deliver the stability that the political establishment wants him to bring when it's been such a pleasure, having you with us for this hour's program from moscow, of course, as haughty international. thank you for sharing your time with us here in the russian capital r t thought com loads of stories that for you every hour we're on auto see we're on gab. we're on telegram find us out there in the world of the online information cycles. we'll see, you see oh, well, never be a victory for russia. wait solutions, you will you wait unless you're a new modem, but you look at a meal. crane war is a proxy war. this is a war between russia and the united states. naz on on media comes to not shoot kit, then in carbon dioxide. america forces are in,

you're not in europe to gauge in conflict with russian forces. the american forces are here and defend nato allies. what happens if nato escalates even more indiscretion? military operations become a war when you but does have so that will be rules that dealership and that will, that doesn't, is my dog. i see it that i see you at the us thinking possibly go to me live. so you sleep, he should week and he's dealt with home, just don't food or in your sewage near as he gets the girl who's ah, personally, my organization has been opposed, especially made up for many years. and we know that it was wrong. we know that it was a trail the promise made when the berlin wall fell. we know that the question is,

how are we going to proceed in a constructive way that will reduce the chances of nuclear war rather than increase the chances, which is what has occurred this year. ah ah ah ah, ah ah, ah, ah. hello and welcome to cross stock were all things are considered, i'm peter labelle. the conflict in ukraine is not only about which side will eventually prevail, the stakes are much higher. the outcome of this conflict will determine the nature

of a new geopolitical order. the west is fighting russia to maintain its global hegemony . much of the world would like to see this come to an end. ah . to discuss these issues and more on joined by my guest here in moscow. glenn decent. he is a professor at the university of south eastern norway as well as author of the book list of phobia propaganda international politics. and we have maxine switch golf. he is the director of the center for advanced american studies and laska state institute of international relations are joining cross back rules and the fact that means he can jump any time you want. and i always appreciate it. let's start with the glen here, gland. i just jot down a number of countries here. saudi arabia, turkey, the united arab emirates, india, south africa. now throw in opec plus,

i'm not too long ago. these were considered, you know, if not, um, staunch american. oh, eyes very supportive of the west. and these are significant countries, and hope that by itself is very important. they're not in line with washington's demands that the world condemn russia. how significant is that? go ahead one. ah, is very significant on this clarification about the world order that was established after the cold war. that of liberal hedge monet, folks around the united states has come to an end. and so again, we see that the rest of the world and not supporting down to russian sanctions is pretty much on nato. plus a handful of countries square, joined to sanctions. and is quite significant because i think it's approximately 85 percent of the world now live in country who haven't sanctioned russia. on the contrary, you see the opposite top happening. you see s e o expanding which is to some high corporation organization. you said the brakes now expanding,

taking more competencies. so, and again, this doesn't mean that they the same support, russia, again, vast majority do not, but they also do not support to the western sanction. so the point isn't here that we're replacing the american order with a russian center. gordon, of course not. that would be ridiculous. but the order that's coming to an end is this western centric order, where effectively the united states was able to dictate the rest of the world followed and they can many countries are seeing this with and with a view to grant opportunities, you mentioned a few country but also latin america here from brazil, argentina, many countries are now saying that, you know, doesn't mean that support russia, but now they're vulnerability to us pressures diminishing because they're always b. now other centers of power which they can lean towards. if the u. s. or show them too hard, so the world is definitely changing as well. there's no denying this max also.

and there's another angle to this following glen. had to say here, all the countries i mentioned and when glen meant mentioned is that there is a, this new thurston desire for sovereignty. because this is what people, you know, the united states, it with our nato allies around threatening everyone, you know, you know, from anywhere destroying your currency, destroying your financial system, like what they did with turkey, nato member in these companies, countries that are coalescing around these groups that it's not confrontational, what they're saying, i really love the word that glenn is competent. you know, we were, we're competing for our own foreign policy. we're competent enough to know what our national interest. that's it's, you know, i hate how the west always. it's us or them as it's confrontational, when i think that these new centers are saying, you know, we don't want to be confrontational with you, but we don't want to get involved in decision making that adversely affects us go ahead. well, in 1990 s the thomas friedman,

the columnist for the new york times written that's what didn't know what to call the new world order by what it was. so we called it. but what, by what it wasn't. so they said, you know, the post bipolar world. perhaps we don't know exactly what world water that is now, surgeon is going to look like what it is today. but we can perhaps argue that what we're seeing now is the beginning of the post unipolar world. as we know, it seems to break up of the soviet union in the bipolar system. i think the processes are multi happening and simultaneously motel level of the multi level domain. we still have the core of nuclear states, but we still have and it's, you know, in that sense it's, you know, the polish centric world. so to say, we perhaps have the economic do awfully in the form of

