made her apparent, they know finland and sweden may want to join nato of all times. but we can talk about that. but one of the things that you have to think about when you, when you're adding new members to this type of alliance, is what they call article 5 of mutual defense. and that's bandied around a lot. i don't think everyone really understand what, what it actually mean. so tell our viewers here. what is article 5 of the nato treaty, what is what it is and what it isn't, go ahead. yes. well, 5 ok. states that an attack on one member is to be treated as an attack on all. so as the media presents it, that's it. you know, the moment any nato member state comes under attack from any non native member say that, oh, for 30 native member states are now war against that attacker. but of course, that isn't quite true because in the 1st place,

all that article 5 says that it was one they didn't, and the state is under attack. then all the major member states can then decide what it is that they want to do in order to help out that attack made a mistake. but even more important, there is article one, article, one of the north atlantic treaty states that nato will not resolve any conflicts at all with anybody. 5 but other than by peaceful means, in other words, it's simply not, you know, jaws using force against any other state. so when we think about what nato has been doing in ukraine for a long time, that cannot be described as trying to resolve problems by peaceful means. nato has

been very actively involved in ukraine using force arms against russia. ok, so this isn't in a country that is not a member of nato against another country. that is not a member of the state of nature. so once you violated article one, you can't then turn around and start invoking article 5. so, you know, if for finland, let's say what to become a member of nato and would say, you know, we got to want to some of that territory back like to really, you know, we'd like it back, you know, styling to get away from us. and we'd like it back and then start making trouble. and then if russia response and similar things we're going to go by, i mean, you have to come in on our side. no. in going to happen. and if you try to do anything at all, and that is by using force or anything, then article 5 that does not come into operation because you violated article one.

well, it isn't the 1st time i think the serbs would say that nato certainly is in defense of alliance. then george is an expert on the break of the legal break up of the former yugoslavia. you know, demon going back to the vinland in sweden. i mean, the timing could not be more peculiar because nato does deem russia as a hostile state to its alliance. so if you have 2 new applicants joining the alliance, they are doing that full with full knowledge. that the, the, the country that they're, they want defense, they want to be part of the organization. they want to be part of will defend them from russia. so by definition, if we just take what george said about article one, they're in violation of article one because it could very likely turn into a hostile conflict with these 2 new to new members. i mean, the logic of nato is so peculiar because it's supposed to be about projecting a piece and stability. it's doing just the opposite. go ahead. oh,

i agree with you. we're, we can imagine now what will be given to these events in the media. they will say, oh would you want to sleep or you want to sleep? the western whoa are here we are together. and here with sweden and finland going in. they do so many years. new clarity. and basically this is a lot just the facts, feelings and its new credit the main year. you know in 1981 after the break up of the service basically isn't you russian authorities democratically elected president yeltsin. they came to the fema. so they said we have these be some friendship or making $48.00, you know, they're guaranteed your security and your one year. and the been said, don't you think that you know, these are to meet when all the thinking. so people and since the early nineties

have been reached in a way that states that home with us, the same story was basically, you know, the law, 8 years after 2014 and we the conductor together who need to go literally dolan so many dangerous seem to think even thinking, well that's right, that in dame, russia, some people might see some, you know, some evidence for when it was these exercises them or not so much about defending they were about taking any action. so basically, even freelance we've been doing need to which i doubt you know, the summer this will not change much. situational. the ground, you know,

defect to these countries inside need me. yes. now a nature will take up the formula to, to defend them. but again, they are both members of the union. so if you look at the needle side you, which is basically the same thing that you had there gauge, protect them too. so for russia, it's not to be change or get released. and if some people of you, all, you know, the erase it was not justified just because in one sweden b or no. this abrasion was justified because such post on campus s door jamb will go over. the suddenly changed the rhetoric because they saw that russia was a, you know, and was determined to defend itself. if the, you know, if things develop a say you say nothing really than significantly geopolitical changes. but george,

