simply a bad photo, however, is not the 1st time the embrace of extremism has caught his controversy in ukraine . let's show you some more in may this photo with a soldier wearing an emblem of an infamous, not the tiny division was posted by president lindsey himself. later deleted after a public backlash and the following pitcher was taken last month in the hut cough region. here the landscape can be seen guarded by soldiers with the same symbol on their attire. that photo was also later deleted, while former us defense on list, michael maloof is hugely concerned by the reach and the influence of what our neo nazi groups. this is one of the concerns that a lot of us have. and obviously it was also a point that president made when he decided to undertake his special military operation to rid the country of the, of the nazis once and for all. but for the, the commander in chief as commander chief,

he has had right wing roofs and neo nazi group with part of his own armed forces. so it's not surprising and i looked at that braces very carefully and the room is, it's ancient. but the way this one was tilted and comprised it definitely represented and reflected accurately the, the actual nazi symbol. it's not the 1st time and you see these group. so walking around openly, displaying these symbols. well, we knew it back in 2014, when the qu actually was staged. you didn't hardly hear a whimper out of any of the e u countries or the united states who was working with these right wing groups was especially as off as off actually has representatives in the united states and our, and have been actively recruiting us per se us people but it's been an awful lot of

breaking news on this coverage here on our chance national from moscow. appreciate your company on this monday. the 24th stories told the com when we return, but top of the hour, between now and then catch up on everything you need to know it's our website. dot com use the ah ah hello and welcome to cross stock where all things are considered on funeral about 1st it was the north stream pipelines now the bridge connecting crimea to the russian mainland. both have been sabotaged. both can be considered terrorist

attacks on infrastructure. there can be no doubt moscow will react, but how and against whom ah discuss these issues and more i'm joined by my guest here in moscow. maxine susco, he's the director of the center of advanced american studies at moscow state institute of international relations. and we have to meet with bob, which he is a political analyst editor. and you know me, internet media project are generally across top roles. in fact, i mean you can jump anytime you want and i would appreciate. ok matt. so kind of put this all together because, you know, we have 2 major sabotage. we have the north stream pipelines and then we have the bridge connecting crimea to the russian mainland. these are infrastructure projects, civilian infrastructure. though, obviously everything can be dual purpose. these days, we still haven't seen

a major direct reaction from moscow. i think there's a tendency here in moscow is for a strong reaction. but you know, there's, there's a big difference between scoring points and achieving goals. and i think that the, the dilemma that the russian side is looking at this, all of this, obviously to one degree another at the behest of the united states tony blink and saying this is a tremendous opportunity when it comes to the pipeline. and then we had ranks, of course, the minutes after it was reported, the bridge been attacked. thank you usa. so we can connect those dots. so none of us are going to make any a bit of decisions because we're not in a position to do so. so your thoughts on how this is going mass, but i think on most of the attacks are important in 3 ways. one is see symbolic attack in the sense that, you know, especially the of the attack on the crimean bridge is supposed to happen. i think

was that was a plot it to happen on thursday and then we, we've seen reports to something went wrong and it took place the day after. but, you know, the, the in case of the nor stream, of course it's, it's a, it's a symbolic attack on, you know, to stop as american officials put it depends european dependency on the russian guess. it's also the 2nd thing, it's an attack on the symbol. both the crimean bridge and the north trim have been a symbol of russian power, energy, power, geopolitical power. and the, you know, bond in them was an important act of sabotage or act of terrorism. i wouldn't, you know, perhaps go as far as suggesting that's exactly what it looks like. and finally, it's, it's, it's a 3rd way it's, it's an attack on an important security chord. you know,

this ukrainian bridge is an important logistics route for the russian troops defending crimea song. and that is important in the wake of the plan, the premium counter offensive on that region. and. busy the north stream is an important element in the russian energy security, and most importantly, perhaps our viewers european energy security. and so it's not the software that mostly europeans will end up with the ultimate losers here. so, you know, as they used to say back in the day we produce who's, who's gaining from all of that, who's getting from all this is set up perfectly for you. wow. i think that basically with a beach is mostly psychological because they're a real connection. reestablish can just out after the explosion that you know,

the small stuff have been passing since evening, you know, since evening or saturday ok, drugs be carried by fairies. but in general, it's not one of these great for a long time. so that damages want to say, go, i want to look at that in a broader perspective. i like the article in foreign policy might even walk around it, rushes, defeat would be america problem and there is a now in this article would profit. let me go to stephen book the ukrainian victory, stressed on the same political force in tonight the states that could use the counter productive excesses or the you or you are a liberal procedures will grow. i mean, finally, in order to success, the 30 years or favor and the quote then i think is the answer. because you're

going to, people are not going to write a, you know, be technically technically unable to get a russian guess that the good. yeah. you know, in case most team to and austin, yvonne stayed intact. right. so these 5, this one is i don't want to go and the ultimate benefit are people i want to profit from it. a liberal procedures. they, i use ingredients in the same way they use syrian rebels in 2011, 2000. well, this is not my thought, i read it to review and i agree with it. so we know that these forces are destructive and when americans and europeans are asking the question, why is it that china india a lot of african countries, the middle east? why are they so reluctant to condemn russia?

