that have been effective, but also for the military from both sides. we know that war kinetic conflict is a terrible thing in terms of the human cost of lives. lost people hurt, wounded, named it, also the economic destruction. but i would not agree that it is a localized conflict because as i've written and spoken about and other venues, i believe that this really is 3 different conflicts or wars. there is also a media or propaganda war being waged by the western countries with the angle phone countries at its core. and perhaps most significantly, there is an economic war that is being waged initiated by the you with us and its allies, its russia. and it's the 3rd war that i think in particular, is having a global impact. and we are only starting to see the beginnings of it,

and he's affecting energy prices. it's affecting food prices. it's also affecting fertilize prices and for wiser availability which can have long term repercussions for food security. and perhaps most unfortunately for the global order, i think it really has destroyed what remaining legitimacy there is in the us lead financial system. mr. mcdaniel love to impact here. so let's go step by step and i want to 1st advertise something that you mentioned that the military aspect of this struggle in, in your view is the least significant from a geo political perspective. you're essentially saying that war as tragic and as horrible as it is, is not the most dangerous thing that is going on right now. do i understand you correctly? well, i yes and no. so i do think the military conflict is

a catalyst for the propaganda or slash media war and the economic war. so either not completely separate. also we can see, and i think this is very, very dangerous and alarming is the military conflict does have the potential to escalate both in terms of the, the geographical scope of the conflict as well as the types of weapons being used. and i think everyone around the world is very, very concerned about the potential of this escalating to some sort of nuclear exchange. so i would maybe modify a little bit what you said to say that i do think the military conflict is important, having broader repercussions. but clearly the economic war is having an immediate global impact. and i think it has a least forces that may reshape the world. in ways that many people might not like

to see in one of your articles, you pointed out that many old school american strategies did. george can, and henry kissinger, john marriage, hymer, they all warned against crossing russian red lines and ukraine. and they did not out of concern for russia, but rather out of concern for the international system that by and large is still shaped in favor of the united states. wouldn't be fair to say that this animosity, i don't know what else the towards or russia or pigeon personally, is blinding western decision makers have their own peril that they're harming their own interest in doing that. so you're absolutely right. that are people like john mearsheimer in particular are realist and have a very pragmatic view of international fairs. as of course, does, henry kissinger and arguably. ready to canon as well. so you are absolutely right

to say that they've warned against exactly what is happening today. not out of concern for russia, but i think out of a very clear eyed understanding of the nature of the world in particular the nature of europe. and i think this leads me to this idea of individual. ready security, which has, for whatever reason, either inadvertently or deliberately been ignored by the west, by nato, and dismissing the legitimacy of russian security concerns that i think reasonable people can debate and argue, you know, which of those concerns can be accommodated or should be accommodated. but this kind of wholesale dismissal, the legitimacy of it, i think, has been very, very bad for russia, but also self destructive were the quote unquote global international,

the global warner. which really, i think we mean the us international order. now this tension between russia and later in particular are not new. and the yet, you know, there is a sounds that there's a lot of similarity between divide and administration and the obama administration . their rhetoric is similar that a lot of the same people working for that administration. and yet, it is my perception that during the obama administration, while all those passions were still present in your brain and sarah, and many other parts of the world at the moment, nutrition still managed to avoid bringing it to such an acute blow out. that may be wrong. i what i want to ask is whether you see any difference between the obama administration and the vitamin administration and the ability to predict and strategize about how they deal with russian. well, i think certainly there is significant overlap between the obama administration and

by and ministration. as you say, i think the world views probably are not too different. i think maybe there has been some difference in terms of the execution of a number of those policies. you know, president obama, that time was reputed to and said, never underestimate goes ability to ask things up. but, you know, as we've seen with crawl from afghanistan, certainly, i think the verdict on the western response to russia is the russian creating conflict. i think still remains to be seen. i do disagree with a lot of the western narrative that this is proven to be a colossal failure on the part of russia. i think that it's probably too early to tell. ready so, you know, we have to see the difference though, is that certainly, while obama, in the obama administration there was a talk of the pivot to asia,

