this sounds very strange to what the western is and even here and it's where we have, you know, a population a, i think, you know, if i would have to advise mr. put in, i would advise him to use a different sentence to justify his the will. now can i brought in this out towards the issue on now says because i think the ip address on on 2 pillars. one is this idea of exceptional or secret nature of any given. and the 2nd i thing is the, this issue of the, of the end of history that history has some predetermined more, as we know, people are, was trying to bring that about. is that a concept that is being reliable, not only let's say in your brain,

but also more broadly movies that you consider most of the chosen people. so and nobody, you know, saying that this is any of those, not this but you know, many nationalities things out. and so this is about the nationalist and again, i think that this choice of who are not the best one. but a, you mentioned the just consider themselves the chosen people that you're not trying to impose your way of life. you're quite restrictive about who can join your, your people's rules about that. but when we look, let's say in the american constitution, they not only define themselves as exceptional, but also see themselves as a, you know, the ultimate judge, all the replacement of god. i wonder if this russian,

american rivalry over the years is partially spiritually based over whether one country can be the ultimate just what is good and what is evil in international affairs. i refrain from making normative judgments, but i know every church believes it and it has a direct line to, to god and a christian it though. so america, it, which is actually becoming less and less so it's not so different from environmental when that and then i'm not, the specialist was also a russia, but they believes that is very valuable. and you know, it's all in design, you know, it's coming back. absolutely. but i think

a self conscious nation wants to build its own, you know, have only jerusalem. that's for sure. but i think very few nations, in fact, only one nation plays that. you know, this is the one you only have only jerusalem, you know that. and the russian also allows for the multiplicity of gardens. the question is whether the americans are ready to leave even after the ukrainian crisis, whether they are ready to accept that they can be a multiplicity of developmental pass in the world. and that not everything. and not everybody will play to tune i want agrees that so is the missionary stain in american foreign policy. and this is why we have those complaints for democracy. and the campaigns for human rights, which yesterday blue ridge, national interest of the united states. and this is

part of america and 0, some positive sinks about it, some negative things about it. but this is towards that. so is a mission mission of israel, sometimes in american foreign policy. and which is not prismatic, when you displace too much of this type of desire will be moral and imposed. it's morality on the hello now and one of your article, you pointed out that you korean experience being last one on one as you put in ruth, less russian neighbor. what will reinforce israel's belief in south protection doctrine that in the times of crisis, you can only rely on yourself even if you nominally have very, very strong ally. do you think israel will be the only country to, to draw?

that's lesson or do you think there will be more countries that will stop relying on hooley, on, on the power of american to turns? i think we see in the middle east the clear with development in that direction because americans are signaling or the so we have ministration obama come and does a by nurse questions that they don't want to be as i may please. they want to retreat and to focus on the chinese challenge. and as a result of that, her as outgoing feels particularly among though so that boy will do seen countries said so willingly man without a shield against the hon. no, i do so. and as a result of that, of course we see and the alignment was excellent and but is well definitely has the self reliance. milton. from the very beginning, this is also

a jewish experience. and i am at a disdainful as a you know, zone i, investor guarantees on up the world much and i think same king has made a mistake, hoping that the west will until been on sale behalf. and despite goes ahead, said the worst case providing to claim, but no single american soldier cost the same crumbled. can i also ask you about your because your, after very long pass, this is spell and now seems to be more willing to invest into its own designs. perhaps even a sense. and that is very visible in germany. germany very dramatically rose and expenditures. is that something natural to be expected, or is it something to be well worried about in historical hindsight,

being made the mistake of the end of the call believing that they are going into a paradise. and those are national security problems, so will be sort of after the defeat of the soviet union. so i'll go home and this is a awakening for you. oh, i'm not sure how don't get to a less and maybe it will fail. you know, there is this dilemma between the guns. i may fail to be, but those are those and use the money for guns. but this remains to be seen but clearly . so is a change of it within your many or countries in on is a show for national defense. i guess it's my final question a, you mentioned this choice in butter and guns. and clearly there is also an economic

damage that's coming to all sides from a very harsh sanctions introduced by europe and the united states. you mentioned before that your ultimate test for foreign policy is how well it serves national interest. based on that, do you think the policy of sanctions is good enough for the europeans because it seems to be hurting not only the russians only the europeans, but also much of the much of their will. that has absolutely nothing to do with, you know, a, all the arguments in russian, the way we're really economic sanctions. we're really successful in, oh, america, right? sanctions against iraq against cuba for many years and didn't change behavior of the country. so i need to suffer and to pay heavy price for continue was a policy a i don't really much is for as a sanctions, fuller,

