reason was so foolish, a security with the station owl has been become becoming intolerable for us. now, can i ask you specifically about the language? because in just the other day, we had a few cranes at security council. alexi denila for percent with russia sounding family, suggested getting rid of their russian language completely. and while he did that in a very derogatory term, he compared thrasher speakers to frogs. what i want to ask is not the moral assessment, but rather than the sort of analytical assessment of what sort of consequences this math, psychological experiment of trying to raise the mother tongue from a substantial part of the population could produce. well, most, most probably there will be no, you crate in the end, or if you played in then you to the pulses of their present cranium. government her as 2 attempts to raise

russia from russia for. but who should it? oh, it was very clear from the beginning that the korean kiva elite elite was afraid of russian ladies as a more competitive. and this was the were and heard from english as a more competitive. and so they were making their policies are building their feet on the anti russian platform. there was only one of the reason of this conflict and the loo weakness of, of that elite. but it was a reason. but focusing on the language as this says, sort of battle ground or it even back in 2014. i think many of the van said it was a capital is this language bill was one of the capitalists for russia's actions. i'm a big fan of ludwig byzantine. it says famous selling mystic scholar. and there are

many, many a studies that confirmed his famous statement that the limits of my language are the limits of my world. that language indeed defines how you see the world in this sense, doesn't it make an a military and strategic meaning to try to erase somebody else's language or in a, in a way that is happening at the local elite or some of the leads are changing the course of the countries are also oh, using the language question the same as a 1st of all that via estonia, in that that has been a bit. oh, the 20 that had been her happening. go throw the history. math for sir language is one of their defining features of the nation, even though the defining. so when you want to build in your nation, you have to build that around learn language. if the language belongs to maturity,

i always share my lives elsewhere. it becomes a problem. i wonder if you see any and linkages between this efforts to suppress the russian culture and that the, the fear of the russian influence if, if we take that one can influence other nations through their language through their culture, then indeed, the russian culture becomes a very potent weapon, of course, i mean a strong culture is a potent weapon, but i would blew up a nice culture for it is a one of the strongest of instruments of influence for there is no question about that. so the, so i fully understand, i mean those people though i do not share the policies who want to get rid of richard culture. now, in one of the articles,

he suggested that due to the composition at camellia ethnic composition of ukraine's population, it state what can only be shaped and midwife through a very deliberate anti at russian stance. now i understand how it could be one of the political technologies, but why do you think it's the only way available for, you know, because not, not only because of the language, because you creed has a very weak historic nation who they don't want to denigrate the crater, there hadn't been ukraine for her 9th century, so age and they have their, they, it has been a land which has been run over by different tribes countries. so the roots of ukrainian feet of a relatively weak and so they have to so they have to dig these rules out to ship. but any our choice app has its costs

and consequences. people who try to think about the ukranian political future. surely they would have understood that there in our country, like russia would not be able to take that indefinitely. or do you think they didn't do that? if you did that in think in that way and that away at the beginning, rushes to week. i russia was frank to integrate into the west. so it was not a problem for much political consciousness. people like myself and very, very few outside of my can. our country, even very few in my country weren't understood that but to we were minister. i remember that in their ninety's, and i was heading, organizing them all russian, ukrainian meetings and commission because nobody was interested. it wasn't because

the russians too, were taking your crane for granted that it was, they were taking a grade for granted. and also one original company at no cost more than g, d, p o, v. free. and they were, we were who made our mistakes. we often accused her and you yourself often accused the western air arrogance and ignorance. do you think russia is se guilty of the same thing? absolutely. no, we were ignorant that we did wanted to know what was happening area where we didn't care and although we pay will be the price, it does not marry original either cranium, the behavior of ukrainian leads, which are also which up to grant a nation and natural from my point of view, there they are a 1st they were building white and that territory, and now they,

