slide and the forces of darkness. oh, well, in a sudden way away or yes. when we speak about their nationalism, they're violent aggressive. nationalism which are, is present in ukrainian society for many years as us, and especially after the cool, 2014 and $2.00. we all know that in the nationalism, he's one of their wor, asked evils of our, their contemporary history, which emerged in europe in the 2nd part of the 19th century. and has been poisoning europe for the decades caused to ward wars the 1st older and the 2nd world war, especially and brought in man's human losses on the european steeds and societies. we, in russia, we know that nationalism is the one of the most dangerous things. if not them, if not the most dangerous thing. oh, about which we can even speak about that death from what i heard he put in say he

never mentioned national. he was talking about nat says him, and he was talking about supremacy of the western supremacy and to some extent. impunity say if it's indeed a battle between good and evil, once again. what do you think he defines as or as evil? well, i think that he defies you, might be defining as evil or them our self confidence of our partners in the rest that only they are having that's not south cause. and that arrogance is actually also mentioned that where aragon may arrogance of our partners in the west and they are strong and genuine, believe that only they are those who can decide about which internal vision of justice can exist can continue and which can not. so this is a supremacy as i will define it, their absolute self confidence in the knowledge of only one universal truth

in a i find this set of metaphysical aspect of their russian western confrontation. very interesting because it's a bit like a coded language. the general public usually, ah, mrs. is the bed. i think the leaders are using it to send the specific message to each other. and, for example, you're buy than in his reaction to russia's recognition of the breakaway republics . said this. who in the lord's name does put in thing, gives him the right to declare a new so called countries on territory that belong to his neighbors. and that's, i think, a question that that's worth pondering. what is the source, the current, the morning, and the source of just fair decisions and legitimacy in, in the world today? it's definitely north international law. so what is it? unfortunately, it's not a death in the international law. the nations have been trying to develop international law as

a universal instrument of universal justice behind which there is no military power, which will translate its own values prude. these capability to exercise international law, basically before the 2nd world war, the situation to global balance with our was based on the strongest nation and their national vision of justice. but they could actually effectively balance each other off the 2nd world war when we got the situation was out many strong states. the international law was invented after the collapse of the soviet union. the more to paulo walled emerged for the moment or longer for the moment, and this universal vision of justice was t hm. and taken in their own position by the united states. so i am i understanding correctly, that the return of use of force as a tool of politics not only in russia's hands, but also a previously lived in many examples in recent history from signing from as ever

john and all the way like cherokee, the united states are all the arabic conflicts, et cetera. we see definitely an interesting cation of using and military tools in your politics. is that a consequence of the international law as a framework that is devoid of military force, it not being effective or it not being fully realized and not being fully practice? there is an excellent definition about this problem. it sounds like herb the in the beginning, all the power politics simply means the end of the power monopoly of one country. so we used to have the power monopoly, a foreign country of the united states for more than one decade after the cold war . and we remember what has happened to the slideshow. we remember what has happened to iraq, and several are those smaller states. so, and are office are on the said the other countries started to grow up their own

cumulative power capabilities. and the united states have been relatively weakening . so the other styles of congress states started to challenge the united states in one way or another, china, russia, turkey, and the united states. or are they simply trying to get what's their own? despite of the american of joe, by the rule, by the rules of the order which was established after the end of the cold war, the very, the very desire to her to take it. decisions on their own are considered as a violation of the rules of the game because the manual of the game established after the collapse of the sooner was that there is only one country which can decide for that for, for the rest of the international community. now i mentioned joe biden, i, a moment ago and he are also condemned by flagrant violation of international on the part of the fresh which are coming from a years to president is,

is not even ironic. but i think law including international law is not a shallow concept for the russian leader. why do you think he, he chose to explicitly violated by ordering strikes onto the ukrainian military infrastructure? because it is a violation of the national law, regardless of what position will take there because he is responsible in front of the russian people. he is responsible before the russian people. and he is a responsible beer to keep the nation which is elect him and eve, the leader of the country, will be responsibly behaving at the expense of his own nation. it means that he is not properly occupying his position and that decision was mad with a lot of criticism, not only from the west, but from the substantial part of the day of the russian population. many of my friends are very indignant about that, and i, i find myself in

a somewhat difficult situation here because i spend the last 15 years covering conflicts all around the world, usually with participation of some western countries. and to me, the war didn't start here on, on thursday. it didn't started on thursday in the ukraine because the consumer has been going for 8 years with over 10000 people killed the overwhelming majority of them on the air break away republic side. but even more broadly, you know, they have so many wars over the last couple of years, serial ebay, yemen, afghanistan, and the lease goes on and on. why do you think people i so overly sensitive and so exclusively outraged about the use of violence or the use of force rather in ukraine when it's been all but normalized with far greater is tall in other countries. more think that generally people fuel credit,

