ah ah oh, are you doing? what are you doing? i please go in heavy in canada's capital with law enforcement making 23 arrests and issuing more than a 1000 tickets. as the massive movement to paralyzing was downtown area prepares for a 13th day of protest. and i'm still with you asked me if russia wants to fight with nato. let me ask you, does night. so want to fight a war with russia. vladimir putin warrants nato to stop playing games and the fif, ignoring moscow's security demands. the strong words come as the russian and french presidents agree to work on stability amid the ongoing tents situation around ukraine. us though, takes a different road with president biden threatening, that a crucial european gas pipeline will be shelf if russia doesn't bay. there will be

no longer north stream to we will green. and how will you do that? i promise you will because you're headlines this hour. i will be back in just under an hour's time with another fresh look. stay with us, our international with with hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things considered on people about wild tensions remain high over ukraine. one thing has abundantly been made clear. russia and nato have fundamentally different ideas. about pan european security and neither side appears to be in the mood compromise. is this why the propaganda war

is reaching new heights? ah, to discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess. all robinson in ottawa, he is professor at the graduate school public international affairs at university of ottawa in pittsburgh. we have dan caballo. he is a professor of international human rights law, an author of the plot to skate for russia. and here in moscow we have to meet re, so he is deputy director of the center for comprehensive european and international studies at the higher school economics regionally. cross stock rules and effect, that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate it. let's go to ottawa upon, i'm sure you came across the exchange that ned price had with matt lee of the associated press. and that's why i entered my introduction about heightened propaganda because it was truly an extraordinary media experience where

the 1st of all, you have to believe me. second of all, you doubt us intelligence and british halogens than you're somehow a stooge for the kremlin. i mean, is this where we have gotten to because there's, there's no evidence of anything. we're waiting for godot, we're waiting for an eminent invasion. this has been going on since november and all a while we'll talk later in the program, is that the quote unquote unity that nato keeps talking about simply doesn't exist, go ahead pull. yes it was, it was a great exchange. of course mattie has done this before, he used to do the same thing to jackie when she was looking at the state department back in 242015 and ran rings around on many occasions. but you have to write. but the problem with lisa intelligence leaks and statement says that there is a lack of supporting evidence and we are being told to take turns on trust. and, you know, perhaps in my youth, when i was myself as

a member of the intelligence community and you can, i would have done so, but we've seen, unfortunately on altogether too many incidents and these claims turned out to be untrue and best to be complete young verifiable and therefore be very foolish of anybody to take them entirely on trust at this point. so when that price says, you know, if you don't believe us, you can take a news from the russians or something, i think not seen a disingenuous. he must surely understand, but there is a, there is a lack of trust, you know, falling on from a rocky w. the fact that, you know, russia has been imminently comparing to invade ukraine now for 100 days without doing so. but people are going to be a little skeptical, and i think that all viewers should, should, i wouldn't say, you know, dismiss everything better. be a state department, a u. s. government, somebody was unsure, but nonetheless, if they don't provide supporting evidence, treated a good degree of skepticism. and dmitri, let me go to you. i mean,

it rushes, the subject of so much of this commentary and, and i find it really made. i always look at it as a, an enormous amount of patients here because so many things that are said are just absolutely absurd, waiting for an invasion that russia has over and over again. that is not in the cards. and what this, what this quote unquote imminent invasion is, is a dodge because russia, the russians keep saying, are all on december 17th, they sent 2 letters, one to the nato, and went to the united states. and the russians, if they do, we about these 2 letters, it's not talk about, it's not about ukraine. and that is discursive direction. that western media and western governments, and particularly nature want to focus on. it's not about you think it creates a symptom of the problem. and this is the information war that is very hard to fight because they, if you're interlocutor is not going to react to you. how do you, how do you control the narrative? it's impossible you're talking at parallels. go ahead metering. well 1st i fully

agree with you. i think that the west tries to diverse, the agenda tries to focus on green instead of discussing the fundamental issues. so the rational concerns on don't be european security. and this is done deliberate, a plan in order to divert attention from the core issues. the process tries to put on the table, namely nato enlargement. and secondly, it is done in order to delete the minds of the russian demands about the security given those. because the russian security guarantees demands, based on the premise, the nato enlarges to that often borders, thus creating threats, thus creating challenges for us and russia wants to build that. so from the russian perspective, nate, to expand it, is revising a distribution list and rational wants to store that expansion. whereas if you

present the situation as the muslim russian innovation in the ukraine, then you put everything off site. though, from this perspective, russia expansion list congress, which tries to invade ukraine, which conducts a revision of this for foreign policy. whereas nato is at the defensive and tries to prevent this loss of nation. so it's absolutely food stamp thing upside down. but if it is down, so the delivery of a day, one of the things i find very peculiar, if not very frustrating, is that this is all, i'm in the garb of protecting democracy. well, ukraine's democracy's pretty dodgy at best. and again, in the western narrative about russian aggression, russian and pending aggression, russian expansion is want to rebuild the soviet union. all this nonsense here. it's

