it's an it may be an ideological conflict, but it's only coming from one side, michael in watch. and if you want to jump in here, we don't have you. you had there was respect michael,

you want to jump in in washington? yeah, i was just gonna say that it is. it is. natal describes herself as a defensive alliance, but it has nuclear weapons on european soil and, and, and in turkey. i how, how defensive is that? every $100.00 that's, that's all fences that is offensive and, 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 offensive missile. i don't know what they're talking about. well it's my co, 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. on eli long, i alluded to this. hopefully. the fact that behind the scenes negotiation to taking place that 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 attend to repeat 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 to negotiation people are always going to put forward. presumably more than they might

expect to get. for example, an indicator of ukraine where you absolutely right, that is about far more than ukraine without. also like to emphasize and mike was any point that the fact that there is these whites pretensions anyway, and he's institutional issues between nature and within nature itself and makes relations with the outside world. that mean those tensions can easily be exploited for, for the benefit of sectional groups. and some of those are close. when did you kind of south, we've seen that and that's absolutely been the case started last 23 months. and i'll keep li, either the last 8 years that the attention to exploited for a very local and benefits. and of course, and about some cultures 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 known and to membership that should be no

troops deployed notes. and that that should be great limits and exercises within former warsaw pact. countries that already within dietary, i suspect seminars, red lines will be, would turn out to be flexible. some of them, as in will be some of the demands, 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 presumably in to you kind and a response might not be as bad as if there was a full invention. so he's already made that distinction in his or so, of course, inadvertently, or perhaps deliberately reveal with those divisions that exist between the western and ours and particular attitude himself and what nato itself would actually want. and so consequently that every so 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 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 had 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. and 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 wife 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 in give especially when you come right up to the brink. i think at the another proverbial day, unless someone instigates something from within the ukraine that you will see more flexibility. and if not, then i think you're going to see russia doing much more proactive a maybe we'll re be convening next week to see how this was moving on here with that's all the time we have gentlemen many thanks. so my guess in london, washington. and here in moscow when, thanks to where it be worth for watching us here at ortiz, see you next time. remember, cross talk with ah,

yes, me id with you. i, lisa typical, there is only 9, but already a university. students that away in slash a seems a new model, but when the, let's see. yep. you got the floss distort padilla there. he did not. then know choose to snable to call with the he may come can only cost. he will show control such programs. now brochure of course with level your special i want the yeah my but i said of course thinking what certified like was to kinda touch him was a new mom. she's in the some dignity with that he was not covered with soon lose with when you most of judge leave you on could you put his teacher over was also

reason just released a good a, [000:00:00;00] a useful meeting with a candidate exchange of opinions at a critical moment that is how the russian and u. s. foreign policy chiefs described their talks in geneva, which come mid rising tensions over ukraine and nato expansion. we recently notified congress of our intent to deliver. and 17 helicopters, white house announces it's sending military helicopters to ukraine. just hours after de escalation talked with russia,