i think on the other hand that the finland and sweden are signaling that they deem russia is a military threat. and, and they have actually put a target on themselves. i mean, it's one over one and one from all, isn't it? ok, i mean, i don't see any upside here. i mean, neutrality is worked very, very well, even at the very depths of the cold war neutrality worked very, very well for england in sweden. i mean, i, i'm just willard why they want to change their status. now, because now they may, they could possibly become a belligerent and in a conflict were another country, and nato start something. i mean, i don't see the upside. maybe i'm missing something, go ahead. there isn't any upside because as you say, during the cold war, for feminine sweden really had a very good on. after all, you know, dirty, would finland eyes ation actually described. a very nice state of affairs. the

soviet union didn't interfere in finland's domestic affairs. all that he wanted from finland is that it wouldn't take sides in the cold war between east and west and finland that went along with sweden. enjoy a considerable reputation. you know, when he likes we'd not unless we had a major reputation during the call will because it maintain neutral status. once you are member stage of nature, you know, that means you are a co belligerent and as we see now in your brain, i think a conflict between russia and nato. it's quite likely, i mean, whether it happens now, whether it happens in 2 years time or whatever. i mean it's, it's not something that's very much on the cost that happens. then the countries that are in the front line and that would be, it's been long bolding, state, sweden, they, they would, they would be in the right of that will, they will be immediately targeted. and you know, when,

when your world war you have to then, you know, go for your immediate target, cut off that basis of their ports. so that in all of those ways. so the status that at least you might have enjoyed being outside of that nature. even even as the most the already kind of the fact that i want to make the least you enjoy your status like that, that would've spent you. now, if there's a conflict, you know, let's say you're going to be attacked in this just so you know that there's no way you're going to get around the demon the, you know, if you look at the entire history of the north atlantic treaty organization, you know, article 5 is area to front and center because i am on the one hand article 5, at least in theory, accorded you collective security. but the, the copy on is that it should never ever be tested. ok. and that's the trick. and george already hinted to that,

that might be tested and i think that that is nato's greatest nightmare. because then, you know, nato isn't, you know, unified and european union isn't unified as much as they like to say it. and so it's a game of chicken right. now with the highest, you know, possible outcomes and consequences. i mean, i think that this is something that the, the, the theorists, if there is such a thing for nato really haven't thought out, go ahead. well indeed, you know, i think there were only monkey yesterday when i think, 05 was used and it was used by the state when they responded to the 911 by that again, old place. right. and we remember or not they, you know, neither. and again, it's rob, so need on the back or invoking article,

you are the right the both in the stages. i mean, you benefit huge the promise you credit the status during that whole a lot of financial in fact, you fuel was our saw, your west, you know, when was the last few months we were huge, huge general. committed a lot of dr. together and know where to reach real quickly wing with bins and russian soviet citizens. was there a high level of antipathy or was there a mutual respect or no relations were very audio. they're much worse now than they were getting old war because of propaganda. and i'm sorry, there was no warrant. they swedish propaganda rush unique and

it was just like, there was no anti dark. there is some happening. i have to break in here. we have to go to a hard break to hard break, and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion. and so we'll need to stay with our t ah, [000:00:00;00] ah

ah ah ah ah ah,

with ah welcome back to crossed up. were all things are considered. i'm hearing well this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing some real news. ah or it's going to be me. we're making a point in the 1st part of the program. going to finish up there, go ahead. well, just neutrality, you know, you can benefit, you can all the years. and now where do reach russians go?

if they want to have a foreign bank account, if they want to do business, you know, we're really find that mutual county not locked to switzer, switzerland going to say they go to his biggest stock. they go to cover up. remarkably, these are the, you know, i mean, i refused to join the sanctions against brush level. so if you do have for the 2nd was biggest, i was completely away. they take money from west, they, russia, they g green us together, you know, so in a secure way. so didn't know how to read your true economic going to be sure areas, you know, the softball game overseas. i believe you're about to build the whole demo democracy a talk or say thing is a bit complicated, you know why? because it doesn't make any sense. but anyway, george,

let me go back to you. let's continue our discussion on article 5. let's really dig into it because the reason why i'm talking about it, because there's a lot of weird interpretations of how it could be in vogue. i mean, we have a western countries army, you credit at least claiming that they're going to arm the ukraine. all these huge, $800000000.00 more and all this, you know, it is, the numbers are hard to, to grapple with. but you know, how do you get it into a country? and if you're sending arms to ukraine than that, doesn't that make you a co belligerent? and if you're a co belligerent then they're fair game out of self defense. i mean, it starts getting a little complicated here. so if there's a base in finland, her example that sending arms, isn't that fair game in this conflict? and then what article 5 be invoke and with other members of nato go along and say, you know, but you were sending arms. i mean, why should we broaden the conflict article by? it's really a nice bumper sticker until you tried to press on it, george?