never noted in the narrative that in, in february of 2014 the united states. and it's a, fortunately, over through the democratically elected government in ukraine that is never mentioned. so if it's about democracy, then why did western powers overthrow and democracy in ukraine? and by the way, the person that was behind that was victoria new and, and she's back in our, in the bind administrative. go ahead. yes. yes. and we know from telephone recorded telephone calls that she was quarterbacking to coo and quarterbacking, who was going to take over. it was going to be in the new government who was not going to be. and of course, again, according to her, the cia is spent billions of dollars on a supporting making sure that the people we want power are in power in ukraine. but also if you talk about democracy, we have to talk about the don bass region as well, according to the men's agreements,

which the un security council with the united states approved re um those that region has a right to some self autonomy. right. and an a kia has not honored that part of the agreement. and of course, this bothers russia legitimately again, 1st of all, that's an interest of democracy. the u. s. decides which countries it's going to balkanized in which, you know, a small parts of countries. it's going to recognize that here, the world said, you know, the net skin in lieu hans has a right to some self autonomy. there should be elections there. ultimately, if they want to have a territorial, a certain amount of, of, of self rule they should have that in the us just ignores that. now. in order this

makes it worse as it became, governments signed by russians might have signal or of that agreement was the government that said that that they would implement them and they haven't got it. let me go back to ball in ottawa, i think there's a silver lining to this with these tensions here. paul, is that because if you look at the nato response to the russian letter was boiler plate, it was worthless, it had nothing of value to it, but the american one actually had some trimmings there that you can chew on is that there is essentially a recognition that yes indeed, russia as security of interest and it has to your political interest as well. i mean, it was a defensive alliance and less on speed dial ok. but this letter actually was saying, it kind of got a point though. it doesn't necessarily mean it's, they're going to actually act upon it. but there is a recognition here, and i think that's actually a bus for the right hand side during all the spitters by head maybe more of a recognition of bosch and send them within the car later. the problem is that nato

has to and operates on the grounds of consensus, which essentially means it's going to go down to the lowest common denominator. and therefore, a lot of the agenda is going to be a german ready by friday. so stay sent back. it. thanks, potent and salt lake by actually end up having quite a strong influence on the overall outcome of out of 10, which comes out later. because that position has to be consolidated with any, any documents. whereas on a, russia has clearly decided that it can do much more bind actually with the united states, and it can do operating from nato or european union. so i really, i think, trying to speak tonight has pretty much that, and you may be right, there may be a possibility of some small incremental progress through talks of united states. so that's sort of us having left b i n f treaty is now. so talking about re introducing it. yep. which, which is,

which is i plus on the russian point of view. these things cost me the much larger demands. russian federation was making effect as demands are unrealistic. i'm not entirely sure why they, why they were made. because america is never going to agree to them, but the money might be some agreement on small things. i need it by step. but putting it on the agenda, i think was a wise thing to do. looking to go, she ation, you never get every thing you want. so i mean, that was a dmitri or you're not in your head there. i mean, i think this is part of the game, but here, i mean, you won't listen to our demand. so we're going to make ours public, we're going to send, we will let the whole world know that this is what our concerns are. i think they have made some progress. that doesn't mean it will succeed. dmitri. well, i think that there was some absolute us demands made there for the sake of

negotiations, but i think it's extremely important to make it clear that the process considers natal nolan lodgement and the cancellation of the very prospect even hypothetical prospect. ukraine in georgia, joining nato as real, not as an absolute, this demand for the sake of negotiation. but as a very real and realistic. the mom, i am the, from the russian perspective, it is possible, you know, never saying that it is possible for the demands to be addressed by the united states. because again, from the russian perspective, the statement which was included into the response documents from the united states and nato, that's some principles of made. so they agreed principles of european security. it may go from from stating the closed door policy agreement,

georgia off the floor. this is, this is a trick, this is a 3 can play poker because there is nothing either in the nato, joppa in the native trees, or in the 1st chapter of new neural which come pals and obliges nato to include all big guns that wants to join make up for their lives to make decisions which confident, which is biased, the joy and nato joins is able to join me and which one which, which will law. so from the russian perspective, when they the claims that it can not simply cannot exclude the prospect of your graham and ga, joining nato be absorbed future. it means simply that the alliance uses that i'm going to be breaking up at your break. well,