u. s. a. china and the kind of deal with kinetic level. but we also, as you and you and glen are good, are seen the emergence of a great number of states for seeking greater autonomy. and while most of them are still very much hooked to the western financial institutions are very much dependent on the international institutions where the west has a dominance. we do see the new try for poor sovereignty and for suburb decision making, especially in critical forms. and many of them, even though they vote against russia on the un general assembly at both of the level level leads and both the level of people see that despite that is happening now from the battlefield. a crane or an artist other domains as kind of the beginning of the new post colonialism. so to say, such

a really good point because there is that angle to it as well. you know, but if you, if you listen to western leaders and pundents media, this is a struggle of good versus evil, democracy versus photography. and they love to play this kind of mark. we're seeing all this. but the core things that go across everything that we really said is it is dollar privilege, the dominance of the dollar in which we have seen that even though the united states has considers europe. it's ally, it's. is that a pretty good job of damaging the, the euro. ok, and making the, the entire euro sphere very dependent on the u. s. that's a strike with, that's a strike in the right direction for the us. and there's also energy, which again is kind of counter intuitive step off these western leads that are these greeny green maniacs. but they do want to be able to control energy. and i'd also throw in other commodities, so it cuts this way as well because what, there's

a huge difference between money and energy. i would say you can print money, but you can't print energy. and this is why i would even go as far as to say, one of the reasons why the north stream to like winds were damaged when well, energy is obviously the life of blood in any economy. and this is been one of the problems stuff we've had in the west during this uniform order. another problem is and during global hedge i'm on, if you can afford to make a lot of mistakes because you can absorb the punishment, but over time, the problem. so start to accumulate and again, if you see now this idea that we could just sanction all the rush energy and we will be fine. i mean we're cutting off my blood, but we listen. but they say, well, we can diversify. but can we? because again, this is not our 1st mistake, spoiling relations with the russians. we also put sanctions on defense, women against the iranians. now eliminating compared to how this is all. i mean, you're, you're, if you're pushing too hard against everyone,

especially the energy producers, you know, it's not worth this right or wrong or good versus evil. it's just, it's, it's physics, it's reality that economists will grind to a halt. and so, but on the 1st point i agree as well. no, i don't think there's of course, this conflict, this has been dimensions is very complex, but this attempt to reduce it down to being a conflict between democracy versus authoritarianism. first of all, it is ridiculous. this is very poor who respects to understand this conflict is suspected when a replacement saying that if a competition between good and evil, we always done this with the russians, to be honest with your parents, against the people. this last, you know, civilization versus don't barbarians. we are, we always, we always had this is you simplify everything about the narrative of good versus

evil. it's good for mobilizing support among the population, but it, it doesn't quickly with the right tools to actually solve this conflict, which is demonstrating forever on why you're absolutely right. particularly is in the shop for emptying out and you're getting colds and the winter, the good. any good versus evil thing, a wayne's and importance here. max. one of the things that's very interesting is the, because the way the west is framed the conflict in ukraine is i see that this is a ukrainian democracy or whatever. but when you go outside of the nato world bubble, it's pretty amazing. russia, the west is declared war on russia and in a variety of ways. and the rest of the world is almost in awe is being able to stand up to the entire thrust of all western institutions. and it's the west that is going into recession and russia is coming out of it is. i've talked to many people in the global south that are just amazed that the all powerful west doesn't

seem all that powerful anymore. that well that, that, but also there is one, i think, token of the crumbling kind of system. it isn't the very fact that secretary of lincoln had to say, and i'm not quote directly something of the kind that the west that the world cannot live without usa leadership. i think the very fact that he's talking about it is symptomatic in the sense that will a i had just oh, with the world has lived without us, let us show for most of us history. but it's not to, to degrade of the great many things that the united states has done for the world. and i think it's one of the, of, you know, things that russia should totally avoid doing as, as this. so if you and, and the iron curtain that is full and now is full and on the opposite sanity left russia, that is shutting down itself from the rest of the world. and right now, i actually have been blanking for remarkably right here in washington. that does

not set the rules for the world than someone else will. well, all okay, may be a collective group of countries well or different organizations working through consensus. when you're agreeing, i mean, i don't see the, the why it shouldn't be so dramatic because the world is in pretty bad shape. maybe there should be better collective leadership. go ahead. no, i agree. and i also have to be said, this is constant warning from the usa for china. and you had your mom, but it has to be point out like china will not occupied decision to us have in the ninety's, then want to will not be another sole superpower. capable of actually dominating the entire planet. i did this era is over. so, so the horse with lincoln is expressing is the fact that the u. s. won't on his own, able to dictate at the rules of the game. and again, this is a common phrase from just keep in mind that obama, when he was,