yes, i, you know you raise an excellent question because it's now clear that the nato powers are co belligerence. i mean they're, they're only talking about delivering arms to ukraine. we don't know how much is actually getting in out overnight. the was a report of a transport lane had it in the shop down there on this up. i know that that may be true if true, then you wonder why haven't i been more a transport planes a shot down. but once you article belligerent then i, you know, it's in the old bit. that's all. i don't really see why it would be unacceptable that the russians do think it's unacceptable why it would be an acceptable to say, attack of military base in poland. that you see that he's engaged in packing dispatching arms to ukraine. that will be used to kill russians and say, well,

the back of direction again. so when i was on the regression figures you, you are a co religion and everything that you do, all the constant propaganda campaign and open sabotage of any piece negotiation suggest that you are a global leader. now, as the media reported that a strike and based on the go 5, it goes into effect russia now with nato. no, i don't have a mobile and it's got it. so in gauge, you know, there's not actually, it's not a loan actor, it's acting on behalf of nate, who's got clearance from all the nato power. so nato has got itself involved in a non nature area is in violation of article once it's in violation of light, it can then go back to that same tree which is violating. and so one would hope that countries such as hungary, victim of, i'm as

a know out of the car in vocal fund. and we hope others, you know, maybe it will be new leadership in france. i mean, emerging after the election, also say no, you can't invoke article by you violated article one, daemon. good to continue this analogy here. this is the, the worst nightmare that not nato couldn't imagine, because a specific member country line one, for example, is decides to get into the, for a, in ukraine, in that, that does not necessarily mean and it's a ppo policy that they haven't actually set a policy so you would have more acting as a pre actor outside of the alliance, but even this is the worst nightmare that somebody else of that is, it will take one country to pull everybody else. it is, george was saying right here. and so what would be, you know, all one for all one, all for one and one for all can turn into

a situation where an article by just completely falls apart. it's like saying in your hands, because you're not going to get all 30 members of the alliance to go along with it . and this isn't a situation that brussels is probably very worried about are actually right. and when nato was expand, you 999. all russia want russell was that you're taking caucus with that huge potential. we were pulling them, was already already to move groups there, which is the motor. there were all kinds of statements made, you know, when they're still, it is gone. for most of the day to lead the spectrum, we are the same over 10 years that you know, the west, a huge rational send a bow in tears. and poland was suggesting that it should do the thing, you know,

and it was, there were some or dish bowen tiers. su though a indeed, it's a very dangerous game with all get all the nato countries in rule not be have a deeper, don't you think that the post leadership been lead believes that they can actually force the alliance to follow it's lee, which i think is a mistake, i think that that's something that is a miscalculation george. you want to think that because it seems to me that the assumption is that we can do whatever we want because the lines will have ball because of article by, but i don't think that's necessarily true, george. no, i don't think so. but the problem is, is acting alone. i mean, we know that the united states is using its satellite intelligence to provide its elegance to ukraine about russian forces, and ukraine is able to target russian forces and therefore kill russians. thanks to

us intelligence now that any nation a very active collaboration. so the united states is very much involved in this fight. and the united states is actually, you know, pretty much directing everything that the ukraine is doing. the fact that zalinski now is not, it doesn't feel like negotiating at all about anything with the russians when he was where he was. maybe up to 3 weeks ago, is a result of the united states encouragement and the united states sending him a. we're going to be giving you more of this intelligence more and more of the equipment. well, you know, that the united states is a village are now, was russia contact the united states, but i think russia can attract poland, and i think russia can then say, you know, maybe it may be more specific. maybe this will be a pedantic, but maybe you said a top poem, but i would be more pedantic. it's a a tack of bass in guy. i agree, but i just don't know exactly not one thing. i yeah, it's like

