ah, ah mm mm mm. hello and welcome to wealth apart. more than a century ago. mark twain, the remarks that god created war so that americans would learn geography. i guess today have supported all recent american lab wars and a time says regime change, but he's absolutely appalled by russia's actions in ukraine. why is that? to discuss it? i'm now joined by a former us national security advisor and former us ambassador to the united nations john bolton, ambassador bolton, it's such a rare treat for

a russian journalist to speak to thank you very much for this occasion. well, thank you for having me. glad to do it. now you have the reputation of being pretty hawkish, thinker, especially when it comes to russia. when you look at the balance in and around your crane, whom do you blame 1st? is it president putin o president biden? well, i think this is unquestionably an active unprovoked aggression by russia, and there's no legitimate explanation for so i think the responsibility does live with president colton and his government, i think unfortunately that the west failed adequately to deter potent from, from launching the invasion and, and that's a great tragedy but, but in this instance, it's pretty clear where the responsibility laws now president put it in his own words, is motivated by defending russia, that strategic interest. so he will definitely disagree with your definition of an

unprovoked aggression. but let me, i establish that phrase, do you believe that russia has any security prerogative when it comes to its own neighborhood? and especially when it comes to the american and native presence in its neighborhood? well, i certainly has an interest in it on strategic security. but the fact is, the countries that border on russia have an interest in their strategic security as well. and it's not just dealing with eastern and central european countries that were previously independent. estonia, life in lithuania, have all join nato, they border on russia. they were part of the soviet union by force, not by choice. and by choice they decided to join nato. finland may soon decide to join nato as may sweden. so, you know, every country gets to determine how its own security plays out. nato has always

been a defensive alliance. russia has always known that every contract, if you would agree, it has also its own choice of the means that it uses to defendant's interests. now that means that i didn't put in chose to defend russia's interest, may seem disproportionate or excessive to some, but i'm sure it to you, they are pretty conventional given that you are somebody who supported or advocated for military action in iran, iraq syria, live in israel, a cuba, north korea and the lease goes on. are you saying that the use of force that seems to be so permissible to the united states in your own? eyes should be absolutely off limits when it comes to other great powers. well, obviously, any use of force has to be justified and certainly acting in self defense is a legitimate use of force. nobody questions that and i think the preemptive use of force against a real threat to the united states,

towards friends and allies in order to prevent devastation of innocent civilians is also justifiable. so when states like iran or north korea seek nuclear weapons, use of force is fully justifiable when a country commits unprovoked aggression as iraq did against kuwait in, in 1990. it's kuwait is entitled in the exercise of its own self defense to ask her out to protect it, why we iraq. so there are a lot of yeah, there are, there are a lot of different situations and different fax, different circumstances give rise to different remedies. absolutely. but the, in most of those circumstances be access central interest of the united states were not been both your own populations were not threatened either in libya or in syria or for that matter during the 2nd iraq invasion that you saw eagerly supported now

. well no that's, that's simply not correct in, in either case. and you can, you can talk about these others as well in the case of syria where terrorists supported by iran, supported by the government of syria, were threatening to create an islamic state that would have threatened the west as a whole and had very strong western support across the board with our nato allies, to destroy the islamic state. nobody can argue, nobody in their right mind can argue that ukraine posed any threat to russia. none whatsoever. well, we will talk more about that. that's certainly the case that russia is trying to advance, and russia has sounded deep displeasure with native moving formerly in formerly towards the borders for quite some time, including when you were in office. you visited me as president trump national security advisor. you shook hands with why do we put in?

i remember, i think it was in some or 2018. you even talked about the value of communication between leaders in the most difficult of times. in all fairness didn't the crumbling use all the diplomatic means at its disposal to limit the welcome. and so i would say malicious us presence close to russian borders. there's simply no truth to what you're saying. nato didn't move toward brushes, borders just just for, for the benefit of people in russia who may not hear this. it was the nations on eastern central europe once the warsaw pact broke up. after decades of repression by the soviet union, that came to nato and requested membership so that they could create their own free governments in societies. and so that if they could have peace and security against external threats, nato didn't decide it wanted to expand into eastern europe democratically elected

governments expressing the will of their peoples, asked for nato membership. i'm bassett, or bold and with all due respect, i think you're a sure the now think you understand that mosca would find it quite provocative, that the united states was arming, providing ukraine with lethal weapons for pretty long period of time. you may disagree that it poses spread to moscow, but moscow is within its own ride to determine what is this as threatening as it did signal, if this pleasure with a didn't it so. so you believe moscow would be perfectly with vantage. rights to attack is stony a live be unless the windy are right now? absolutely no, because i don't think last stormy. are big enough countries to pose a security threat to russia. ukraine, very large, your a p and country would be given that president laskey recently raised a spectre of a nuclear confrontation of re establishing its nuclear expertise. you think that