certainly under the, by, in the, by the did it ministration. there is a very clear recognition that china's the pacing threat and again, whether we'll see a significant change as a result of the conflict crane or not. certainly, i think the rhetoric and the bi demonstrations been very, very consistent that the u. s. is attention really should be on china. but mr. mog, i, there are a lot of, even here in russia who said just that indirectly this call may be beneficial to china. because while americans keep talking their talk, their ability to actually address what they see as china's problem is now curtailed to significant extent. do you agree with that? well, i can certainly see why some or would say that. but i think that one thing we should

bear in mind too is there are china's rhetoric and i will say behavior has been consistent over decades. and that that alignment is around the central idea. the peaceful development really has to be the goal. and a corollary to there is that this whole war block type thinking of us versus them, the good guys versus the bad guys are, is really counterproductive for every body. of course, it's not in china's interest to pursue a new cold war or some sort of destructive a competition or with other countries around the world. i would say that even for the united states, that it would be much better served or if it did not have to devote as much money as it does to our,

the military to defend spending. and could we allocate some of that towards domestic priorities. so, but in my view, i think that your child has been very consistent in its words, minute actions are to promote peaceful development for all. now, i'm myself, a russian, and we're, and the russians are known for, and, you know, our emotionality and sometimes are poor execution of critical thinking. but even to me, when i look at the way how these are conflict and many others are covered in was media, it's, it's roy, emotion or shameless moralizing, almost ada, and the total at a cost of total exclusion of any nuance, any context, any analysis. and i wonder if it's a tactic of persuasion or what you mentioned as the propaganda war before, or whether it is perhaps even a bigger problem of the west,

essentially losing the ability to see reality or to approach reality as it is rather than what it wanted to be i think there's probably a little bit of both. so in fact, one area that i focus on in research is understanding the difference between the chinese system and the western system really centered around the world. i think one thing that gets really missed is that there really is a profound difference in world view and in the west. starting mostly would be a world where there is a dualistic view of the world that comes from plato. ready from greek philosophy that sees the world is 2 separate spheres. so there is the world of absolute truth . justice freedom exists in some absolute way and the world that we see him live in are the shadows, was plato,

calls it shadows on the wall. where's the chinese view is that in fact there's only one world and where that leads to a problem that you talk about the moralizing is that for countries like the u. s. and other countries that have a very strong certain kind of christian tradition is that the idea of being there only being one true god and being on the side of righteousness is seen is very, very important. so we have to take a very short break right now. we will be back in just a few moments. ah, here. ah.

ah . ah, the 1st time in history, an entire country's culture has been canceled to the very modern weapon. cancel, culture. daily desert. wonderful. i was just a little in one, but you get just me sitting there with the phrase now, particularly to 1st to counseling russian culture. yet them know what secrets of to oral school because it's convenient. my fuel, which will be on there is chill out of it. so that the most of the separate yolanda

e, them we what russia is created over the past 1500 years. there's no question actually condemned, reviled and reject it. just to remind you that it was funny at the will of bramble . there's a lot closer to hold out any time i guess it'll show them the list. joining total condemnation, gross daily, and now include does dance go to costco, shostakovich. get that i need to you left, but yes, she says that with the time, will you do? obama lee? you up with a

walk and back to world report with andy mach, senior research fellow at the center of fort china and globalization. mr. mall before the break, we were talking about these different ontological philosophical approaches between china and the west. and it also has very practice locations, i think, many countries and, but especially china, very sensitive, very attuned to sort of ordinary features of life. you know, poverty or living standards, you know, providing for the people. whereas many in the west have taken the prosperity that they had over the last couple of take it for granted. now that these changes start to pack them as well. and you know, people are seeing them of the palms they're seeing in the supermarket. do you think, how, how much longer do you think there was get afford to maintain this, you know,