quite comfortable when only one big nation violates the international law. and this is a reason for down to be nervous, even hysterical about what is happening now in her role in the round ukraine because it just destroys the picture of the universe a day or vehicle at all here. glove and yeah, really close around the world. you establish stuff of the end of the cold war was based on the simple assumption that there is only one country which can violate wiley to the international law. and everybody was rower too low key was it, given also the fact that the united states managed to provide significant, significant material benefits to many countries, even to russia, to many countries of the international community. so people could live with it. so this is the background, the fundamentals of the reaction of course these reaction l stories. ready are result of. ready their natural care, the war is not a nature or condition for people,

even though their nations and the steeds of fighting wars for several 1000 of years . still it is. it makes us humans that killing the other humans is not nature or for us and its own usual is very big factor. oh and leveled a willingness 1st. but of course why i am very sorry for saying that. some people feel that their personal individual comfort may be, can be damaged, that they will not be able to travel any more to the united states, or for study or 4 or 4 visit. i don't know. so people generally don't care about anything. what is not connected to their personal individual well being where the kids in the bus have been killed? morosely by the ukrainians. it did not harm rushing my. might some of my colleagues or the other people here and everywhere are in terms of their or own personal won't, will being. now, this is a done that in danger. and the problem of ukraine has existed at for the kremlin,

for quite some time. it's been understood that having a hostile country on the border is a strategic problem and put himself in his speeches in his articles and expressed that he was se mulling over that. he would have to see the russians and ukrainians fight. but in this was somewhat where the things were moving. why do you think you chose to act? now because as you said, the war has been going on for 8 years. people have been killed for 8 years. but what do you think needs to move right now? in order to respond this question properly, we need to have the same information as their leaders and steeds l, the steve sand governments do have, we don't have it. i believe there are now we are at their very and all for the period when the resolution of their problems was the european secured to order are possible resulted. general war eve de enter and leave has been said by

russian leadership for many eyes times. even the ukraine would have been incorporated into needs her developed nato military infrastructure. the war of choice which is going on today could have become the war of necessity for russia, conducted in, not in order to defend the interest, but in order to survive. and when you fight the war in order to survive, you can resort to all nuclear. but abilities you have, and we all know the treasure has significant and danger, as well as united states, significant and dangerous for they should entice humanity, military capabilities. so this war is fought in order not to put russia in the position to war for survival. okay. it's a hey, we have to take a very short break right now, but we have been back in just a few moments statement. ah,

what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy, even foundation, let it be an arms race is on offense. very dramatic development. only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very difficult time time to sit down and talk ah

ah ah welcome back to want to part with you with a bunch of program director of the of all di, discussion club timothy before the break we were discussing the military operation in the ukraine and vladimir putin defined the goals of the current tribes as demilitarization and de notification of ukraine. now technically, i can't understand what demilitarization means. you just take out the crucial military infrastructure. but what about the so called dean? that's if occasion, what doesn't even mean in practical terms. well, 1st of all, starting with limited through zation over the country means that the territory of this country will never be used as a territorial bees full of their activities,

which are dangerous for the russian security. full stop. the notification means that there isn't a huge number over individual seed ukraine who have during the last 8 years committed crimes against people in odessa against people in dunbar. seen some of some other parts of the country. so people who committed crimes order their nationalistic pretext, but to listen, it's one thing to, you know, order, limited stressful military infrastructure. it's relatively easy to do, given the technology. but, you know, rounding up are those sir individuals. many of them, as you mentioned, putting them through the some sort of legal process. you know, that requires a totally different infrastructure that requires the policing in place that requires some sort of some sort of control over the legal system. does russia really have a habit and how long it could possibly take?

