ah, ah, with me going welcome to wells fargo, depression, general and military theories that carl klaus with famously said that war is a continuation of politics. by other means. i guess today it takes that a bit further by suggesting that these day and age sanctions to you are advancing the cause of war. and in the case of the ukrainian conflict, we have both isn't likely to leave a lasting peace of discomfort. i'm now joined by hans kirk, later president of the international progress organization. dr. kirkland. good to

talk to you. thank you very much for your time. you're welcome. now let's 1st deal with a search and, or is a continuation of policies by all means, i know that you disclose you use in your writing quite a bit as cynical as it may sound in our progressive age. is that still to is that still the case not only in the ukrainian context, but also broadly around the world, it is still the case. indeed, of course we have to have the war is for politics by other means. if other forms of politics have failed, that means in particular if diplomacy has for you. but certainly, whatever may have been said since 1945 since the foundations of the

united nations, the use of force by one state against another state, is still a kind of almost regular method of the conduct of international affairs. we are told quite often that this was supposed to have changed with the adoption of the united nations charter. but unfortunately, that is not true. and sorry for interrupting i just wanted to sort of narrow our attention a little bit, a whole listing attention to now and i that, i mean, of course, the lens and ukraine. he's a very difficult decision for the russians. we will have to deal with the consequences of oral economic and political consequences for many years to come. but the question i hear open here in moscow is whether it could have been avoided

whether russia could have it. she wanted it as, as a stand. so goals without the use of military force. if we look back how things develop, it could have been avoided. if one would have implement those points that were agreed upon by both sides by both parties of the conflict. you are in english nations in minsk and in particular, i mean very precise agreement on specific measures on a picture of measures in the course of the negotiations are called means to in the year 2015. and i just would like to can recall here what i said at this time, i issued a statement in connection with the means negotiations in february 2015,

where i outlined the basic principles that were contained anyway in the middle agreement, namely, deep friendship, love self or local self determination, which are also in place, friendship will offer candle federal state structure. and i added to the the policy of permanent neutrality, which anyway was always was initially when you grade was founded. and when they agreed on, on a little clear, the statues of the country in the ninety's that was always an idea that shaped somehow the foreign policy of ukraine. so that should also have been followed up. and if this would have happened in the armed confrontation,

which is going on right now, which is very unfortunate also by the way, in terms of international sure military law that could, can, should have been avoided if everybody would have acted in good faith. unfortunately, i don't remember i did raise this issue of autonomy for the eastern provinces with national speaking majority around 2018 in a conversation with the presidential candidate ukraine. he was defeated, who was a former minister of defense. i addressed the issue. i asked him, frankly, why do you not implement the pro vision of autonomy in the eastern territories? it has been agreed upon. it is on paper and by the way, all of this has been and ensured has been confirmed. i think you would agree with me that it wasn't paper and,

but from the very beginning, i mean the next day after these agreements were signed, the ukrainian side will be helpful. down western partners essentially suggested that you know, those agreements reached under giraffe. there were sort of a political ploy to win time and to change the situation on the ground, the military situation on the ground that they should not have been implemented. that they in fact implementation of those agreements and even that knowledge. and then the support of those agreements were i can be trail cream, national interest. and this is, this is, this is what was transmitted, not only in ukraine, but i think the wes largely wanted to do the was course. and he's very, he could debate in domestic politics in ukraine about this issue about the rights of the minority center right off to russian minority. but anyhow,

i would say it was the leadership, the government of ukraine agreed to that measure of amending the constitution of ukraine. and the stalks were facilitated by germany and france. and i do not see how one could say that this all was achieved under duress. what i remember me if i may just go back to that discussion which i, who is a former minister of defense of ukraine when he was a presidential candidate. he came to vienna and he wanted to explain his position as part of his candidacy and his son play. when i asked about 30 autonomy provision was no, we cannot do that. we can have it from single because this would mean this integration of ukraine. but this, what if this is the idea from the outside? i do not understand how they could have signed it. and just if i'm

a give one example, we have an experience in austria. how through an autonomy arrangement for a national minority, a crisis between 2 states and conflict can be avoided because we had almost the same problem with our german speaking korean minority in italy. that was oppressed as a result of fishes policies of michelin. if you wanted to italian eyes, determine speaking audience. so he banned the german language and so on. and as a result of this, after the 2nd world war, there was an armed resistance by an entire audience in italy and the situation. the problem could be solved ultimately by austria acting as a protection power for the south orleans. and by reaching an agreement at the bilateral level with the to lead on full autonomy,

a very advanced form of autonomy for the south orleans. and we had almost more, i do remember that our military was stationed along the border of italy in the mountains after since the receipt reach that agreement. we are, australia, italy, are in good turn. the historical analogy only applies if you believe that both sides one here, boy, and what you said, there was almost in war, but avoid it because the 2 sides i seen were genuinely interested in finding a solution and mutually agreeable solution, which i'm not sure is the case in the ukrainian constant, do you actually believe that the ukrainian side and our partners in the west actually wanted to settle that issue for the best of everybody in? well, this is difficult to answer. officially,

