for these people have no soul. ah ah, ah hello and welcome across that were all things are considered. i'm futile. well, for months the u. s. in the u. k. have warned that russia may invade ukraine, and yet there has been no invasion for their part. the russians have made it abundantly clear. europe's current security arrangement is untenable. the anglo saxon powers talk of war. russia talks about security. ah,

discuss these issues and more. i'm joined by my guess, ivan ellen in washington. he's a senior fellow at the independent institute in kingston. we have nichol, i petro, he is a professor of political science at the university of rhode island. and here in moscow, we have maxine scoff. he is director of the center for advanced american studies at moscow state institute of international relations. are a gentleman, cross that rules and effect, that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciated, sir, i would look like it. it's really interesting to me watching this on a month long, eminent invasion, a messaging from the u. k and the u. s. everybody is talking about a russian invasion of ukraine, except for ukraine and russia are not. i mean, how do you explain that? yeah, clearly a president zelinski and his cabinet are not singing to the same hymn book. and that has been a source,

as we read in the press of frustration in the united states, because the rest of the nato allies are predictably following along like that's about. so, you know, like you say, the bottom line is that there is not going to be an invasion. and that leaves me for me at least the most important question is, what do we do afterwards? what if worse comes to worst and there's no rush to an invasion? i'm going to look, i'm going to look for, for american ford, both. i really don't know how we're going to get out of the situation. i mean, you know, why is it the u. s. in the u. k. spearheading this here because we have had on 2 occasions that we know of publicly then you know, zalinski is not on board as nichol i just said here and he's actually pushing back saying it's damaging his economy. and why would you trust your major patrons if

you're evacuating your dependence from the country? i mean, and you're not a member of nato, and they're not going to send you troops. i mean, how do you unravel all of that? go ahead. i'm in. wow. i think the both ukrainian nato people are doing what they see is in their best interest. and of course, and he has to create a public, a sense of calm. where's the nato allies want to deter any possible attack? which i don't, which i don't think is impossible here because we have there's troops there, there's even the logistics, the blood, the, the hospitals, the stuff that you would do if you were actually not just an exercise, but an invasion. so, you know, they're looking at the intelligence nato is looking at the intelligence and saying, well, you know, this is very possible. so,

and we want to deter it. so we're going to be, you know, we're going to be as forceful in our public relations campaign to try to deter this . and of course, so lensky is in the opposite position. he might support that behind the scenes, but he has to publicly say, well i'm, you know, i have to keep the car, keep things calm, the economy going, etc. well, i mean, even if i can stay with you, i mean a part of my question is why is the u. s. u k spearheading this? i mean, everyone else is kind of taking their own playing out their role here. but the, the u. s. new case in particularly interested even to the point of hoping for some kind of conflict or maybe i'm wrong. go ahead. how do you as to that? well, i don't think they hope hope for conflict. i think they're expecting one, and i think they're pushing back on it. and that's, you know, that's leading. i mean, the us is the leader of the alliance, and people work to the united states, united states, even back during the cold war, was more concerned with other areas than the countries involved. and i think,

you know, the, the russian energy and cook is important in the russians. i have 40 percent export 40 percent of the europe gas and 25 percent of the oil. so i think, you know, other countries have more mixed here of these things. britain and us are, of course, geographically more separated from, from europe and then roger, so they wouldn't, they wouldn't suffer any of the consequences. they what they want, others to do. ok, that's clear here. max, i mean i guess if nothing happens, then the west one you were, they did turn invasion. i mean they, they played this up because also my cards. everyone. i think this is just been a propaganda effort more than anything else. ok. i mean, sending 3000 troops to poland and, you know, and that's not a major strategic statement considering poland is in nato itself. here. so maxine,

i mean, everyone else is playing the role. the russians haven't done anything but the, the by administration, the johnson administration will probably declare victory by the end of the week. what do you say? like in maryland to declare a is the russians are serious about the security guarantees and they're not getting a so i don't think this will be so easily even when i want to buy it. for now, we'll see that in the face of the electric russian region, the united states tremendous har to the credit in security, instability virtually and still in the no fly. so, oh, great. now, the insurance companies refuse to give interest are also, you know, the national currency is down. and i think the 2 things that are missing from the