and change a calculus. so fashion leadership and of course the may still be seen. we shouldn't forget that is a sanctioned how thoughts those are with the you up in particular is dependent on russian n, o g, a russian weight. so it is so, you know, in every world we have 2 equations. one can cause a mold damage, but or so, and i got the equation, it was the countries that can take a most definitely, you know, for looking at history, i think her russia is displayed their willingness to work a cost full well what it believes. it's too well, i agree with you, but i also think that russia definitely has a capability to suffer

a lot. but it also has demonstrated a willingness to reach some sort of a compromise with israel. tricky or many other contentious neighbors and partners. i hope the west can also learn from bad news only. yeah. possibly know why they've outcome will be the people on the station. oh, okay. is there only? don't a has already. and i was not going to join, but they don't think so. russia miscalculated is a competence of its military forces, and that will set to the phone. you know, it's more power, go grain by then. no one said, you know, one more piece. it's ok. so maybe this will be, they'll come in maybe, you know, like met the washington. well, of the time,

mean we have to leave it here. thank you very much for your insights. you're welcome. thank you for watching hope to see you again next week on with me. ah, a

ah, a one of the most generative and most destructive western concepts, giving rise to a conflict in your brain rekindling the

old disputes about the right and wrong sides of history. still a chance for russia on the west meeting somewhere in the middle to discuss with them now joined by a friend in our president of the jerusalem institute for strategic studies. professor invites great to see you great and talk to you. thank you very much for your time. my pleasure. you wrote recently about the seemingly existential political need to be perceived as being on the right side of history. if we tried to put the apology, central began to out of it and look at it from historical and perhaps psychological perspective. what time do you need this righteousness? i don't believe in high psycho history basically is the history is written by the victim of the walls and good narratives remains a few. jo,

he's the ones that is defined by the big by the way, hitler was not really if you would have put more attention to the nuclear racial rather than non gauge messiah that you might have been the victim. would it be the right side of this story? i doubt that now the tensions between russia and the west, especially over ukraine, have been building for quite some time a couple of years it, no decades. and yet, when i interview western experts, they always point out that the russian actions in ukraine, however disagreeable they may be, are totally unprovable. this totally unprovoked, totally coming out of the blue. do you think that's a delivery, that's the station, or is it a genuine blindness? on that part that they somehow missed the last couple of years of the very tenuous relationship. it's been our size. i can understand for security dilemma,

somebody that tries to defend himself and accumulates both military power to defend itself. at the same time it is said to its neighbor. so this type of situation saline i, i definitely understand is her desire for larger margins of security. hey, we have to remember that nato expended is 12 close, so to wash and both of those. and when it was promised to do the kremlin what else at that time? so you know, this will not happen. i am pretty sure that the nozzle doesn't have any offensive intentions. but there's the same time, it's really difficult to dismiss. that is the feels of russia and to have historic

feel. so renovation funds are her funds o. s. so and this is precisely the problem of a security dilemma or in borough. i'm you from here from western x prison. right. nathan doesn't harbor any listed as the intentions in russia, but, you know, looking at some of the recent actions by major members in levy or syria, you know, they, maybe they were not intentional, but they have not the last. i mean, is it really so crucial to, you know, have these written as a statement of purpose that a tac rush rather than, you know, pursuing from the reality perspective and seeing what nature members have done militarily in recent history. i think as a understanding was obama and i mean we slip in libya

and silly i think by the license just not as it is a middle east. so face things that there. but i don't mean that as americans disagree and instead of sitting down and trying to divide, you know, divide zillow. this is the obama, this is my power. and then try to exist as it was doing the cold below. and i think that there is a understanding and so on how to run a foreign policy. they become a liberal or heavy illusion about what the international relations please. and as a result of that, we spoke misperceptions on both sides. now i take it from your writing that you

take the full cell of national interest rather than morality as the ultimate measure of any policy you wrote that and then we'll be hearing that no country is allowed to gamble on its very existence. and i think that's pretty clear and how israel conducts itself on the international stage. but if we look at the ration from that perspective in russia had the choice and then to act militarily with ukraine becoming increasingly militarized and increasingly hostile to russia. this will allow him to clarify, a country has no white, no model to commit suicide. and therefore we test to act upon its internet international. it's national interest. those choices, though he's a choice to surrender or so. so i show obviously as many choices. and they chose to act mean it really you know,

the. ready to defend its national interest in ukraine. and deb, this was following a serious little warning to the west, but say it was didn't, they could to and i'm not making any judgments any more judge. i can understand their behavior overstayed that once we have a large amount of to kill it this way, once larger mom and dad, i would like to point out that korean was to some extent, that was out caution when you leave next to a big bear like russia, you have to because that, so i have a chuckle about russia, russia being there. i think we're a little bit more civilized than leaving that. but you know, in that the perception, i mean, i want to ask you about a 20 it was that the addition of