well, precisely because the big just in case of this, so you bring in big 3 will be the know can show it and the broker see this would destroy them. you could destroy much of it. and, but there's, there's a particularly when it comes to the bridge max, we have to say the obvious in this is what made a lot of people here very angry. that's russian territory. that means that it's happened once it is going to happen again. i mean, and i think all of us are in agreement that you know, we'll never know what happened to north street. that's usually happens. ok waiting because i would be the investigation of the powers that be the noun will never be held accountable. but i mean, this is a reaction and it seems to me, this is my own only opinion. is it, this is like, particularly with the attack on the bridge, it's a fundraising event to show you know, the ukrainians are taking the initiative. the, the, the, the russians are on the back foot. it's a way to keep ukraine top of mind. ok,

because i have no illusions about the outcome of this conflict. ukraine will be destroyed. ok, be utterly destroyed. just how that happened. so i'm sorry to be so cynical, but you know, it, you know, ukraine was top of the headlines again because the attack on the bridge is already been pointed on this program. it's already operating hours afterwards. your thoughts mass? well, i think. busy you know, as, as isn't important or whatever your korean official, some policy makers think and take action or stance. a secondary here. and i think for more, russian policy makers is also kind of secondary in the sense that was important as to see the signals and the reaction from coming from washington. and i think we've seen some change in that position over the over the several months here. as we remember back in the day when the americans for suppliers ukrainians with high mars

the state department tried to, you know, highlighted that the do not endorse attacks on the russian territory for say, you know, and only those weaponry will be used against the russian positions on your training territory and things like this. now, now we'll see some actors behind ukraine are either openly cherishing those attacks as the ones coming from the baltics or making pretty dubious. but pretty, a clear signal is coming from washington that they actually appreciate an approval of the past. now what will make of that is an attempt to and at the same time, the same people speak about the dangers of the russian escalator. a rhetoric on the use of nuclear arms and stuff. but the same people are actually in my view, pushing the conflict to a new level where, you know, the attack open attack on civil and infrastructure is no longer a taboo. and actually are inviting russia to launch these attacks.

and that, i think something, you know, if you read with, if you a couple of weeks ago that we haven't actually started, i think, i think she actually meant that not the use of nuclear detective, but exactly the things that russia can do, the damage, the russia can do with conventional weapons, disrupting the logistics and disrupting the civilian infrastructure that would disrupt the communication of you printing intelligence, all kinds of things. and i think those attacks are actually inviting a moscow to do that, whether it will follow the passage of course, of the question mark that every policy maker and i don't want it low cost. it's not america. grady. i mean, this is pure cynicism here. uh huh. i'm going to ask you a question that a lot of people are asking me after the attack on the bridge. why are around, are you kidding? bridge is still standing then?

well, they're already coasted. russia was suggesting to destroy the radical position to retaliate. well, i would say that since the russian army, since president would have not yet agreed to use such methods, i think it's a radical position because again, this is something that americans to log on to stand, you know, the view this war. so what would be an american for some evidence for us ukrainians, indistinguishable cross. i mean, in 90 percent of the cases, if i agree in person came to worst one, spoke russian to me. he's russia, he's a russian would be so i would be able to tell, well, maybe this would be someone from the south of someone from a lot of people speak with secret x and then people come from to year from different control. so for us, this is not an 80 and therapy. these are not ease. you know,

these people are exactly like us. they have been just separated from us for 30 years by forced our media. i will pick up on what the max has just said, you know the problem with moral, with the moral side, all these actions. i mean, this isn't right now, how did you react to this explosion on the gray mean beach during which 2 civilians died too? absolutely innocent civilians. ok, we do not know the truck driver was here. comic garza was just used by the spectrum services but to people and then it was mr. for the next reaction. crimea preach. this is the stop, isn't illegal, has to be destroyed. everything you great question. and so the moral of these people there ethics is exactly why that gary raynichol morals over there. 2020th century. i know just, you know, it's rang and said