i mean, it's one thing to take an action against the infrastructure, something else entirely, to actually take care of the people in day ideas. while think of that as president poodle said, the russian, the parish in ukraine, is not about occupation of this country. and is not about that. they're state building. it is about regime change and it is about bringing to the power in ukraine. people who are not connected to the crimes which have been performed during last 8 years. and when, of course, after that of course, the ukrainian government will be able, willing and support that, of course, by russia, in exercising their activities directed to hunt the out and bring these people to justice. it's not for russian, where security authorities to, to, to, to bring these people to jail. and it's also not for russian security authorities or even civilian authorities to decide when and who is going to be a,

the ukranian government and what its priorities are going to be. do you think this current operation may result in the change of power in kia north? of course, this is a main goal. we in russia have been decrying regime change policies and other countries for many decades. e, i saying that russia is now into the regime change game itself. and if it is what makes him believe that it can be more successful than some of its quote unquote partners, we're still going to, we're not doing move him the remote country somewhere in the iraq or afghanistan. we're doing it in the country we. she's a close to russia, basically sarah, by russia, and which is populated by the people who speak russian. and do you think those people who speak russian are, would just accept eagerly and the government that russia would propose? so in one way am eagerly earned him and very soon we'll be able to support the government to which will be friendly to russia and friendly to peace in

europe. some of the, some, some of the people will realize a bit, a little bit later. so i don't think, i don't think it is a problem. russia has many years, many centuries of the historical experience dealing with these territory which recall ukraine well and not very successful experience. i have to say, given how quickly i ukraine turned inimical to russia after the collapse of the soviet union. i mean, i think it's why they recognize in the russian analytical and circles that decided that russia, that ukraine rather has become saw vehemently and, and to ration is there is a consequence of, for it to some extent rushes own policies. so this is a concrete consequence of their communist policies in supporting ukrainian nationalism as a position to russian nationalism. so basically the biggest evil,

the biggest fred, which the communist government was fighting in the soviet union, was russian nationalism because russian nationalism was only one danger for the power of communist party. and in order to plight these thread, the communist government supported written national small nationalism is immoral them ukrainian was the biggest in long, small nationalism. and i think that that ukrainian behavior after the end of the cold war after their independence of this country, was supported and was actually based on the fact that those people who came to power have been grown growing up in the ukraine or 60 seventy's and beginning of a cheese where the national is. maude is seely, anecdotes about monday or of c, and all these on cirrus treatment over there, atrocities committed during the 2nd world war by the ukrainian nationalists. so all these people who have grown up in their, in the, in the soviet union, which supported ukrainian nationalism. do you think this process of fire changing

our political hence, gape? i, in the ukraine entails be still carried out within the democratic framework. or i suggesting the return to the communist at times when essentially it was more or less straightforward. well, i think that eve, yeah, i remembered then in 2014, according to the old pulls, more than half percent of the graham population was supporting the close relationships to rush. i believe that ukrainian people give them the conditions of the free expression of their will without the permanent intellectual and physical and psychological terror from the nationalists. the will be able to elect a democratic government. one of the statements that was picked up here in moscow with a lot of concern was a zalinski speechwriter. ms. bishop dominican conference at which here was talking

pretty a straightforwardly about his intention to rebuild ukraine's a nuclear military capabilities. and it didn't meet any response or any rebuke, whatever from the western partners, this same countries who have been, i sanctioning iran for the last 20 years for its pursuit of peaceful nuclear nuclear program. and this, and this seems like a pretty m pretty odd idea that nobody in the west would think that a hostile country talking about the resurrection of a military program would not be perceived as a matter of concern in the west. why do you think, is that a sign that the ukraine was essentially allowed everything, or is it simply the lack of i don't know political vacuum and how do you interpret that? well, i think that's one over the biggest challenges to the international security to now

he's the unstable and unstable and very dynamic situation in the united states and political instability, social problems, race problems, gender problems, all problems which are american society facing. now, the become very turbulent for the, for the international landscape americans electron, lynn, americans have strange election select by them. maybe come on hurry. so come to office at the bottom. but this has a moment, so we cannot be confident that america will be a responsible member of international community. and we cannot be confident that one the one leader in the united states to morrow off tomorrow. we'll decide to give you a quote from nuclear weapons. but it's not that i'm giving the ukraine nuclear weapons. it's about the ukraine's own capacity, because i don't think, i don't think that the koreans own capacity could have been a problem. i think what could have been a problem in the united states giving to ukraine nuclear weapons as the deed to britain in said 50, or perhaps as they did the to israel. i mean even in a,

in the case of israel it's, it's still kept under the rock and still an international to bore nuclear proliferation is an international to boys. and the fact that janski's allowed to talk about that freely from the missouri, doom of the buick security conference organ and, and her and his role is not to feel that there are what are you suggesting is essentially that they're from a strategic point of view. ukraine is a problem and would have been a problem for any of its neighbor if it was there in the, in the current configuration that we see not for any or for its neighbor, are not merrily for any of its neighbor, but for the international community. as a whole, because the present pathic runyan development could put russian position russia in the position of defending is survival. now let's talk about the survival of ukraine dekaiser. for the most part we spoke about the, the military action in ukraine bed. and there is also 2nd front and the breakaway