using full now you know that you can obviously go, yeah, absolutely. and israel is also, despite being much smaller, it's also a country that takes its survival very seriously. and you are definitely not shy about striking targets on the country territory. and i think to some extent, israel, of course, projection projection relies on his adversaries knowing that some sort of richer vision is inevitable. so i want to ask you whether you think that the drastic actions that she's now taking in ukraine is that there, at least partially conditioned on russia being has a, tend to flip all as to your math and for way too long. have russia reacted earlier and more forcefully when the current prices have been avoided? doing things it could have been by i, by the states,

paying attention to russian security concerns. oh, so by the cube lease, well 1st, so crane in leadership and not the understanding that there are certain anxious may go vocal russian sensitivities. and as a result, though, we have no, it will deny which is not the really nice thing. people lose their lives. cities i will destroy, but this is this spelt of wall. now within the western camera, it has a very interesting position because it tends to walk along side many western resolutions condemning rushes behavior. but it is also not dismissive of russia, security concerns what the israel game or the israel or rationale in this

conflict resolution on this really clue own on hand. we also know dependent as united states or what's, what's the cause of free will and there we are. going to want to be it is american care was out of hand and not file form will i leave, am zillow sion, sammy in celia. and though we reach an agreement to coordinate our military action, so as a military action cecilia against iranian thong, which is something which is extremely important to his national security. and we want to make sure that this quality nation and continuous, which is dependent upon a russian good will in the national interest. and so we try to balance our no participation in, in what schools are western cam. it was say, realistic position. this

a v o n, our neighbor, which is a neighbor and to have to take it into consideration. we are not acting idealistically. i think they general outlook cove is really foreign policies around 20 take. and as a result of that, we are trying to balance those through interest, which is not going to be on india is doing the same amount of countries. so doing the same without the loan in what you call this game. and you both and to have to take into calculation. it's national interest. and when we did it, you mentioned russia presents in syria. and i think one out of can you to mention here is tricky. and i think you would probably agree that in syria, russia was both for accommodating,

it was respectful of both turkeys and israel's central security considerations. but it also could be power on some of the actions when, when it deemed in them. so that allows me to conclude that at least with israel and turn in syria, russia has learned how to differentiate between the, the various uses of power and why didn't work the same way with your brain go. so i agree was there was a when they decided to intervene on a jeep into a situation as a is wally and play a, a new claim or basic is always know is currently those sheep. and which is that, and i would say to no idea and then i'm out. it was ideal for being part of

the view. it didn't play a game. and as a result of that, and as i mentioned, this is one of these before. so we are witnessing now, since i mentioned turkey, you know, that it's a very challenging partner for both russia and these are especially under prime minister, and i'm at a prime minister. yeah, that's my mistake president. how could i forget that? but anyway, he's been a really with here, he's in powerful way for quite some time and 2001. yes. and our countries have gone through the periods of acute crisis and very pragmatic relationship. and we managed to restore some sort of partnership after the very

precarious incident back in 2015 when the church shut down a series, which was taken in moscow as a staff in the back. and yeah, it's worked towards restoring some sort of a pragmatic relationship. good serve as a model for, you know, future adversaries to that serve as a model for either russia and ukraine going forward, or perhaps russia and the way going forward. basically my knowledge and this is what we see developing is that is all again between the united states and its allies in the and i am and does a lot of times when i am a leak, i had a different leadership and the 2 countries i don't like you see joe i differently the blows the flag says united states doesn't have it,

kissinger at this times that understands international politics. understands politics and understands that sometimes you have to accommodate your lease there because they have ran national interests and day in international relations. unless you are extremely strong, you can get the present in bar. we have to take a very short break right now. we will be back in just a few moments agent. mm . mm hm. mm mm. the 1st time in history, an entire country's culture has been canceled to the very modern weapon cancel, culture. really desperate. wonderful. i was just

a little william from here just sitting there with the phrase now, particularly for us to counseling russian culture. yet them no secret of fuels with them. we what russia is created over the past 1500 years. there's no question. ashley condemned, reviled and rejected a bill of bill. 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 they have to pay to cost gate shostakovich. get that i need to. yeah. but yeah, she says that with the www album lee,

you're left with people to log in with only one main thing is important for not as an internationally speaking, that is at nations because allowed to do anything, all the mazda races. the reason you had gemini is so dangerous, is it the law,

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 south africa won't be pushed around the country's top diplomat. response the secretary of state as he tries to convince pretoria to sever ties with russia and china. this fear that we exist under some push is i think, a totally a rear, unfounded as you, as excuses israeli attacks on garza as self defense. we look at how western countries turn a blind eye to palestinian victims but bend over backwards when it comes to the conflict. any friend.