needs a bit like apple sacrificing, i think, and i think that for me which and given everything does he have sat and written about the russians and the ukrainian historically being one people. i think he has to over stop major personnel historic and perhaps even the religious tablets you authorize those military strike on the premium infrastructure. do you believe him when he says that he has no other option? well, it seems that she's personal value system. there is something which constitutes an existential fan to challenge to russia, not even to its security as well, too. it's near survival. and this is something that can justify any actions which are supposed to protect the country. i think that the president who can should be now thinking about his legacy. and i think that ukraine is one of the

permanent headaches that he has. but do you know my take is the given situation as it is right now, we should probably spend more time thinking about how we can resolve this cart. and frankly, i was a little bit encouraged by the outcome. so the 2nd round of fashion training negotiations, because at least they were able to getting well only from your tear and corridors were still very far away from any kind of compromise. unfortunately, people out da killed every day. but at least some of the gaps, the positions seem to be narrow. if they come up from the positions i narrowed, but i think it don't leave on the humanitarian issues. are they agreed on the strategic or tactical issues?

i don't have any progress whatsoever. can i, we will discuss how it could possibly be resolved, or at least in which direction besides would be moving in order to do that. but let's consider a little bit of the, the sort of settings for this conflict, because you've addressed the nation after authorizing the strike, why russia was acting in self defense in an effort to avoid that much bigger war, or the one between russia major and the one that could have involved nuclear weapons . is that options? do we on the table at this point? no, i don't think so. i would say that at least in my judgement and escalation is still possible and that i know a lot depends on the decisions made by the most atlantic alliance. because there is a strong pressure on need to,

to get involved in this conflict. in a more active way for something more than just supply and weapons to ukraine and sharing intelligence information or with the, with the can you afford this? for instance, where there is a discussion about a no fly zone over u k. and the need to tries to to have such a no fly zone. it will constitute danger of direct nato russia. conflict. can these concept unfortunate can easily escalate to the new level. now, even before the beginning of this military offensive russia a major, we're in disagreement about the nature of that disagreements for most good was always bigger than play, accomplish, and also conflict between russia and ukraine. oracles over them,

back to the west. it was more or less, you know, a little disagreement. do you think which framework do you think is getting better at this point? and do you think i have these horrendous events and the last couple of days? very tragic events. in any case, do you think they have a broad rush and make it closer to how they evaluate reality? well, i think that term right now it is difficult to, to talk about what's going on in terms of local conflict. because the west eas invoice to the west will continue to be involved. i can easily imagine, for instance, you know, volunteers or most notice no matter how you called them from invest in countries. so it gets into training lodge a lunch of numbers. we can imagine the situation the

west might start more to magic military systems to ukraine and definitely discounted to below. also negative impact on other or somebody general issues that russian major have. for instance, i can imagine small townships in the black sea or maybe in the baltics in the far north. i think this conflict might incentivize certain political forces in finland towards sweden to consider getting closer to nate or even join in nature. show my take is that one of the dangers of the situation that might lead to more comprehensive,

multifaceted conflict between the russia and the west. and not just, you know, this military confrontation, but also confrontation between societies. because when i look at what is going on in the west, i feel that it is directed to not only the or not only dawson did a ship or the military, but it is directed to the russian society of the russian people that i think this is very dangerous, because these trend, continuous lusts then it would be very difficult to start building the relationship when the of this stage of the conference is already behind us. so it might have been a long term consequences in terms of the relations between the russian, the west, which neither side will profit from mr course. and there is a lot of speculation with regards to the timing of creation. but the one that i

hear the most of the last straw was the lansky speech of the munich security conference. she allowed will be change in your cranes nuclear post, essentially hinted at the possible acquisition of nuclear weapons, which was in most with eyes at least aggravated even further by the lack of any review or any process from western capital. do you think the west would be okay with keep refreshing from with x rays or perhaps even how he is here to refresh it? well, just let me say that i find the statement of the landscape in munich to be very inappropriate and unfortunate. i think that he shouldn't have done that. what about actions do west or rather the lack of any reaction to that?