republics. when the house of fire, some russian special forces are now being pushing defrauds line are further into the the territory of the ukraine. what do you think is the gall and the limits there? you mean, are you speak about this republics in republics? yes. well, this is a request. so as to the question, which it's very difficult to answer because it depends on our vision of the future . the future of this territory. if we see ukraine is a relatively big steed, may be in a certain future dis, breakaway dawn bus republics will joined the rest of ukraine in order to make us more internally, nationally, politically balanced and more strong, industrially because there's the industries to you in numbers. but if you reason, we will cease to exist as a huge steed in on, in european terms. huge. oh,

maybe bo see the other. out on him was republic, switch or self warning. territories will, which will emerge out all the ashes of what we used to call ukraine for 30 years later on foot. and that suggested that the and military operation in ukraine could be finalized in early march our which perhaps prisons are present, will present an opportunity for the russian and ukrainian leadership. what have her this to come down to the negotiating table and perhaps discuss the bilateral relationship between the countries. what is the scope of negotiations there? and the thing that you will. busy need mediators of any sort well as a but pacific was through his, shes the, she was girls very much beyond my, my capacities, all of their common fortune telling academic theoretician for her 0. well, i think our, i think that having negotiations with zelinski perceive is not an

obstacle to put him to justice afterwards. if he has committed certain crimes against the people or few korean people of them boss. we have examples in the history when the leaders like middle shoes, for example, who have been accused of committing crimes, have been negotiating agreements and after that hakan herb herb been taken to just as you mentioned this whole on conflict. a rough test, out of the inability of rush and the west to agree on basic security principles in europe with what happened over the last couple of days and what may happen in the near future when do you think that file is last and do you think those negotiations will continue on the basic security principles in, on the continent, you know, geo politics matter. and in the very heart of. busy avery procedural question of every organizational quest for bold rules, norms and law. we have a territorial problem which territory can be considered as

a possible conflict point for the nation. so we'd shot dangerous for the peace in the, in the international community. if we have ukraine like that, if you green her could have continued to b, r more closer to west, more distant to russia, or their security architecture discussion could have make sense. but ease fer, we are, we have gone so far as now we can, we can see that there will be no more territory in europe, which needs to be taken by their, by their security architecture. what exactly do you mean human danny enlargement of native they'll have to start one way, liam. and, well, i want to say that enlargement of nature to these hers already stopped the way that this beginning coll freshman had to read to ration against ukraine. and if we, if we resolved the problem which we wanted to resolve within the international

agreement by force, i don't see the significant reasons to continue negotiations. yvonne demon too much here is still and had to normalize our relations with the, with the, our european neighbors. i'm in perhaps it's not the 1st part here to right now, but it would be better if that the ties in europe for a little bit warmer than they are today. i absolutely agree. and i think that in the couple of years we can come closer to where this issue in practical terms. okay, well we have to live in there. we'll see what time will show us. thank you very much for time and thank you for watching hope to syria again next week on the walls apart. ah, with

ah, it's been 30 years since the soviet union collapsed. mom miss got louder. go to chill on to what the problem yet, nuclear, you know, talk, so shown where you also trust one coil or tom ukraine was one of the independent states that emerge from the ruins of a super awesome. would you also get on google greens? come a little more surely confusing some of the yeah. can last new lucian west intermediate better lung or a surface, but it is a pretty helpful watch at the past 3

decades. green light for ukraine. eye witnesses were cool. the events, there should be more or less to do to shoot in a deficiency of chipotle. what are new to know if that order? i'm not sure, but if i told them once with marvin windows and what other forces were at play, you have to use the room. you show in sion machine, those them you put in the kid what it i'm going to consume little bit when is it shows us it was a little versions. only take a look at ukraine, 30 years out, the gaining independence with what you know, unless you mean like unity recorded live, but a will. it could be issue. you have lush, will still holding still for a

lot. with tonight, following a raft of aggressive nato statement, sort of which new arms delivery is pledged by block members. president potent puts russia strategic deterrence forces, including nuclear units, on high alert curriculum, easterel. i'm ordering the defense minister and chief of staff to put the russian army, the term forces on special alert. the e u. and am says, the closure of its air space to rush and flights, as well as a ban on this channel. our t. sputnik and subsidiary companies from broadcasting in the block, brushing and ukrainian delegations are on the way to the ukraine. belarus border as i speak of.