the western side would always have said that they are in favor of full implementation of the means agreement. at least that was my understanding. as regards to, to co sponsors off to meet in germany and france, they would never, they never said that they are not in favor of a full implementation, but they did not follow up visa ukraine on it that for sure they should have on it as far as i can see now, the real problem is one of the mystic politics in ukraine as far as the statues of the russian c to some sort of ukraine is concerned. because every politician, even, i mean also the president who is now in office as i saw some video documents of conversation she had with the leaders of the commanders of the she did not succeed to convince them that they should keep out of politics. and the

problem seems to have been over all those years. if you're green and politician would have been in favor of a correct and full implementation. also of these domestic revisions, this would have been exploited by the competitors off. the other part is always a problem. i mean, whenever a politician pursue certain agenda, he always encounters here. he always encounters difficulty, not the nature of politics. you're not expected to have a smooth, right? especially when you are you and you happen to be present the country that is position right when you major military adversaries. that requires a certain amendment that requires the so, you know, will a certain willingness to defend your own nation. when you pull the land, he could not persuade b,

a county and not to metal into college. being to diplomatic, typical european i have to say because as a battalion is not just new enough to but ultimately massive italian is not just involved in politics, it's part and parcel. it's fully incorporated into the ukrainian state machine. you a or different man describing the facts on the ground. i will tell you what this unit. so this fighting group is now officially integrated into the ukranian army. i think the idea behind was to sort of speak domesticate that little not to leave them out. so they could take whatever the ukrainian government is doing from outside. unfortunately, it has not succeeded this kind of project as far as i understand because the ideology of that particular group,

this is without any doubt that they are, you know, is it right when or faces or whatever, you may call it. and the ideology is in favor of kind of a nation state of your grain, where everybody else, whether russians or for that matter. also by the way it would have to see himself or herself under this aspect of being culturally or ethically ukrainian. and also the banning of the russian language. and i understand only too well are the implications of all of that. because as i said, we had the same problem as far as our i and from 0 myself as a douglas and sisters in italy. we're concerned who were not allowed to use their own language and who were not even taught the language in the school.

this is in italy, it was the ideology of facial study or mostly. and that's not an ideology for our time where we believe in tolerance and multiculturalism. so there must be a gang of one must develop the kind of stuff from this point systems. and in a case such as the ukraine, a kind of a man off the constitution in the direction of federal religion would be the way out. it does not mean that this would be opened the way to this integration of the country, not at all. and as far as i understand russia also and interprets it as a must have become part of the country country where there are ethnic communities that have their own rights. and also that has in particular

situations in particular areas, also local. so they're all a couple and we have to take a short break right now. we will be back to the discussion in just a few minutes state. ah ah, what we've got to do is identify the threads that we have a tree that even foundation let it be in arms. race is often very dramatic. development only personally and get into this. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very critical of time. time to sit down and talk with

me ah, welcome back to wells, of course with the president of the international progress organization, dr kerr, before the break, we were discussing various ways of bringing that calls like 10 as one of the things that you mentioned was neutrality and i'm hearing a lot of russian analyst day will say that russia has a stake in fact, and that, that a strong vested interest in maintaining and protecting your crane sovereignty on one condition. that is, if it's signs to authentic military neutrality is that something that the west,

the americans in particular ever seriously commit to, can they commit to not trying to use rushes neighborhood for their own geopolitical . busy goal for as a platform for, you know, injecting di insulins in this part of the world. thank. can we conduct on a rational basis, namely, on the basis of mutuality. and this is exactly the experience of austria with its own neutrality. after the 2nd world war in the period of the cold war, and this time, austria was occupied by 4 elijah powers, the victors of the 2nd world war. and i mean, it was to regain our full sovereignty and independence and strictly to get rid of all these offered by the problem at that time,

was that the great powers and particularly the soviet union at the time and the united states were quite suspicious. these of each other. so the only way out of this last that austria did the clear itself a permanently neutral country. and what is important is permanent, that the check stubs not just neutral in a particular consolation or in an opportunistic manner. but as a principle of state, as a shaping the identity of the state and is now known as in the history books. it was all foreign minister. by the way, also from your role. as i mentioned earlier to mr. grover, who had the idea that we might sound out at that time with the soviet union, how they would react as if we suggest that we could commit to

a set of neutrality. he asked the indian prime minister in confidential meeting in switzerland, in not to know the $53.00 to sound the to find out what these are the distribute union, how the reaction would be. initially, it was a little skeptical as far as i, a minister while ago. but 2 years later, it happened, we agreed, the austin delegation agreed on a memorandum on utility in the negotiations was moscow. and initially the western powers were rather skeptical in particular. the british and united states, these are the you're trying to do, but ultimately they understood that this was a rational measure of the real quality because each of the bowers could be sure