the russians should have missed that comment that the media security conference so so let me get, let me get your, your rationale here for countries big enough like ukraine then russia is entitled to invade. no one should take security interests seriously. and i think if they've communicated that to the americans, you can't deny denies that russia has legitimate security interest. but that doesn't mean that they don't legitimate security interest. can you define that, for example, in terms of the flight time that it takes for the rockets to reach moscow? how would you define that security interest? what would be comfortable, lifetime for you, for rockets to reach russia? well, i don't know russian rock as can reach the united states in 30 minutes. that's not very comfortable either. the point is that the, the, the question of what constitutes a legitimate threat to russian security is

a subject. russia has to prove. and there's absolutely no evidence that ukraine has ever had the capacity to threaten russia. well, i think russia growing that right now on the battlefield, but rather than arguing about that because we could never agree, let's face and you think i should, is proving on the battlefield. is the incompetence of its military and intelligence search. we will definitely also talk about the tactics of the russian military. but before we do that, i want to ask you something about the decisions of the bite and administration. because he says recently that it was a strategic mistake by, by them, by to said that nato would never interfere with russia's actions in the ukraine. what about america's presence in the ukraine? i mean armaments security advisors, those advocate prime promises to ukraine, to care with regards to its membership prospects, especially when we consider, you know, a very limited desire on the part of the west to come to ukraine's defense. as do

you think it was iranian to make ukraine believe that the west that would come to support? well, i think that that nato made a significant mistake in 2008 when it rejected president george w bush's proposal to put new crime in georgia on a fast track toward nato membership. and i think president. busy saw that mistake and 4 months later, invaded georgia. now the fact is that neither the united states nor nato responded effectively to bad act upon provoked aggression. and in 2014 president coding struck again and invaded ukraine. and once again, 9 the united states and nato took effective action in response to that unprovoked aggression. but the fact that that these mistakes were made doesn't justify russia taking another active unprovoked digression. what it says is that only when russia

is deterred adequately does not act with military force. and that's why in this case, making sure that brush doesn't benefit from this act of aggression is very important. you mentioned that it was a mistake not to grant ukraine in georgia, formal membership, but as it is viewed from the crime. and it doesn't really matter whether the membership is formal or informal. the fact of arming your crane in which the west has been doing a very eagerly over the last couple of months and years already. well, it's doing a lot better than the kremlin expected. that's for sure. well, that's not good enough, but let me ask you again. would you like ukrainian troops marching into russia, which, you know, if the russian forces continue to perform as poorly as they have both, what i would like here for us to be grounded in reality, you know, a real quality met or something in this. well then, i do think this more at this point,

russia has failed to achieve its objectives. we don't know exactly what russians casualties are, but i think they're going to be a lot of families in russia, missing their sons this coming year. i'm bassett, bold, and let me ask you something as a strategist rather than an ideologue, whatever you think of putin, i'm sure also rising in operation like this was a huge moral historical dilemma for him. because russia indeed has a very special connection to ukraine. i wonder if the boldness or the brazen this with which the west was militarized and ukraine of late, was in fact promised on the calculation that russia would never ever use force against ukraine. oh, what, what you have in ukraine is a government freely elected by its people, which you do not have in russia. and the freely elected government in ukraine looked for defensive capabilities. having seen what russian arms achieved in 2014

seizing the crimea, seizing territory in the don bass, they wanted the, the ability to withstand that, to deter future rush and aggression. now anybody who believes that the quantity and quality of military assistance being provided to ukraine, gave them anything more than an enhanced defensive capability, doesn't understand what was going on. it's simply incredible. to argue that somehow a buttressed ukrainian defensive capability was a threat to russia. it absolutely was not, and i don't even think vladimir putin believes that i think what he thinks he's doing is making good on what he said in 2005 about reversing the breakup of the soviet union. that was a hard thing for russia, but history is a hard teacher. and failing to understand that that was basically an irrevocable breakup is what's causing this tragedy today. well,

i'm back to bolton that we have to take a very short break right now, but we will be back in just a few moments. stay tuned. ah ha. a just what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy implementation. let it be an arms race is often very dramatic, development only personally resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very difficult. i'm time to sit down and talk ah

welcome back to world to parts with former us national security adviser on both and ambassador both. and you mentioned that in put in mind and americans for some reason i left so much to read his mind. so i will rely on the capacity to do that because we, the russians don't always, don't always succeed in that. do you think the ukrainian state will continue to exist after russia fulfills its objectives in ukraine? it's military objective. well, we don't know what the military objectives are, but i think the ukraine states can certainly exist in exile even in the worst of circumstances as governments did in world war 2, after the nazi occupation. and i think that's something that the student and his advisor should have considered before they began this operation. but i don't see

how at this point the russian military can really expect to take control of the entire country. i think that's beyond their grass. that has also be on their aspiration because the chrome has never pronounced that to be at its objective. so all it sad, it was, it said what it no, it hasn't said but its objectives are, but it's the tax, the capital city. i know it would you say, did the objective number, why was demilitarization and taking out the ukraine military infrastructure. the 2nd objective was what he called dean. it's if occasion, that is the elimination of far right militia groups in ukraine. but let's talk about total pretext as we know those remain, you know, the bathroom in mr. walls on the, you know, how many times the, the night and space attack a foreign lands on full pre access in numerous times. but the time, especially the 2nd invasion of iraq. yeah. the chemical weapons and we all remember