conversational rationalization is a, what type of little interest with the russians want to pursue through the invasion . that is not clear and most important to the perhaps what i think is missing in the western worse is what kind of military maneuvers ukrainian forces do as of yesterday or the printing military. read it $300.00 for region. closer to dawn back a might be some potential and of course with it also shows some kind of preparation for some time with the construction or that there might be a need to rush to respond and really late in that case. and that's

a very clear, quote, unquote, invading part of ukraine camp has no control over over the since 2015 nichol. i, you hear this phrase a europe, whole and free. but ever since the end of the cold war that has been pursued, now, not including russia, actually excluding russia intentionally. how can you have a europe that's free and whole impression is excluded? you can't. and that is the point made by russian foreign ministry and coach. and it is also rhetorically been accepted by a number of western leaders. but they haven't been able to get around. what i think is the major objection. i remember, lord is may's famous quote, that nato was created to keep it,

and the americans in the germans down and the russians out. and that really, unfortunately, hasn't changed since the end of the cold war. if russia were ever to become a part of nato, or to have any serious voice in nato, it would mean a degradation of american power and influence in the region. and i think that's what ultimately, the bigger picture is all about. i don't think america really gives a hoot about what is happening. what could happen in ukraine, as long as it maintains it's not always distance, but a certain hostility toward russia. everything will be fine. they're generally don't care about the human rights situation there, which is gone. reserved for with the closing of 6 major television channels, opposition, ours and channels and not moms. the words here in the west about that,

i think the bigger picture from the united states is exactly a maintaining the status quo, and nato not engaging with russia on the issue of broader european security. and the entire education around ukraine helps to make the case for the united states as united states, as a vital leader ever. anyone is that sustainable? i mean, you know, you can talk about intimate invasion, but just for so long i that you can never stay level until the next elections but a whole week here. and that's one. that's one conclusion. i mean, even what your thoughts on well, i think my, my own views always been that nato expansion is a mistake. and that russia should have been brought into the post war post cold war and european structure as did in the congress of vienna, rather than after world war one, where they closed out germany. and we had

a big problem and were or 2. but we should have filed the congress of vienna and 1815, where napoleonic france was brought back into the european structure. and i thought that should have happened and after the cold war. but i'm not sure, i hope there's not going to be an invasion because i think it's a bad move for, for russia to do that. now, simply because i think you're going to get pushback, guerrilla warfare, if they do a full invasion, and you're also going to get, you know, lots of sanctions. and those sanctions will eventually do you know, lesson as, as russia copes with them. but still it's going to be economic pain there for a long time. and i think there are, you know, the whole thing goes down the tubes. it's true, i think rush as legitimate security concerns. and i don't think they have been listened to, but i'm not sure that this is a good approach that that garage is now taking. okay. i'm on that team.

i don't see that rush has had a whole lot of choice. so over the last few months we've had war, hysteria hyperbole, you know, they see an, an rolls out all the graphics and all that. it's a big show and all that. but for it was far as russian is concerned. nothing has changed because the west isn't a reply. constructively, to insecurity demand. 2 letters that were sent out on december 17th, one to the european, one, to nato, one to the united states. nothing's been done on that and that realm. go ahead. no, i think up my calling from here when hear about the congress and they were one, a pole in russia suit situation because both france and germany were defeated. and it was, you know, they were pretty much in the age of the winners. and it was a matter of ours will handle that. did you get a feel now that the cold

war ended in kind of mutual consent agreed to democratize into the stuff. so russia was not supposed to be a power loss, even though obviously the western mindset lost the cold war, but the expectations were different. so now is the time is kind of the 3rd time since the end of the cold war to review the secure border in europe. that was settled unfavorable to rush. and because nobody really cares a certain point. and that's why we've gotten to this point here. i mean, it's unsustainable, it's like that in mind that you gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break and we'll continue our discussion. really stay with a a

a with a. busy one of them id my calendar, i'm all chill now to go with . 1 a

with welcome back to crossed up. were all things considered on people? well, this is the home edition to remind you, we're discussing some real issues with okay, let's go back to mic like i declined. i mean, it's obvious that the, the post war, post cold war order is unsustainable for russia. so if it's unsustainable for russia, why, why, why is it that it is a on a magical and beyond the bounds for them to stand up and say, look, you know that this is not working here. major expansion is creating more tensions, more instability. and we need to reassess it. why serve the stubbornness in the west, particularly in the us?