and launching this economic election agreements in, in east asia. he also wrote this all that in york time. so he warned us, listen, the future on the economic relations in china. the rule should not be written by china. it should be written by us. and it's very sarah, some mentality. again, it's up. it's just like in europe is locked. russia being the center, it's not going to happen. and also in a choice of china going to dominate everything. it's not going to happen at all. but it's this transitional from unit polarity to multiple r t in which it part of process diplomacy ends. it's not one centered dictating to the rest, but to promise it now instead has to be compromised and negotiations, which have become lot the words in the past few years. but this is how this is something we have to adapted because the distribution of power no longer reflects unit polarity and dust reality, which states should address and adopted also do not

a states for its own interests. yeah, for its own interest central it, it's, it's all too often for god. you know, i mean, john joe biden became present. he said he would ever of middle class foreign policy . well, it's anything but i gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break, and after that short break, specialists will need to stay with our ah, ah

ah, welcome back to grow up. we're all things are considered. i'm peter. well, this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing some real. ah glasgow maxima, maxine moscow. i chuckle you were talking about mentality said in the at the end. the 1st part of the program here. i'm sure you came across joseph burrows, gardening essays about you know, how europe is the garden, and you have to fight off the jungle invading the, the garden. and then he had a follow up blog to try to go, you know, he dug himself in very deep using a gardener's motif here. but i mean, this is really a mentality and glen was touching upon and isn't, you know, we have these western leads. they can't imagine a world being run differently,

which is so ignorant of history. empires rise and fall, nation states come and go. i mean, if anything about history it's, it's all about flux, but we have these western delete that have this kind of fukuyama believe that we're at the end of history and nothing can change and everybody is in there right position, which is a historical go ahead. well, with all the criticism, i think bro has a good point of by arguing that the european prosperity is very much dependent on the security guarantees from u. s. and chief energy from russian ship was from china. and that's none of that is in place, except perhaps for even greater dependence on the united states in terms of military and security infrastructure. well, i think the, the, the, the very wording that was used by burrell, in particular, but also by a great number of your western pundits and policy makers reflect the sense of off

mentality to continue to leave in the comfort zone with the, you silly and then 99 is where, where the rest of the world has never had that conference zone in the, in the 1st place. but secondly, that the comfort zone is no more even for the west. so to continue to, to talk, to use the language that was adequate. perhaps in 90 ninety's now that they exactly as address when pointed out that the district of power no longer left uniform. heritage is absolutely ridiculous. one other thing i think what we're seeing now is the system of checks and balances across the globe was changing dramatically. the one that emerged after world war 2, but it's also changing inside the united states. will, will see this, you know, the part of bites seek to change this. then the system that has actually made united states what it is was recently, but it's also gonna projecting to the move to change the system, jackson biologist, and accumulate even more power that, you know,

automatically produces culture counter or benches and push back from russia from china and from other states that it's just natural that i think not very well, appreciate it across the western elite where people do get it. i would say, i absolutely agree with you here. you haven't yet. again, part of the postwar settlement plan of as it were, bretton woods and, and what not in the the united states in the west, in general have been able to financial eyes, their economies and in it, it worked for a long time and believe company and the west became very, very rich and the envy of the world. but let's so slowly coming to an end, you can just print so much money. you can, you can't print prosperity. um, you can use a wise monetary policy from time to time fiscal policy, but that it's coming to an end that they're come to the end of their rope here. because as i kind of alluded to all already in the program, is it instability will come through real things, oil, grain,

ok. i'm a natural gas. this is one of the reasons why are people wanting when they see they economic system that the, the west is created is become unstable. and there you go to start seeing a level of ms. ration in the west. people want to go with what it has real value in . it's really remarkable for viewers, we're looking at currencies. ah, no one would have thought including high cell. there are before february 24th it a, very soon the russian rouble would become a hard currency because we are treated as us off currency before. people actually want rubles now, because it's, it's not these rubles, are backed up by real things. commodities. well, well that's, that's correct. and well, of course here you could have a system, nicholas international economy run by countries without natural resources. however, this was ever since the repeal of the corn was in britain. no idea, said one,

they will do the high tech aspect of the economy and the financial and the rest would the mayor export the foreign products or, or national resources. however, this is not the international distribution of labor we currently having because you see that outside the west, this is where almost all the natural resources are bought. and we also now see that they have their own financial instruments that have their own bank stop the payment systems. and also as especially with china, they being and they also dominate fi tech area. they know the developing their own transportation corridors down you know, i, one after another you see that the, the west of necessarily have this is real strategic industry which creates huge dependencies from the rest of the world. so instead you see that the demand strategic industries, independence is an operator, will reside in other countries like russia within our oldest natural resources. and again, the people who lost you out of the room only a year ago by suggesting that,

you know, because russia wasn't a real economy, also gas station, upgrading us, an economy. this was kind of the line and we were thrown. but again, we in the west, we do everything at the russian economy. i mean, we took stolen one to 300000000000 from a central bank, were cut off from the swift payment system, put your sanctions on this entire economy. we stopped importing energy, even though it's destroying you're doing oldest things. and now suddenly, you know, we see that the economist recently noted the russia from not recovering. it's going to go back to growth while european for thinking. so obviously this is not taught to expect us, so we don't have to reassess some of the assumption which we haven't. and that's right there glenn will. that's the nature of the be here. why?