a military base. and same thing with rocky, i think you know what the russia being a good, very good position to attack some small and they to then i've got themselves in a slot, listening in the es 300 into you. right. ok, well you know, we can, we can start getting bases and, you know, trying to invoke article 5 and i to see and see how others respond to. i'm sure there's a reason why the war bounce, that nobody is sending anything via hunger. it because or mine is realizing you send it why hungry i'm hungry now becomes a belligerent. so if you've made that point and you say, hey, that's up to you, you know, use that weapons in your fight. don't drag us into your fight. a demon on the same token here, going back to england and sweden, there mowing, joining the north atlantic treaty organization. but it may be a undefined name, co conspirator, po,

belligerent and a finish is taken out because it's, it's, it's been found to view the sending weapons, the ukraine, and it's not a member. here we have the same situation here is that, you know, nato can't do anything about it, even though they're helping kids out of it. will they be obligated to help finland, for example. i mean, again, the name, it's all in the minutia here. it's very, very unclear. will nato go to war over finland when it's not a member state just like ukraine. go ahead. well, i'm coming back to what you just said. you know, i will, boyish down and act unpredictably. well, i mean, read the western press about the forty's government from the last 4 years. the western breath officials in brussels has been seen that she is mad, that he is dictatorial, that he's unpredictable, but he's dangerous. and now when the rough it is using the same adjectives of opportunity suddenly with you. oh no, no, no, no, no, no,

no one is going to make it stable. it's not going to, you know, it's no friends. do we've heard from natal? did you grade? was no rush right now, was it's not true and the west coast to develop some kind of lordship here because right now they just come direct again with feelings and sweden. i mean, the units of even sweden is still very good in russia and nationally because of all these years. but if you listen to some of the ones that we heard from the swedish, but it didn't grow the brand new, it's really dangerous. i mean, these whole madness of our russian san luis. yes. there was one that actually, you know, landed there somewhere. you know, they the heat, shallow water. and since last, i mean, is the last, oh,

i don't see 6 years. every year they said russian summaries in sweden, sweden is now a weapon. nice thing, dolphins, or something like a yes. all righty, george, george. you know, i think when we look back in history here, when, if sweden were to join nato, i think there'll be a future store and say, alba and neutrality we had a good deal. ok. i mean, what happened here? last 20 seconds. go to george. yes, no question. what if sweet enough in what to join us, nate roches, borders direct borders with nato? well, double that cannot induce great deal of anxiety in russia, particularly in the context of everything that's being going on. the western propaganda and everything that makes life very, very dangerous for the fence because this isn't the right time to be joining a turning. it's a turning article,

buying into some kind of stupid drinking game in a college campus. ok, that's my opinion here. as all the time we have want to thank my guess in budapest and here in mosque, i want to thank our viewers from watching us here in our t c. and see you next. i'm remember. ah, ah, ah, is you'll media a reflection of reality? in the world transformed what will make you feel safer? isolation community, are you going the right way?

or are you being that with what is true? what is? ah, in the world corrupted, you need to descend her join us in the depths or remain in the shallows. ah, ah, needs to come to the russian state. total narrative. i've studied as i'm phoning those landscape development. i'm not getting calls. i'll slap a group in to see if that would be okay. so mine is gonna be the one else about this even with we will van in the european union, the kremlin. yup. machines, the state on russia today and split our t spoke neck, even our video agency,

roughly all band to on youtube with what he did. you think even chris, with, with industry i'm always talking just look up from literally a muscle around noon. she doesn't being of jane. she's on a nurse to me as possible. mama cook gosh said get somebody to look at that. i for this ashley of nbc. what are the, what the duplicate pieces goes down to the bubbles one to new thesis. but of course zation the t wilmington, you bring out an up of the key for the chino grindsley metal for phones. right?

something like that and then we got that voice it. i have that a few. oh, a minute. i think when it says they capture all the expensive ukrainian weapons inside the dumbass city of mariel, as russia lead discontinue their advance that some of the fighters, they pro, key of radicals are still using civilians. as human, she'd go to the blue. there have been many civilians in the city. the nationalists have been using as human shields. that's why we couldn't shoot. but once they retreated to the factory, really took it under control. the un warnings. i have a one 5th off the well it's population could plunge into poverty and hunger as