maybe you've already answered. i mean they, they, they want to maintain, had gemini and it works for us. so why should we change anything? i mean, is that the mindset you alluded earlier to the washington echo chamber, people outside of washington, of beltway, really don't understand how deafening the echo chambers. you really cannot appreciate the interest of other nations in the same way that you listen to the competing interests within essentially the military industrial complex. russia strategy is an interesting one. and it's a traditional one for powers that want to draw attention to their grievances. it's brinkman ship, they push to the edge believing that they have control of the situation and know exactly how far they can go. the problem with brinkman ship, as we know historically, is that we don't,

although the actors in charge are not really in charge of everything. and then they get scared of the consequences of their own action and eventually backed out. in the mean time, sometimes they've learned something from this crisis and re address it as in the case of the cuban missile crisis. and sometimes they go blindly about their businesses. you haven't, even, i mean, i view is the historical example of the cuban missile crisis. but when, and in this case we, it can be applied in reverse. i mean, you know, we, we had kennedy telling khrushchev, you know, if you don't take those missiles out, we will increase as well. cuba is a sovereign country, has right to have its own friends and alliances and all that. and then kennedy replied, if you don't take those missiles out, we will. is it an appropriate analogy? go ahead. i but how, but, but a, go ahead. let's remember how that very quickly,

how that crisis actually got resolved each side. got what it really was. it eventually administration, one, the public relations war within the united states. and who show of god exactly what the soviet union wanted. the withdrawal of those missiles and establishment and been effective parity and recognition that parity between the united states and the so you know that it was the cuban missile crisis that created the soviet union as a superpower in america's mind. and after that, things found out, okay, i mean, even if they could cuban missile crisis in reverse apps in this, in the situation. well, i think that, you know, that there are 2 very different, different crises, but i, it is a question whether that, whether people learn from these types of things. and i don't think banks midship

ever gets anything because it's dangerous. i mean, maybe, you know, come out as we, as everybody did in the cuban missile crisis, you know, and we didn't center the world, but yeah, you know, it was sure scary. and i'm not sure if that's the way to go. right. and i think it's true, russia snap and listen to here, but i just don't think, you know, beating up on a smaller country or threatening a smaller country if you will. is really the problem problem is nato. and i think it really should, it, wouldn't they really need to negotiate this, and maybe this will be a heads up to nato that, well, maybe we shouldn't put ukraine in there. and that might be a good outcome. but getting there through this through these means is not, is not the correct way to do it. ok, but maxim make well, how other, how other way to do it. i mean, rush has been wanting nice word expansion of nato since the end of the cold war, and they've demure every single time. so, you know, this is not,

this is not our interest. you're moving your alliance military lines to our borders . and of course why she was ignored, left right and center, and now we're at the rubicon and you can ignore it. now you're there. ok. i mean, i don't see what other, what other ways i mean write a letter to stilton berg and say, please don't expand anymore. those days are long in the past if they were ever effective at all. go ahead. maxine, well i think it was a 20 plus years presidency to try to find out why it's hard before a you know, well later a a day. ready or 210 slash ice coalition for russia went to syria, every single attempt to find common ground. and i think this is

a last attempt to try to find some common ground to secure russian perimeter through the walls. you know, we're talking russia do something with this means there are no means, but it won't see yet. and this one else is the mind games. and the information worker was pretty much a any just yes, except who troops around and people are thinking some kind of scenarios and freaking out. and it's a similar, you know, last year for a 100 troops, wagner, guys, in venezuela and people with these guys capture for. so this might happen. so i think there's a lot of history and

a lot of you know, so i didn't even know what to call it. a response to the person who promised is a serious thing. but it all is considered as a last resort if you know was not compelled to talk. so to me, to rush introduce learners are a, to compel the west to talk, to take or serious the final and be to deter ukrainian military from possibly a to fill those newspapers because they're not in their interest. well, we have to point out to the government chapter dumbass before and up to 14000 casualties. so it's not unprecedented. and is there a part, you know, they always talk about russia moving its own troops inside of its own country, but they never talk about ukraine moving its troops in it, within its own country to the point of contact. but again,