well, you know, it's talking about the expert community. of course, there is, i think widespread opinion among the assets that you can is not in a position right now to get back to its alleged nuclear stages. that there is no experience in the soviet union. most of the components of nuclear weapons manufactured outside that is contradicted by the russian intelligence reports. well, i think the intelligence is looking for, you know, even very small opportunities, but to notice so we do exist. so it is a kind of forward look in approach. maybe not now, maybe 5 years from now, but of course ultimately ukraine is a country which has the technical capacity to produce nuclear weapons of just a matter of time. it's

a matter of money. so metro persistence and the ability to concentrate that needed to intellectual engineering capacity on this issue. i don't think the west will be okay with that with no, no, i think that's definitely a very serious problems. not just for moscow, but for the best in capitals because that might produce a chain reaction. for instance, ukraine might share its technologist with other potential productivity has gone to the door to clear all ready. i think we have to remember the, you know, what they did, they shared some of the ballistic technologies that they had and i'm getting very exactly they, they argued that some of the unexpected to break to see in the korean ballistic program. so originated in, you know, it's hard to prove the position. there might have been some other sources of

technology to cane is one of the options that, that's clear. so in terms of ballistic technology is, i think are ukraine, has a lot to offer. and in terms of nuclear technology is it still has to cover a lot of ground before the option becomes at least a clear available how well you know, i'm deeply convinced that nobody is interest just nobody's interested to go in for that. would definitely create major problems for mom from h, and i do hope that you can, the leadership understands the, the potential barrels of such a decision. a commercial break right now, we will be back in just a moment. mm. mm .

i look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for. people are given it by human beings, except we're such orders that conflict with the 1st law and to the patient. we should be very careful about our personal intelligence. and the point obviously is to make a truck rather than say, a with artificial intelligence with protective own existence. it i want to

with this with you with you. i'm with full credit. it's going to be out of wood from beach. still easy

to the station, but in the board with ah oh a a a

ah welcome back to the partners, i'm the director general of the russian international affairs council, mr. cosmo. before the break, we were talking about the spectra of ukraine requiring in nuclear weapons. and this whole new play issue has a very measurable, very concrete dimension. because during the cold war it would have taken alum based missile from the soviet union around 30 minutes. so he's a major american c, and i think according to some estimates that i have here in russia, if you're a right to be supplied by some major or

american material, these have been reduced to 5 or even 4 minutes. and that's perhaps a theoretical scenario. but what i would want to ask you about is what kind of a change policy change that have produced? would have made a more pushy in regards to russia or would it have made rational, compliant with regards to the west, a lifeline time is likely to be reduced to strategic hello, todd, who doesn't jamaica osher lie more on now, a potential preemptive strategist. and i, in turn, this is likely to her being down the level of the overall european us

strategic stability are dead. it is a said, a dangerous option. it can be dealt with by dia, alerted of by ya. create in all some law or provisions for non deployment. let me give you just one example, which might explain what i mean. in 1999 when a german year, they knew it a unified, there was a special agreement signed the so called 2 plus 4 agreement to 2 german is and for a country has said that to run in the 2nd world war and the decision was made to that the, it part of germany would join native because the united germany of was a part of nature. but to that, to know nathan was talked, you know, for him to know you clear weapons. ah,

but no military exercises. i will, i will go to the territories german. so the former g d r is even now 32 years later, he's not coverage caused by the nater alliance infrastructure. or there are no american tools. the or there are no nuclear escalations the. so this is how it works. if you want to reach an agreement that would contain the need to infrastructure. when east, you should think about legally binding treaties that food said specific limitations or the specific types of weapons, personnel and activities or this directly. and as we saw, basically this is not inconceivable to reach such agreements so that in my view should be applied to ukraine as well. you follow

a goal is to contain bee adversarial military infrastructure getting closer to our board, the mr person, i think you would agree that russia has made an attempt to last each time to propose such talks and such agreements in relation to your brain and neutral status . to think trade when it comes to going for struck to military infrastructure on that's are true, but the using that didn't work out in putting words i believe that is what has allowed them to. busy russia authorizing the tribes on to the ukrainian territory. now, according to put in this operation, have 2 objectives. one is the military is ation. i think my law should have been taken care of by russia destroying much of your friends, military infrastructure by this point. what about the 2nd objective, so called the vacation? how do you even interpreted? well, i think it's a far more ambitious goal because it didn't blight reset or the

ukrainian state for inter blinds that gain s to change its political system. that, you know, the system should be more inclusive, that it should de, incorporate some political forces which are marginalized right now in the political life. and it should alter side. so some of the had to come national corpse. i think that these go with big stream the difficult to achieve it is more difficult to them now. for example, get into a neutral status of ukraine, which is very, very hard in itself right now, especially after what has happened. doug, definitely difficult to impose such a state just so even when the crumbling proposes dina publication as when it's a tradition of an objective, do you think it actually means that or is it more,