that. but anyway, you said that the russian effort, the russian military effort is now bogged down to the surprise of many western analyst. and i wonder if this surprise of western analysts arose out of the very different ways in which the russians and the americans find their wars. the russians relying far more on b, manpower, and the americans relying far more on behalf of artillery. well, let's go back to iraq's chemical weapons. you know, who also believe that iraq had chemical weapons, the united nations, because iraq itself had declared those chemical weapons after the 1st gulf war. and sure, they say, you know, you are hiding behind the, for the united nation that wasn't him, know, my strong point in your career. you, whenever i thought it might be impressive, you the issue now is not, not the different styles of warfare that countries engage in. although the russian

style is going to cost it in casualties. sad, sadly, for russia going forward and the families that will suffer as a result from it. it's whether completely unprepared countries. some of them were associated with terrorist attacks in the west, including the one in the christ church, new zealand, where 51 people were killed. if that were happening, close to your border, would you be ok for that? well, if i thought it were true, it would be a concern, but you have this. and if you, if you have this information and can verify, then i think you need to present it and people can make up their own mind. but even if everything you just said is true, as absolutely nothing to do with rushes invasion of ukraine. well, how is it not how that's of have anything to do with russia invasion and ukraine? because if you actually look at what's happening on the ground, the most notorious class is the fiercest class that occurred there on the between the russian and ukrainian military forces there between the russians troops. and

before i arrived military battalions, you know, were just for my information where the suppose it clashes take. but are you familiar with this town? i think they're around 130000 civilians that are being still health hostage. they're not being left out despite the existence of humanity, humanitarian chord there is both to russia and to mainland the grain. have you ever heard about that town? many open and there's all that to see this is the only news cast of which i am aware that says that the people fighting their for ukraine are right, wayne terrorist. and i think that's something you really need to consider. everything we see and independent was western press. observers believe that this is the ukrainian army making, a very heroic stand against overwhelming force has nothing to do with was right going terrors. now let's talk about how these me and you advocated for the harshest

possible sanctions against russia, ronald reagan type of response, which would combine a firm stance and support for russia's opposition. what can possibly be achieved through that? well, i think this is really up to the russian people. now, i don't, i don't know that anything will necessary necessarily take place during the course of war. but i think a lot of russians are voting with their feet, leaving the country and, and expressing their concerns. we've seen some real action bravery inside russia. and at one point we could find out what russians really think, if they'd actually have a free and fair election. can i ask you one more question about the reaction of trying to because many analysts, both in the east and west, agreed that china's position would be crucial in determining how much pain russia suffers in the face of western sanctions. and it's evident from the latest cold between president baldwin, who has been bold, and i'm sorry,

president biden. your wish? i'm sure you will press and hold on. but the reason cold between president by the and president she died in the u. s. main means of decision now, threats, sticks rather than kara's or any form of positive reinforcement. do you think asian will find it appealing or threatening enough to comply with washington? well, i think china is a threat in and of itself to, to the united states and the west is a whole. and the question of how to deal with china is going to be a huge subject in debate. i don't know whether these telephone calls from president biden will dissuade china or not. but i think china is going to need to think about this. because if they have designs on free places like taiwan and others in the endo pacific, they need to recognize that there's a stronger and stronger view in the united states. we will not accept this while

there may be a stronger and stronger view, but the tools in your toolbox seems to be rather limited. in fact, i've heard the number of analysts adjusted the most opportune time for beijing tissue. full control of taiwan would rise right after the end of the russian operation in ukraine because the american ability to hit beijing, the sanctions would be at its minimum. do you think that will come to pass? well, i think china would be making a huge mistake if they drew that conclusion that's for sure. and in terms of the policy of the united states, if you think it's tough under joe biden, waiting till we get an administration whose views are closer to mine. well, god help us, i has had time to do both and but that will leave, we have to leave. and here i had this point when you come to office, i will request that interview again. but for the time being, thank you very much for your perspective. glad to get it. and thank you for watching hope to see you again next week. i

ah, the so called enhanced interrogation techniques used by the u. s. officials were basically designed as techniques to break down the human mind. if you force a human being to stay in a certain positions doesn't take very long to the pain involved to become absolutely excruciating. but nobody slain finger on you. you are doing it to yourself. we started adopting those techniques when i was stationed in mosul

among them wordpress positions, sleep deprivation, and type of thermo. there's already beginning to be evidence that these old techniques are now being used on immigrants and children, whatever you do or more comes home. nobody has been held accountable for the torture that happened in the past. in the moral authority, the made america will sacrifice the shimmer of effective interrogation. ah

since then with the choice when i'm adequate for the mobile blog post that's from the choice. we're just gonna keep a twinge, quit up until the both the middle them put a bunch of minions. since when you, when you want to push, what did you buy to replace good that up, a slab of radius love. people much blue. i don't want that to my default, that of which will to present course, and i love that i see gamma will wish that the village because we are what i was more, there is no good fun bunch from growth or your through whoever in the bridge.