i don't live in the bubble nichol. i mean, maybe it was made very clear. it's like a fight for ukraine. so why wouldn't want ukraine is a member for it's are willing to fight for it. go ahead out. at present. no one is actually saying they watch ukraine as a member. it's more in the negative. if they insist, then maybe we should consider a, but i do agree that the agreement is likely on the fact that ne, that ukraine membership, great membership in nato is not in the cards for roughly 20 years. and by that time we'll have a lot of things will change. i do want to remind everyone in this context because we say we, we talk about war and diplomacy too much as if they. ready were opposite poles and they're not there really on a continuum. and plows of this reminds us of this with this famous phrase,

the war is a and extension or continuation of diplomacy. all the more. so the threat of war. and that i think is what is what we're seeing, that the perception of the threat is much greater in the west and the panic he response in the worse. and i do have to. ready simply professionally judge it as panicky response. i'm really plays into rushes hands because they're the ones who will come out of this one way or another, appearing as of the more the com or the more seasoned. and the ones who really have a better grasp on what the real situation is. ivan, ivan, even misprint with reply to that because you know, the, the, one of the problems with what i call a propaganda campaign is that you can't keep this fever pitch going on indefinitely here. ok, there has to be some kind of resolution and,

and the frustration that i see on this side is that there is still not been a really meaningful, concrete reaction to the security of draft that they've been russia. and i've read them very reasonable things. are i mean, they're debatable but why it's off the table. you cannot consider these things because it's appeasement. and it's been a can, it's, you know, how do we get around that? because this is hysteria is getting in the way of reason. go ahead. i. well, i think the west says, well, we know we might negotiate, boat can't do with a gun to our head that's, that's the feeling here. and i, i share some about that because i think the russia, if they deescalate it. 3 you know, put and can say, well, the out the situation here, but i want, you know, it, we better have meaningful discussions. and if, if that doesn't work, then i guess, you know, all bets are off but, but, you know, it's,

there's no acute crisis here. this is been just come out of nowhere really. i mean, of course, it hasn't come out of nowhere because it has been a decade of nato go going eastward, which is the route. i agree, it's rid of the problem. but i don't, what i don't agree with is that the way that this is being handle on, on the russian side, i don't think this is, there could have been many different ways of a back channel saying, you know, couldn't, could have said listen, you got to do something and he said that you, nick, he said that in munich in 2007, it's a pretty amazing speech. he said it already. he said it over and over and over again. you know maxime are rapidly running out of time. the so security is indivisible, that only applies to nato countries, doesn't it? it doesn't apply to russia. that's the implication that comes out of brussels every day. go ahead max. well, the, the think is a, me, too, in the united states, they're actually willing to discuss things. russians with their have

declined to us for years. this has to do with these are actually are willing to discuss. but this is important to the secondary and is a, a important to you and discuss the com. the concept of in security is key to further, especially if a gentleman we've had a wonderful discussion always to little time. want to thank my guess, washington things and, and in moscow and i want to thank you for watching us here next time. remember, oh,

ah, these people learn from their own experience, how vulnerable a business is to the bank. so he pushes my business over, the age, pushes me right to the edge, bankruptcy. now i realize we were good. this isn't just the back that may be involved in this is the concept. see, firms is, is the lawyers, these people have got you want all this stories at a walk kind of whistleblower. tell people's marriages have broken up and lost their family homes. it is spectacularly devastating for people's lives. they have committed suicide, but left behind norwich. they explicitly state that it was the constant intimidation and billing by bank officers that led them to i took the spear,

it's obscene, these people up nor sold a border line to nationalities. when you finish as a merge, we don't have a charity. we don't have a vaccine, whole worried needs to take action and to be ready. people are judgment. 2 common crisis with we can do better, we should be doing better. everyone is contributing each in their own way. but we also know that this crisis will not go on forever. the challenge is great, the response has been massive. so many good people are helping us. it makes us feel very proud that we are in it together

with ah, the war that never was the western media is left with the egg on its face after a flurry of predictions that that'd be an invasion of ukraine today. instead, russian troops returning to paste after wrapping up drills at the border. soup, got some can't seem to stop banging the drums of war. the u. s. president for one who's insisting that the threats of an attack remains very real. or with uncertainty over ukraine, pushing up energy prices. germans favorite shortage in electricity supplies could lead to nationwide blackouts. we hear that concerns with our politicians continue to act like they do in the foreign policy with russia and other countries. blackouts may happen. the problem is politicians are afraid of not being elected if they do something wrong. it is hard and crucial about the price of batch on transportation. there definitely needs to be.