they planted pledged into woochie is absolutely almost inevitable now, but we will, we're also do that now, sooner later, this military operation in the ukraine will and, and i don't think at this point at least there is any intention in the kremlin team to great western ukraine into russia's proper and will that territory have any other options for sort of sustaining itself politically other than extreme with the phobia? and if not, how do you think this friendly? i did, degeneracy to heard, say a, it looks at the juncture. i mean, all options are open. i think that there could be several retreats. what do you mean by several ukraine's over the city? this is a widely debate debated the puts of, of ukraine belonged to hungary, austria hungary bus to poland. romanians want their piece to. but again,

the question is, what, what will come out of this state as it is because it further the state collapses, which as opposed to the possibility, then i mean, the territory will be totally taken by a smart do i understand you correctly that sang in strategic terms, russia would be more or less ok with parts of your brain going, let's say you are full and which is just as it was, the phobic a some of the ukrainian leads. but the thing like that kind of a point to view the father a border with, from how to russia, the better. if i may press that for one more question, do you think? what do you think is the best case scenario for ukraine at this point of time? because, you know,

we all have relatives there and we all have emotional connections to that country. if you would have to your wish, what do you think is the best case scenario at this point of time? could you too late and sign it with a teacher friendship or with russia open borders, etc, said? but that's impossible. and nothing short of that will preserve the ukrainian sovereignty emptying the yes. if i were god. okay, what the realistic scenario there is a scenario. several, several of her theresa and a very long war which is probably the ok. and then you know, dangers and of escalating, horizontal and vertical. they all the more that although we're talking hey, craig mostly and now oh yeah. we are like the proverbial a drunkard who is looking for

keys under the flat, not where he could have lost it. a crane is a plot creek, warren traded a part of a huge, massive redistribution of world power off of multi layered traces everywhere. i mean, we have a similar fantasy for crisis with food crisis, energy crisis, crisis of middle class ways of migration. i mean, i could go on a different and it is clear that we are living through a period of desperate, desperate, deep change or to come out in 20 or 30 years. i don't know, but we should think in these terms, of course, hopefully that will be something up to 20 or 30 years and that is they, we have with a catastrophic that when you, when you don't have such

a long horizon in certain ways, you're an optimist. before and you get what happens, let's take a very short break, but we will come to this fascinating discussion in a short while. thank you. ah, a lawyer he's got to do is identify the threats that we have. treason foundation. let it be an arms race is very dramatic. a. i don't see how that strategy will be successful. very katy killed time to sit down and talk the me watching was in control. if i give me the ball in this,

she shot and showed on dinner and i'm not trying to scan. no, we're not hearing him. what was your question? the find is lashelle leslie shyly. your get when you bought when you can buy me the latest? no one, no, no, no, no, no. what was the limitation of i unit 73. 1 was a unique organization in the history of the world. what they were trying to do was to simply do nothing short and build the most powerful and most deadly biological weapons program that the world had ever known.

real enough to build on it. so new looking to keep money, to know more about this. you know, the more not new and i got the sale. i wish enough about julie who knew he didn't know i had to put all of them on all buddy bill, you know. oh, that's good to do it on what on this talk to my annuity on site is and more. oh simone. good soon don't the you know, a little hard to,

to keep us together. ah ah, welcome back to wells. of course, with said k can gonna cut dammit supervisor at the school or for the canal mix and international relations at the higher school of economics in moscow. mrc are going up before they break. you are suggested that this conflict is much further than russia. ukraine. it's a, it's a full blown confrontation between russia and the west. and i've seen you are right before that are because it's such a global conflict. rushes actions should also be targeted at the west so that it loses the appetite for picking on russia further. what exactly do you have in mind? what actions could moscow take tier a limit they appetites of western relates, were 1st a re on for size. it's not between him. it's weighted and brush in the west and the

not, not, not only the west and the rest and everything is changing. the west is shrinking. i mean, the rest which i would prefer to her to go to cold. not a not, not a lot more west, but to global majority. i as a move days are growing in its power. but we that everything is changing and one of the elements of this picture is that they're desperate. the attack now of the west or counter attack to stop and the to ration of the over their positions are they decided to concentrate on in their real aim is of course saving their 500 years of their domination and a middle intermediate amys under my in china now, but to have to my china,