godly attitude towards the rest of the world and seeing itself as the only dispenser of common? good. well, this is exactly, but i think the world that we're facing in that you know, we return this idea of the well as having this dualistic view the world. busy and that the us and other western countries being the god lead moralizing seders, what we see replacing terms like religious piety and virtue now are freedom and democracy. and this is the dynamic that's driving it. however, i think we are in new territory now because this economic war has also seen the shattering of the legitimacy of the u. s. leg financial system. so the seizing of russian bank, central assets, i think really has caused a reevaluation around the world. and it's not only russia, iran,

dennis wales that have suffered these kinds of sanctions. but now i think many, many countries are thinking that, you know, it's probably not a bad idea to have an alternative to swift, to alternative to the us dollar. as that, i think will unleash profound consequences that the u. s. may very well come to regret, but those that have suffered under dollar germany may have caused to celebrate one potential illusory in this conflict. even though it for now proclaims its allegiance to the united states is europe. it's interesting that many western or rather european countries, while they continue pledging or paying lip service today and unity, it's pretty clear that, you know, they share or of the burden from the sanctions. and from the economic disturbance where the with russia is very different from, for,

from country to country. how much longer do you think these unity can, can be maintained given how differently the. busy loud is distributed, the geo political logic of europe after world war 2 was to keep germany down russia out of the u. s. id. so now as we see it, germany announcing what greater defense spending as a result of these recent events. we have to see again this, if this indeed does lead to a significant re militarization in germany, i think that will have repercussions within the u, but also globally as well. we also then need to look at the, just the pure economics of it. and, you know, i've spoken to hedge fund investors that focus on the energy sector. and you know,

there's a feeling that in fact, not just the most, some investors, but i think even some germans as well, that their economic interest in future actually are more aligned with russia than with the united states. and this could be the catalyst that fractions, this unity, again you know, i think predicting the future is incredibly difficult if not impossible, but i think certainly raises these questions. you mentioned this, this new trends of germany reshaping its stance on the. busy reservation and a couple of days ago there was a major meeting. busy of nato countries or native representatives as one of a military basis, american military base in germany, where they discussed the supply of weapons to ukraine to fight their regular russian army. and as a russian, as a person who was born in leningrad,

i can tell you that, i mean, even with cool, strategic approach. and, you know, they have here as to reality. i think it's extremely, extremely difficult for the russians. you, you know, to see germany being a centre of militarization against the russia. again, how concerned are you about those irrational factors? you know, you said that it's difficult to predict the future, but we also have a very, very difficult history in the lives of many people in the psychology of many people is still alive. i completely agree. and i think this is what makes these security challenges. so vexing, so to see it in sort of simplistic terms as russia launched an unprovoked attack and gives you ukraine i think is overly simplistic not to say what russia did is justify,

are completely justified. but these are complex issues that are partly grounded in some objective factors like economics, like national security, but also the experienced a live experiences of different people in that region. and clearly, you know, the history has been tragic, but also i think, plays today's, still a very, very role. now, let's also not forget the economic aspect of it. and as you mentioned before, it's not just an issue for russia and was there, there's the rest of the world as well that is forced without even being asked to carry the burden of bye, certainly unilateral decisions. and there are many countries in africa and asia that are genuinely concerned about the danger of hunger because of the arising fuel and with prices. we don't know what the future may bring yet. depend damage is not

fully over. do you think the rest of the world which is keeping you can try to find now i think by and large, do you think it will remain quiet or stable as is not stable but and non protesting for now or do you think there will be some conversation some initiative launched to sort of reshape the system so that it is not a how caustic by the decision of any group of entries v. russia. let's say. busy or the united states, i think every country around the world shears a common interest in seeing this conflict being resolved as quickly as possible. but i'm afraid that given what's happened so far, the economic effects, including the impact of food supply will be with us for quite a while. so we need to understand that ukraine, russia dollars, ah. ringback are important sources of grains like corn wheat ah

barley, but also important source of fertilizer as well. if one of the issues is even if the cotton military conflict were to stop tomorrow, or there is still been damage to court facilities, other infrastructure that may constrain the ability to ship a food and other commodities. so i think unfortunately on the world will read these suffer as a result of this. now the question is, how bad will again, and again, it's not only a rising energy prices as we've seen now. ah, with countries like poland ah, and bulk guerria unwilling to pay and rules that causing energy prices to rise up. now as planting seasons of different crops, past crops are not pronouncing. there will be long term effects. unfortunately. now