that austria would not be used on for a, for any military attacks by their adversaries, you have positive and inspiring historical example a quite some time. in our time, do you think if you crean in deep signs up here a, th can be neutral, neutral, and an independent, fully self sufficient state. and the same time releasing its own self interested sounds, guiding policy in other areas, but just keeping the military aspect on the neutral grounds is, can be, of course, military neutrality means not only don't know foreign troops stationed on the territory of a country and that country does not join any military alliance. it also

means that such a permanently military in your country is also not taking sides when international conflict occurs. that's how switzerland, by the way, always has interpreted its neutrality, at least until recently. and how also also i'm, unfortunately, i have until recently did interpret neutrality. in my understanding, it makes no sense to declare yourself, militarily, permanently neutral, if at the same time, the country shines in, measures in coercion, measures against another country. in the situation of armed conflict, i mean to push your sanctions. well, let's talk you actually i wrote that you see at sanctions as a continuation of politics. by other means. he also suggested that sanctions go

again, sanctions a population at large, indiscriminately go against human rights. how do you reset your conclusion? in this, i would say rather easy to provide the argumentation. by the way, i did raise the issue for the 1st time, internationally in 1991 in connection with the sanctions that were imposed by the united nations security council on the rock. as far as human rights are concerned. if the result of comprehensive economic sanctions is that the population suffers enormously, that for instance, the health services college and that as a result of this thousands of thousands of people die. this is a very serious violation of human rights and i consider human rights as abuse or jones of general international law. and that applies by the way,

also to united nation sections. and of course, as far as unilateral sanctions are concerned in boast by one country or a group of countries as coercive measures in a confrontation with another country. those are anyway outside the framework of international law. because according to international law, it is only the united nations security council that has to order to, to impose sanctions as part of the core versus measures. the next step of course, measures according to ensure that would be the use of force. but if countries that use such a shipment measures like sanctions and their own initiative, there is no authorization, whatever the situation may be exempt. it's and the kind of right of self defense would be if a country isn't that isn't, is

a text. it may react with force, but also may use other forms of forcing tooling economic or a legal issue, but also a moral issue. and the problem with the current batch of international sanctions is that they just like not only the russians, but they may have for the rest of the world as well. and there are many aspects for warning about the spectra map or hunger in western africa. people around the world suffering from the increase of gas prices and fuel prices gain. how do you think the world will react? he'll be jack to feel so essentially carrying the brand of the american decision. do you think the other countries would be ok with that or do you think they will voice some objections regardless of what their stands on?

rushes, actions are. i think for 1st the large majority of countries of to work with any way not agree with us. sanctions policy, which has been, which is being enforced right now by the western countries. legally, those companies have no right any way to oblige other countries, such as for instance, india or china or turkey to go along with those. because these are sanctions adopted by the united nations. as far as the people in those countries that impose the sanctions are concerned. i think what has not been thought through by the western politicians is that what will happen? directions that will happen when the people begin to feel the problems themselves. in such a case, this mass hysteria which we have seen now in some of the western countries

is quite quickly. the question and people may disagree, let me get to disagree with their governments about some of the sanctions and you seals or concerning the oil and gas. a european countries have made an exception and they always say a minute for me, it's quite ironic. they officially say in the brightness and foreign minister sanctions not must be structured in such a way, then do they do not affect us negative? it is a rather a promise if not a statement. if you treat yourself as 2 separate entities and either me or the brand of your decision, but your creation should not, you should be somehow isolated from that isn't a,

it's certainly sabrina's that's what i would say. and it is the standards, by the way, now we have a game season, high season hypocrisy and kind of the standards concerning international norms and government. we should impose punitive measures in such a way that only the other side is heard and all the people do not so so to speak. do not have to make any sacrifices. only the other side has to make a sacrifice and we have to push the other side into a certain direction through a kind of collective punishment. because that is what actually what the sanctions in this, on this large scale are. and in that regard, sanctions against human rights,

1 may act if one has agreement disagreements or east edison armed confrontation or a war as we see now. the government may act against the government of the other country, the policies of which they oh, but to take the entire people of that other country, hostage by formula sanctioned by the way also in the field of culture. what does it to yoshi, what literature or sports have to do with all of that? that of course is collective punishment. and that is a violation of human rights. and that certainly is a violation of most basic legal principles, dr. clair rehab to living there. thank you very much for this conversation. you're welcome. thank you for watching hope to see her again. next week with

me. ah, ah. only one main thing is important for naziism, internationally speaking to that is that nations, but that's allowed to do anything. all the mazda races, the reason us had gemini, is so dangerous. is it the lives the sovereignty of all the country? or is business and business is good? and that is the reality of what we're facing, which is fashion. with

you will see it's a laboratory or supposedly reco, gracie you, but you will see i need to know sooner. what is in douglas abilities, parental stability to raise issue in the global measures. alicia menu me 0 is just the concern of what you do at the bull cheese to break and just to a better one is to show the us back to come back to by logical experiments on allied soldiers. employ leg, excuse you. yo use me into any, can you even disposal's dionisio with with.