a little more in the same wait for the current american leech ship and for the leadership of the u. s. in the house. could you see russia is moral, even if you defeat the breed, even if you're exposed the breed, just if you're just rob appliance, if you kill a lot of people, watch c, b s were nothing to do with the war. this is all more or, you know, if you have to humiliate, you know, you are back role. russian needs a state, you know, road good. you, the american can. so just wanted quite well. will these people ever since this is the sign with anderson's political sports. ok. and that point we're going to jump in here gentlemen, we're going to go to a short break, and after that chopper, we'll continue our discussion on some real nice. stay with our team. ah,

look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such order that conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. at that point, obviously is to place trust rather than a job with artificial intelligence. real summoning with obama protective own existence with oh, welcome back to cross stock. were all things are considered? i'm peter. well this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing some real

news. i ah, let's go back to max here in moscow. we're all in moscow on this edition of the program. you sent it earlier in the 1st part of the program. these are, i don't see the attacks on the, the pipeline as an in the bridges and some kind of strategic to feed. i think it's more of a, of a media storia, as i said earlier to keep ukraine in the news. but you know, the, it, there's a certain point when a foreign country, backed by a very strong country, the united states in this country. in this situation, i mean, this is an attack on your territory. i mean, this doesn't that call for a declaration of war. i mean, we've gone from the special military operation to something else. i mean, is that going to far as i'm being in patient?

well, i understand those who are calling for the declaration of war and you know, talking about the need to, you know, full mobilization. you have all kinds of suggestions at the same time. i think since this is a clear publication and says since this, the methods for this provocation were picked in pretty radical way. you know, it's clear that the crimean bridge has been defended by a strong and air defense system. so they chose this specific to put it mildly way of attacking it to, to, to make it damage. so this clearly, as i said before, invites a russian to, to immediate kind of knee jerk reaction in a similar fashion, which i think is not going to happen. i see there is a difference between the same similar attacks on the russian military base and syria. my sister is back in the day, one russians immediately

a launch. you know how a fire on their positions here is a more strategic and more kind of smart das here and obviously before the investigation is over and the russian one force under knows what exactly happens and who's behind that. i think the retaliation will be picked in a more cold blooded manner and not necessarily need to press the issue here because with great fanfare here in russia, the induction or new regions republic into the russian federation. ok. and then, how is it not russian soil, that's when message is mosque outstanding to these new republics. i mean, the deal was you both were going to project, you know, not the way the devil's advocate here. but i think that part of the calculus on the western side is to intimidate because i strongly believe it. i've been saying it

per month. and that's one reason it explains a special military operation. it's, it's page you liberate areas and you convince people. yeah, we're going to capture, we're going to stay here. you don't, you know, we're not going to run away. ok. this is a tax on the bridge is sending a very strong message and i think that's what a lot of people are saying. how are you going to react to this? i'm sorry to be so hard core as they say, but i think it's part of the discussion. you know, i don't disagree with that. none of that. i totally think this is the case, and i totally think that it's important for the people who voted to rejoin join with russia is to send a clear message that they are a defendant and they're not going to be abandoned to or you know, so in the 100 the bus of the ukrainian military absolutely. so in this sense. busy there is a need to as well, not switch back, but i would say it's important to not pretend as if nothing has really happened.

you know, i agree with my, with my colleague, mitre here in terms of going to strategic communications that haven't been much disruption. it's more symbolic at the same time, you know, because this is now being picked up by ukrainian propaganda and the western mainstream media. they're trying to spin it and you know, double down on the printing contra offensive and the rushes and retreat. and that message has stayed there for over a month. now i think that that is dangerous in terms of shaping perception and you know, it's feeling cold for fear in the people. so the need for action on the russian side is definitely there. and i believe some changes are being made right this minute, including in the direction of the russian military operations in the, in the defense ministry. so it a, me, it,

we've had reports on endless number of reports over the last few weeks. i mean, i max and again, gave it a good introduction. the 1st part of the program, you know, it's a certain weapon systems they wouldn't send to ukraine, but by no troops on no boots on the ground. you know, we heard this in, we've seen how we, this is a progression. it's mission creep here. now you have the, the main broad sheets in the united states, gleefully talking about the cia footprint in ukraine. i mean, this is kind of, again, this is kind of flaunting it in front of a, in front of the russians. you know, we're involved in this, i, me, this is what really worries me in all this ridiculous talk about russia using nuclear weapons. there has been no talk of it here. it's only been an invention in western media. but nato and politically united states are a co belligerent no matter how you cut it here. and with these high profile attacks . i mean, at one point in time, russia's going to say you're your euro,