more or less sort of as a broad political agenda? well, you know, we do it, but i suspect that you should look at the red lights advanced by, by dashing federation some lines which i really had, which i even purple. like all nature membership for me to for the for you came and there are other lines to be show might look a little bit big, which can be negotiated. hopefully, it can be pushy to to, and of course the modalities of their not vacation is probably one of these lines. this is something that has to become a metro throw the negotiations. hopefully, you know, we will be able to reach a compromise on how to distill miss between this purple lines and the pink

lines. but i'm not in a position to judge about that. i think it would be a hard job for both sides. now it's very dramatic to use it for by ration will undoubtedly cost it a lot. you wrote a lot about it in recent weeks every day. rather, i don't mean it's relations with the west and sanctions, but also future development. it's relations with the outside world, but i think the calculation in moscow is that from now on political actress in the west may think twice or perhaps writes about encroaching on the russian interest. do you think there's actions as despicable as they may seem to western decision makers? do you think they may change the calculus in western capital when they consider policy? russia? well, of course. so i think that if you look at the volunteer actions or i don't think that many of them predicted what would happen and these actions demonstrate that

there are some leadership committed to defend and ash, a security interest. he was an all the means that the disposal and it's a very serious signal, but the rest it's yet to be skin call. the rest will reply to that. but it's a very serious signal about russia intentions and the, the commitment of dash the ship. but she could, she use military force on such a scale is shocking, said in the beginning, but it's not the 1st example in recent years. in fact, i think in our very neighborhood, we saw a garbage on that with tax that support of turkey using limited military force to reclaim some historic character from armenia reasonable checks back, the kinetic force will make its return into the realm of geopolitics. after the relatively short period of trying to manage each other by preaching values.

well, you know, i guess the kinetic force has always been via a blue cover example of the u. s. so gratian not iraq 2 or 3 lives. i exceptional, exceptional means a supreme there should not be compared. right. well, you know, frankly, i have to tell you that the american actions are called so a lot of criticism in europe and countries like france and germany, belgium did not support this operation. but a beetle, i can remind you of your patient there, get his tongue, which was a 2 logical operation as well. i think the difference is that we have a scalar military operation there. i think the central europe, it's not even the wilkinson though, the balkans was also a short for,

for many of the tides innovation to central europe. and did suggest that kinetic force can be used more just to in some remote areas of the rolled, which you are important, but still not perceived as so critically important. so for the european security, and today we see a conflict to right in the middle of our own continent, which is clearly a new development. and i can only hope with these turns will continue to we will get back to the negotiation table and they can agree on the european architecture which would provide for an acceptable level of stability in the conduct ability in the european continent. i mean, you're one of my last questions i heard you say just recently that are far from being law practice represents a transition to a new international now, which is still in the process of text me and just station i wonder if you could

talk about the current source, obviously you can actually see them right now. how would it be different from the one that we have a moment? well, it's a big question. of course, the picture is not clear today, but i think that we are entering a very dangerous period in the international development of periods of a lot of all a to let you know a lot of for conflicts in various parts of the world. unfortunately, we see trends to the globalization of the senior major decreases of direct for an investment problems with international travel. with c protectionism by many parts of the world. maybe we will end up with some regionalism. so the former global trans will continue but not the global,

but the regional level. at the same time, depression, global problems is likely to increase or we are facing the world with deficits. the also major commodities and essentials like food and stretch and trash water energy. so i think that what we really need to move the global governance to a new level. well, that would be extremely difficult to because the world is not united to split. and that's very difficult to get to the common denominator on such important issues as global governance. well, but on the other hand, the old, the major breaks. so is these happen to be more so let's hope that this one will not have to be that'd be in danger, engender rather than these changes. it's not been great pleasure talking to you.

thank you very much for being so gracious to be a time and good luck. thank you. by now and thank you for watching hope this year again next week on the well, the part, ah with mm ah ah, is your media reflection of reality?

in the world transformed what will make you feel safer? high selection for community. are you going the right way or are you being that somewhere? which direction? what is true? what is great? in the world corrupted, you need to descend a join us in the depths or remain in the shallows. tonight. so you are a book because they see with

the way, would it be a good a good, huge. but you want to have a difficult prologue then you shouldn't have been really well just you said all of us. i was actually in this particular what potential pushes mean with pushy. i get some push a somebody see way lead today due to by a

a local from southeast and ukraine to blame ukrainian forces for saturdays failed evacuation. only 3 on just civilians. money is to leave today, according to done yet. republic, officials with both sides accusing each other of the fire violations all over the place. are possible documents i. d, 's, ukrainian military uniform, her parents here the so just here, she'll call these left them here and put all the civilian clothing before mingling with civilians. in a chaotic retreat from their faces, ukrainian service men leave vast amounts of equipment behind as they lead russians offensive.