but it's very true. this is what really scares me because there isn't a reassessment of you know, how do we get into this mass because they won't accept that they've worked under false assumptions. i've been saying for months now, bad narratives, great bad outcomes and they can't reassess that because it goes back down to the moral purity issue that is really blocking their a same view of geo politics. and if speech go ahead, man. well, you know, isn't any major confrontation, the 1st level of the confrontation is kind of ideological one. and when the opponent see that their narrative isn't going through, the confrontation falls down to the can a certain level of which is money. and i think we've come through both of these stages now where, you know, the west has continued to push these ideological america and what it sees that it doesn't fly in the kind of co go global south. it's going to, you know,

it switches gears to economic urgent and sanctions and all kinds of things. and when that doesn't help, you know, what goes to the 3rd level of confrontation, which is pretty much violence at terror. and then the military cars and, and of course, and where is certain, bifurcation points where either, you know, the policy makers in the west will take decision to continue to push for more kind of military pressure on russia than others that are in the if not supportive of russia then please continue their neutrality that is not favorable to western interest in this situation. or, you know, the big interests that are behind west politics. you know, whether it's energy id and just see others. bush, the elite to be more, i wouldn't say more agreeable, but push leads to to, to seek more, some concessions and compromises. and i think when you have the wording rushing

agreements in capable, exactly, think day people for, for now most of the western lease, our agreement capable. but we'll see them full one by one recently. you know, and i, i want to kind of put a ball on, on top of this year. you know, just a barrel is easy to read and kind of make fun. ok. because i think it's a very antiquated view of history and what, how, how europe was gotten where it's going to. but i see this conflict at the center of this conflict then ukraine is in the waning of 500 years of european western global control. it's coming to an end and it's coming to and very rapidly, much faster than we would have ever thought. maybe it's because our light levels of technology go ahead. well,

the reason it's difficult to imagine is because we never had this before. and then we talked about the world orders to maine, the dominant world onto ever had most of the sovereign nation state to show us established i was the piece on this fall in 1648. this was the main one. but again, even this was limited to europeans, it was sovereignty for civilized peoples. not you know, the barbarians outside of your business and kind of them the logic and, and this was them replaced after world war 2. you had a bipolar system in which you have very diminished sovereignty for all except the 2 poles of power and in the, of after world war or after the cold war. we have uniform order. now we with them to think of this is most multilateralism because the western countries collect having just collect the original niche. but now this distribution power is gone. also, the legitimacy behind the system is completely gone because it can't have a world or without the legitimacy as well. but the rest of the world is, for example, human rights and civil posted limits. what states could do an international system

limit the use of force and step with being used to enable the use of force. so to excuse, you know, the other talking on people less bond and less the regime change less and they've so, so it kind of the legitimacy have disappeared. now what we're going back to now is, you know, we're not going back to bipolar system even before world war 2, because that was a multiple narrative, but only with european powers and united states. what we're going back to now is like truly global or multiple. our thing was, you know, china and you know, soon in there like all of this and non western countries are taking their top seats . this is something we never had before. so i can understand why, you know, a fellow like, you know what i am going back to, you know, the colonial rhetorical rule of the jungle and europe is a jungle, is unless we go in and civilized jungle, doesn't we? our garden, if you don't see less jungle, it will invade us. this is unfortunate rhetoric, but it does reflect that we can't really imagine this new world order, which is now coming. i mean it's not in the future is already here and it's

happening very, very fast. which is why it's difficult to adjust. well, i would follow up on that. i would say that i used to work global agenda gemini and my introduction, a global hedge. i'm on when it sees its power seating. it well lashed out and i think that's exactly what we're seeing right now, and i think that's what that's collected war, western war against russians all about gentlemen. that's all i want to thank all my guest here in moscow. i want to thank you for watching it here. are you next time? remember? oh ah, ah, personally, my organization has the apology, especially made up for many years and we know that it was wrong. we know that it was a, we trailed a promise made when the berlin wall. so we know that the question is,

how are we going to proceed in the constructive way that will reduce the chances of nuclear war rather than increase the chances, which is what has occurred this year. ah ah ah with get a a national a few miles on earth by sure, clever i bought in the book us yet. i just lavish, fortunately i didn't. and then you view it, of course, ask us about.