they have to 1st to take out russia. it's impossible, most probably so that aim would not be reached. but that is at global. oh, but not a global war in terms of military. what a global war in terms of political, economic, psychological, moral values, everything. but he also said that despite its global implications, this war could be thought of as russia's 4th great war. starting with the war against the polio, the civil war of the beginning of the 20th century, the 2nd world war and this crime crisis. if we look at the death to law of the, of this previous conflicts they, it, it could be counted in tens of thousands enough and millions. do you think in this particular case we can do it? i hope that would not reach her. the levels of push of their great patriotic war or of their 2nd that you have to call or chose by the way,

wrongly cold here, russian, german, or even him through his to war. but her role i been, or we had the war against napoleon, which was the 1st for to article oh, i live a lot of people died, but the country didn't. i'm for interview at one on one of the vault i guests and we are recording this interview at their sidelines have devolved that form. and she said, an interesting thing. she said like the world is used to russia, paying a disproportionate price for global peace. and there is a recognition among many of my eastern guests that russia is doing something for itself, but it's also providing common benefit. but i'm not many of those countries i ready to stand up for their benefits directly. do you think rush is getting enough support from the, from the countries that are benefiting on this edition? well, i know we're not getting enough support, but we're,

and we're not counting on that support except of course and support of china and 2 or 3 other nations and also on support of the world commune to now, it is much freer because of her shirt. so huge 1st and then after a short period of soviet union collapse or russia undermined the then foundation of the western hagaman, which is a military superiority which it to accomplish somewhere 500 years ago. and which was, which was the foundation for the western thought. so i, you know, we were free to will already and we're free in the world, but now people leave the do not understand that or in the understand the it's the public would for them. why should they pay for? but there is a paradox there because on the one hand i, you know,

marsha is there at e said that russia freed the world from the western military had germany. but on the other hand, on the other hand, some of the western leads there. i mean, they lost the, the remnants of fear because it, even though russia has a lot of might and there's very a lot of difficulties in just putting in and to this constant part, a parting from the, from the west. how do you think fear or the effectiveness of the nuclear deter and could be brought back into world politics? her that her one of the hardest question. i wanted us to himself, what of herself? and we actually know, but people like myself counted that a foot war of such proportions would start somewhere. our lesson counterpart shoot in stop or because we are far beyond their career for at the

inquiry crisis. i mean, there are what is happening has been thinkable in the nuclear age or later is directly supporting arming the country, which is fighting on the borders of their 1st or 2nd nuclear superpower. that's, that isn't thinkable. the people last, ah, how safe here you're right away. i called and some way could he scold the strategic perez's? ah, how to do with it? i do not know that phrase strategic, paris. it is an air by that i assume you mean dad than the west and the world, perhaps a more generally have come to take peace for granted. and i think some of that that relates to russia's own population because in order to be successful in this

fantasia, you not only need successful military strategies, strategic thinking in modern weapons, but you need to see war as perhaps the war is but legitimate means of defending your country's national interest looking at how many people have left russia since the beginning of this operation and how many presented on moral grounds, do you think the kremlin has enough support domestically to withstand it? no. as far as i know, the support is overwhelming. in the vast majority of the ocean population support of the war. but the problem is, or is there a way to answer your question in a bit different way. i would say that this particular a new to reparation had several and aims. the one is clear defendant and on bus. the 2nd is clear,

stopped maita expansion. the 3rd is a dentist and the sci fi ukraine, which is vague. but then there of it about one of the themes of the war was forced to mobilize russians and to clean russian society from protestant element our mind from per preston or elements and pro, as to a culture and also competitor thinking. and when that is happening, whether it is a good or bad, we know it will come out of this process. but are we really all for one period in our lives? very strange period in the election in light of scotland thought that peace is eternal, peace is normally is very rare specimens are fence

earth i only saw is a nuclear winter. italy who avoid that, but the waters of the wars will come back and that is unfortunately very ugly in her mouth. if human culture for one and for of geo politics, jelly cannot mix whatever for one short period. we because of a, this holy fear of nuclear weapons. we did not fight b. gore's little. i mean we but millions of earth yet memories were killed. mcmillan, iraqis was killed, we killed several 100000 people when invaded afghanistan. so the wars, but in the but now we return in this kind of international media we are entering.