you mentioned the issue of currency and are russia and china have already switched to on. you nominated a trade in certain i like in oil, i think also in gas, but the rest of the world is still kind of in the middle. there are some talks between china and saudi arabia, about doing the same. and transitioning to you on, i, you know, i, what i want to ask you is whether china is indeed dad much interested in that or raising the propping of the, the importance of young given how significant it's foreign reserves are still, you know, even be the proportion of it's for and reserved that i still denominated in dollar no country wanted people or it's a chronometer to be held hostage. and we've seen, of course, what's happening to russia most recently. but iran has been,

dennis whale has been in this boat. but even countries like france and germany that we're looking to work with iran also encountered some very severe constraints and tried to set up their own payment system, i believe was called in steps. so there clearly is global demand for an alternative to dollars in germany. and we can see also india, i believe, a set up a ruby rubel mechanism to continue to trade with russia. so again, i think that the key issue here, which, you know, i go back to this comments that are the binding administration, may have inadvertently damaged american interests far worse than any benefits they could get from their economic war against russia. because the u. s. is not only

a very player in the economic arena globally, but also it has been a referee. if we think about the dollar as reserve currency as a global of accounts. swift, which, you know, although in name is but actually is defacto controlled by the united states that are seen as a fair and biased part of the global infrastructure as now we've seen can be weaponized. and i think this lots of legitimacy really will have one for we progress and it's not a quest if but now, mr. mark, speaking about the nature of money as you point out in many of your articles, money, be your on the rubble or diller. just at the end of the day, pieces of paper or bits in the, in the digital database, there ultimately means of accounting and what matters most of the terms of the

exchange and whether there is terms will or will not be changed midway as often happens to the us dollar now as you on rises in common and do you think china will be able to resist that temptation of abusing its newly found influence? well, that's a very good question, but i think there's 2 ways to get through this. so, what it is that we can understand, global currency regimes are empires as following a life cycle. what humans have a life cycle, ray dalio, the hedge fund investor, the founder bridgewater a very large spokes hedge fund right extensively about this. that if you look at the history of the dutch field for the british pound of us dollars, you see a period of rise and decline. and this will happen independently. what does

regarding the u. n. again, we have to see, i think, clearly i think that china has shown a commitment to being a responsible stakeholder in the global system. so i think we have that. now, the other thing is that i think that the dollar, the, i will not replace the dollar. ringback but certainly having an alternative, it could be very valuable and i think will have profound geopolitical consequences because one of the results are not just dollar gemini, put the dollar becoming pure fee money after 971. when the link with. busy gold was severed, is that it allowed us essentially, to print as much money as it wanted to buy things domestically and globally that

had wanted. and one of these things that it wanted was a global military footprint. so the u. s. i believe the u. s. military budget is more than $800000000000.00. now that if the u. s. is constrained in its ability to essentially print io use that are not backed by a thing. certainly, that will cause a change in its ability to spend, including spending on the military. so i think this is another very, very important consequence of what we're witnessing as a result of the u. s. as economic work gets rushed. let's leave it here. it's been a great pleasure talking to you. thank you very much for that. thank you. have any and thank you for watching hope to see you again next week. well the far. ah a

ah ah, since the break away, but don't, that's people's republic. whew. has been ranging and don't boss. ukrainian artillery, it's been shelling civilian townsend, mining village is more love, believe deal with what i grew up with a little above level of the city of global school to give those bullet one

ah, at least 2 civilians have reportedly being killed in the shelling of residential areas in the dorm buses, you don't get fired ukraine's military. it's the 2nd attack, just to sleep. ukrainian president ministration, full of criticism for proudly posting an image of a soldier wearing good. not the error symbol we have. i'm an american journalist who gets clients to most of the trustees of neo nazis in ukraine, says the 2014 q in every sense my down at them. they've had free reign and they've been murdering raping robbing people across ukraine across on boston. and just by mounting west and pressure on country to join on to russia sanctions.