co belligerent here in the, in. this is the escalation that all of us worry about. go ahead. well, i am indeed warrant by the american reaction. i don't believe our president would use nuclear weapons or i think he's been go, i mean read, he's called, well, we will use all weapons, a search committee. apparently he didn't even say the want nuclear american reaction because look, well the united states wants to retire. so there are always certain stages, you know, 1st a small war is for all the want it to be the rock weight or something. then the lead is demonized. like, oh he's so dangerous. he's absolutely crazy. can get inside his mind. he can destroy the wall. so the american public is convinced that this person needs to be taken out of the se, and there's a stops. so we have all the stove in here and i'm very concerned. i'm very

concerned my general trust you already on a b, c. you know, on the, the perspective what would happen if there were that these things wouldn't use us nuclear weapons. he said that we will take out the game is terrible. what take out all the russian forces are here and, you know, to review their writing more terrible things. there will be a cyber attack when russia paralyzed them, they will find some conventional lisa, you know, the russian, please don't. they show their cards or the show in their cards general portray is, i mean, his reaction destroyed the black c fleet. i mean, i don't know what he was talking about. i mean, maybe complete a lot of them. so certainly a reflection of the caliber of thinking that is in washington. but this is all you can do right? also re, ukraine, drums out of the picture year is really, really show with what this is all about. this is about force with change in russia

because when they talk, that's why they introduce the element of nuclear weapons because your brain doesn't have them. so this is again, pivoting to a, russia is the, the of, of the united states and nature when they're not officially belligerent in this conflict. go, head mass. look, i think at this, at this point in time, all of the parties involved in this conflict are facing pretty hard dilemmas are choices. we've discussed the choices that the russian leadership is nation right on the one hand to respond to the other hand and still maintain some level of adequacy as opposed to as opposed to counterparts. ukrainians are on the on. there are also, you know, so you have zalinski resuming, he's talking, coming in venting a dirty nuclear bomb, something that perhaps partner food and back in january to, to launch the attack. but also you have, you know,

massive counter offensive on several fronts and the casualties of ukrainian military suffering, which is never going to be discussed in the, in the western mainstream media are huge. they're only talking about the russian casualties. and you have certain interesting things happening, i think, in the american political lead. where on the one hand, there is a need in the run up to the new terms to show that vitamin has at least one issue on the control. that is, you know, rationally printing conflicts, whereas it's bipartisan isn't absolutely right. and the agenda he came with office is now under, you know, is not there where there is no foreign policy for the middle class that, that is because there is no control out of the migration issue. there is no control of the installation, things like that. so they need to show that at least one thing, the most important issue for american foreign policy. now,

this crisis is under control and you know, the administration knows what to do with it, but the way they are also quite restrained in the way they want to, you know, approach this conflict to not track us directly there, even though they will re direct to the united states in the nato allies to that conflict. and they're showing this support by sending even more dubious signal, says the ones that secretary blinking made in relation to the bombing of the crimea bridge and more stream. things like this, that all of that doesn't really sit well in moscow and creates the impression that the west is absolutely. they are not just coming for food, but common for the destruction of russia. and that in a way is conflict. 2 or more, you know, dangerous extremes in a very, very, very way, quickly. i mean, obviously even rapidly running out of time. but the mean them,

i was barely alive. i was alive during the cuban missile crisis. neither one of you were. but we are in, if you know the history of that conflict, which is there are similarities and there's some differences. and, but this isn't cuban missile crisis kind of in slow motion. ok, except for it's on rushes. your step in before and q that was on america's doorstep . they're in there consciously aware of this in kind of detailing what max i to say here. this is, you know, you want to make, you want to inflame the conflict as much as possible without being drawn into it. but we see our mission creep is work and every single conflict in recent history. so that's why i'm very, very concerned, because i hear there's really loose rhetoric from the united states and it's official them. but this is the cuban missile crisis in reverse. 30 seconds team and go ahead. well, i think it, so it wasn't the cuban missile crisis, because during the cuban missile crisis, because of march or adequate need to ship in washington. and the woman is the

3rd day and i go and you will already already know staff, you know, people who are involved with crisis told me that she was out with 2 years later by the bureau because of the lead for almost may get hold of some well, you know what the states now is give all in danger because they. ready want you to miss not to join, they don't you the near future. so it was not even real change in ukraine. yes, it was the case in your you know, what kind of get a run out of time? want to thank my guest here in moscow when i think our viewers from watching us here are the see you next. i'm remember across knuckles ah, ah, [000:00:00;00]

with we will take serious steps to provide an adequate response, can measure it with the levels of threats to the russian federation. no one should have any doubts about that. let me pose and compares ukraine's options, primarily in crimea and other border regions to terrorism against russia. evil and they will have ok very harsh response to the remarks comments. russia conducts an enormous missile strike operation on various ukrainian targets, including military command centers and energy facilities. for to had for you this hour here on our feet. i meant to report that both the president of feller,