now we have to be ready. every country will have to be ready to defend itself, much more than in the previous. so golden several decays. we talked about fear of being brought back into politics and to some extent, the koreans are also trying to weaponized here as a, as a means to assimilate their western partners, to a more active support of that cause. i'm sure you've heard russia, that defense ministry or raising concerns about the ukrainians, the potentially developing an ad dirty nuclear bomb. if that indeed happens, how do you think it will change the dynamics of this conflict in metal deprecation in a nuclear dotted bomb? but it's not a very lethal weapon that is more of a psychological terrorists where it will not change the dynamics of water, but it could per by dresser with an instrument to be even more decisive to think it will change. dia, thinking among the western leads because as a, as a said,

there's still a sickness. stigma associated with the problem with the western. the lease is that strategically? i see none of people. there are some people of my generation. i'm old and a there, of course to bring the people in the west. but as in terms of strategic thinking, i don't see any in europe, the better way of thinking about western liter. i've heard you say that for us, it's like the central issue, initial survival of the state. while for many in the west, for the western decision makers, it's a, it's a matter of their own political survival or the survival of that cause. but it's hard to understand what's more important for them at this point of time. if i can't use the for them, i mean the from them i think back issue whether the it is put on the table or where somewhere there is over survival of the system. by through we should they

have been falling off a little cheese and p for 500 years and they understand that he's finishing and that's why i'm in there so well. because the west, with the old, old jewel, gorgeous achievements, have been living off the exploitation, quote, unquote, by direct and cold. it is very cold, is globally etcetera center of the rest of the world. and that is finishing. that's why i mean, even without understanding that there are western elite are so a negative on that issue of acceptable or dignified means of by conducting a confrontation among enemies. do you think at this point,

there is anything that that is of limits when it comes to russia? so i hope, i hope that we're not going to use nuclear weapons massively. massively the keyboard up here. and this is a strategic partner. so there is one strange notion strategic come because well, on this rather ambiguous node we have to live there, but i appreciate your wisdom as always. thank you very much. it was a pleasure and thank you for watching hope to see you again on the well, the part ah with . mm

hm. mm hm. is the aggressor today, i'm authorizing the additional strong sanction. today russia is the country with the most sanctions imposed against it. and number those constantly growing. i figure which of the problem was the question, as we speak on the bill in your senior, mostly mine, or wish you were banding all imports of russian oil and gas news. i know they plenty of those with joe biden, imposing these sanctions on russia has destroyed the american economy. so there's your boomerang self.

i a while we have, which are ours we make, you know, i'm not going to tell you really, you care about me. if you care about the play, i wish somebody could just tell me why they're all hatred, lynching, beating poverty, why supremacy is for disgusting. amber. the people in mississippi voted on a flyer, and 65 percent of the people voted to keep the car. why? our purpose is to, to play in the good name of the confederates held because of these monuments that you see everywhere or not can, they're not monuments to the can better government. they're monuments to, to the soldiers, to battery. you know, if we're going to be offended by everything, every negative part of our history, we have to get rid of everything. so i

mean with these are the consequences of yet another howard hillary, a strike by ukraine against residential areas. this house was reduced to rubble. our 2 bedrooms, one of the residential areas target and the latest attacks by ukrainian forces, as poor people are reported injured during saturday, shelling of dannetta. and in the stories that shaped the week, russia rejoins the grain export deal, as ukraine promise it won't use the humanitarian chord or for military purposes by moscow says it's ready to deliver grain for.