your discussion on some real news say, oh, join me every thursday on the alex simon, sure. i'll be speaking to guess on the world politics sport. business. i'm show business. i'll see you then. algorithms and neural networks have been following us everywhere. we look online because our relationships are what matters most us and that's how we find meeting and how we make sense. um our place in the silicon valley ceos don't mentioned in that slick presentations. however, on the ghost workers who train the software, humans are involved in every step of the process. when you're using anything online . what we're sold, as is, miracle of automation behind your screen is alone rubel workforce. that feeds algorithm as for next to nothing on a very good day,

i could do $5.00 now. a really bad day. i could do 10th, and these workers are invisible by design. it's about labor costs, but it's also about creating layers of weston responsibility between those who solicit this kind of work and need it. and those who do it with welcome back across up were all things considered. i'm peter lavelle. this is the home edition remind you were discussing some realtors. ah sorry, gentlemen. i want to read a quote from a politician of the last few days. the quote is the geopolitical objective of russia today is clearly not ukraine, but to clarify the rules of cohabitation with nato in the

e. u. we don't have any buzzers, genuine, but it's jeremy chancellor. no, not nadia. dmitri never kissinger ma chrome in many. well, ma chrome think ha gentlemen, isn't it interesting? it sounds like he's speaking cram when talking points here to meet her. you're laughing. why? well, i think that micro on the right of the said, yeah, i can do that and i'm using it as it is multiple. if you grade, this is the fundamental issues of principles of rules or european security. but you know, it's important to understand the macro. now wants to make something your wants to deliver something, because course your faces elections 1st and 2nd live before you positions itself as the political leader of the statement also reflects the traditional

desire or wrong which started, which emerged long before they got an escalation about some new initiative, new outreach with, with russia, where you can do that, the goal of the pollution. so the goal according to which europe cannot be secure against russia, that some sort of arrangement with russia has to be made for europe. whole 3 of the piece. okay. well, if i mean that's, that's the whole point here because we talk about, you know, the mother of all sanctions and the pain will be overwhelming. but i mean, if there is a, a strong sanction regime against pressure or something that hasn't even done that, they claim that it will do, which again, kind of puts your mind into abreast. so it's the europeans that pay the costs and, and people like my crown and gentler show to beginning to realize that is that they're the net losers at all. the u. s. what last, is it a bit sprayed with russia?

it's almost, it's minuscule. european union is very, very different. so that's like the americans want the crating, the by the russians to the last ukrainian and everybody else picks up the bill. that's what it sounds like to be. well, it's absolutely true. and if you say europe's waking up to this, germany is not on board with this back there preventing that, they're not giving over flights for armed ship into ukraine. as you mentioned, france is not on board. of course, these are 2 of the most significant countries in europe and, you know, we have to remember. and again, as an american, i have to remind the americans, you know, these are countries that had 2 world wars, you know, where their countries were devastated and russia as well, of course, and other soviet states. and the u. s. has never had such a war. the wars we fight a wars of choice and we don't know what it feels like to be occupied or to have our

cities destroyed europeans do. and they don't want this again. they don't want lord war 3 that they have no interest in that. and as you say, they don't want to sanctions regime that's going to hurt them. that's going to cut them off from natural gas supplies from russia that are just right. they're very close. look to upside of all this to me is this could destroy nature. this may be the thing to end nato, which is an antiquated alliance. after 1991, it had no purpose and it has no purpose now. and this may be the thing to destroy it, and i welcome me a it. i agree with you in principle, but let me, let me go to paul. i mean, this was, this is a way to maintain american hegemony in europe. and then it seems to me, and i'm agreeing with dave here. i think this is a of the end game for nato because it, it, with the indivisibility of,

of security. i mean it's, it's in tried in the helsinki final act, it has been over and over again and trying and then when push comes to shove, no, we're not going to apply here. but you said something earlier, paul, but i think is really important. nato expansion has actually worked against its unity because of youth pointed out the baltic. republics, you have poland. it's turning into a wag. the dale wag the dog situation where they're taking maximus positions and the french, you know, in the, in the crow out the hungarians, you know, the, you know, we don't really want to go that far. is this really and turning and making the alliance more and more brittle, and maybe that is, explains the for roaches. a heightened propaganda that is coming out of the u. s. in the u. k. i don't, i don't says on nato, i'm going away any time soon. beat the institutional interests involved. so notice that the survey, no way that's, that's gonna happen just as, as too many

a party to, to get a sense to, to shape. but if it doesn't expand ben, you know, what's, it's ambition? well, i mean it, some it, at the moment it's found it's, it's found, it's found itself a role which is defending europe against russia. that will keep it busy. now keep it busy for a few years. and because, you know, i mean the, the space for i sort of come and go, so, you know, we had rogue states fragile states ethnic cleansing terrorism, you know, one after the other. and as, as, as each, each last one doesn't quite come up to scratch. you find you on, but this, this, russian, mom is in the center of a better because you've got terrorism. you company justify massive armies or whereas with the russian frances is quite suitable for that point. you don't want to sound too conspiratorial, but i'm, you know, it is, it is very suitable. and to me in that regard, i'm also, you know, i don't,

i don't see quite the divisions that i think the rest of the day, for instance, or germany. germany seems to not know where the hell is there at the moment. on the new government, the foreign minister made a statement of sale or yesterday saying that germany would back ukraine, whatever. pretty much a basic cop blash which is. so we're not going to actually do anything for you to home, but whatever you do, you can do most of it, which is because today was sort of thing because if, if i, if i go between russia and ukraine, what happens the most likely scenario would be because of some by ukraine to try and we'll try dumbass militarily so, so adding the training on by saying we've got your back regardless, is very responsible. so i think is there a problem about policy? and the moment is that when we, you know, we, we don't actually support ukraine over way. right. and we don't send the weapons and, and we won't give them a membership of night out of time, tommy,

some of them. all right, well. 4 let, which i'd say we've got your back regardless of what we do, which that gives them no incentive to, to, to carry out the conditions of the agreement. baffled, keeps this whole thing rolling on and keeps, it keeps the aggravation going. so it's a very responsible policy, but it's an irresponsible policy we can follow precisely because it doesn't really matter very much to us. and that was a lot of brownie points. you can get a politician for clustering without really having to pay any price for it. but that, that, that means you're not dealing with serious people demitria this, these are not serious people. i mean, then what is russia supposed to do? i mean, how is it supposed to react to all these different voices, or it's the wonder that they, they, with the russians, withdrew from the joint commission. they have the council, they had because it was useless as a waste of time. the letter of that, of the russians and, and the reply was boiler plate,

as i said it was that they could have written it before they even read the letter. it was so boiler plate. ok. so, i mean, from the russian side, how are they supposed to treat these people? i mean, who do you listen to that? the why the letter was sent to the us because they're not dealing with the european union because when you talk to go ahead to major, well 1st let me agree with all completely of that made. there was more going to go, we're waiting there. so future, the course nato is the institutionalization of america to germany in europe. and as long as you can most become as subject an agent for itself in the car security, real nato will survive, right? when you leave the agency or your role in order to allow native will disappear, we just don't see the agency and i in the future, you will west of things themselves. unfortunately, do not know how to. so why, for the world that we're facing without america, including france. so this is why ok, they to will continue to support with whom russia will continue to bowl i with the

united states, 1st and foremost, i am confident like bronson germany. right? i mean, i strongly doubt that russia will talk with the central and eastern european congress with nato as a law, as alliance. but it doesn't leads to right the course. again, all the decisions are made by the united states. your west european conference can play the role hypothetical in a mainly in terms of ukraine implementing needs. good ramos, i'm yes, i fully agree also with paul that's statements like we will support your brain under any conditions but extremely comparable. by the way, your grading is obliged to implement the means agreements because of the international law because as dan right said, they were enshrined in the un security council resolution. now your brain

explicitly fails to implement the meet the needs agreement. so bronson, germany basically co authors of the means agreements and parties of the normal the form are to exert pressure on your grade when it comes to the overall negotiations about european secure to the system. well, we do have a jump called or part of this is big united states. well, today the u. s. is the main security player in europe within, within nato. and i think russia will combine diplomatic negotiations with the united states also with france and germany. perhaps with the believe i am continuation will be of the miller to refresh because military pressure is the only way unfortunate lead to make russia or, you know, to make russian concerns. they consider that by the way,

i do not agree fully. such a response would have been written even without reading the prosecutor to the mos. i think that there has been a certain movement on secondary shoes. but over the now, the united states are willing to talk about issues with russia, with which they have not been willing in the american response. they agreed, yeah. they real quick. what other tricks can we expect 25 seconds because it seems like there's no boxes empty because net prices and i show with such a red bull failure. i just saw some news stories from yesterday saying that there are, you know, u. s. mercenaries in the dom bass region, you baby stirring up trouble. so who knows what the end game is here? there are, there are members of the u. s. ruling class, who i think do want some sort of confrontation and i'm worried that they will do something to promote what. ok german that's,

that will probably give us cause to convene again. that's all the time we have. want to take my guess out of my pittsburgh and here in most or i think our viewers are watching us here to see an ex member. ah, well, they directly resell, it says content to us and decide who sees what content when and how much of it. facebook claims that these algorithms are there to learn about our specific preferences. actually, this is untrue, them shaping preference is tomorrow. person finds fake video saying this, then this content ranks at least 20 percent or maybe even 40 percent.

this is a very dangerous thing. look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such orders at conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. at the point obviously is too great truck rather than fear a job with artificial intelligence. real summoning with a robot must protect its own existence with.