well, fill the pain down. they came for the melissa in iran, and that will didn't speak out either because the pain was too easy to ignore. and then they came for their adversaries in russia and the will to pronounce his became because the pain became old to pull people. given the global ramifications of the western sanctions against russia has the international community finally got enough stamina to stand up against the weapon. a zation of global economy for geopolitical purposes. well, to discuss that and now joined by already could decide professor at the department of political studies and director of the geopolitical economy. economy research group at the university of manitoba and canada. it's great to talk to you. thank you very much for your time. thanks for having me. now we're recording this interview on the sidelines of the of all day discussion club and this here there's a very vivid, sure history of western experts and academics for pretty understandable reasons. many of them fear

a certain career consequences are due to their participation or association with the russian colleagues. even though, as far as i know, the participation in this form does not oblige anyone to agree with the cremeans policies. did you have any 2nd or 3rd, thoughts about braving this journey from canada to moscow? i do wonder whether, you know, i mean, we come here. ok. and i do wonder whether when i go back, this is what you're doing in moscow. but beyond that, i don't expect anything if they ask me, i was the i attended this conference and there is no ban on attending conferences. i have been to this conference before. well there, there is no formal band. and yet, as we're, those of us who follow can and in politics lately, know that they could be a some very informal consequences, pretty serious and formal consequences for the academics. well, i think that informal consequences are precisely in the form that, you know,

vitale, funding or whatever you become unpopular. but i think that we, us, in a moment in history, when i think you have to brave being unpopular in the sense that what's the point of being popular in a world that me lo know no longer exist. i mean, this is the key. so i feel that i personally felt it was very important to come to russia at this point in history. and in order to talk to russians in order to understand what they feel. i mean, i certainly see quite a range of opinions here among russians among the international scholars. and i think that unless we leave dialogue lines of dialogue open, we are create, we are contributing to the tensions of the was. so i really feel that i'm here as somebody who is pushing against the contribution because one of the ironies i feel that the in the west particularly including in canada is that everybody who same stands for ukraine is actually contributing and has contributed to the destruction of ukraine because it now appears increasingly unlikely that ukraine can go back to

the form it had before february 2022. and that's largely because the, this lobby has essentially advanced the west to the position where it is right now, where they refuse to implement uminski course. they refused to listen to russia's legitimate security concerns. and now look at where we are. so in the name allegedly, of democracy and human rights were actually destroying life itself in ukraine. i want to discuss the issue of ukraine around in more detail. but before we go there, let's focus on our sanctions because this was the main topic of your speech and there of all their discussion club. and you made a very interesting point that sanctions are essentially a form of colonial politics. and it was sort of intended as, as a means of warfare without spilling blood. is it still apply this way?

because i think if we look at the indirect f tool of sanctions being applied against the iraq or rung, it's pretty easy to see how many live they've, they've taken. the united states sees it as a way of conducting warfare without spilling blood. but what they mean is without spilling american blood, the fact of the matter is and they know it very well. sanctions can be as bad if not worse than bullets and bombs. in fact, if you go back in the history of sanctions to the late ninety's in early 2, thousands, it was the documentation of the harms inflicted by sanctions against iraq, against children, innocent children. and of course, that doesn't everybody. reducing the size of the rocky economy to a fraction of what it had been before when these were documented that was when the americans had to shift at this for public relations purposes to the strategy of so called smart sanctions. of course, these sanctions are not my, they're as dumb as any sanctions, and they are inflicting great home,

but they are at least not putting american lives at stake, their other lives a completely dispensable. and of course, this, as you say, is a continuation as and i was arguing in my paper earlier. this is a continuation of essentially a colonial policy. but colonial policies were imposed by powerful colonizers against weak colonies. whether the same can work by a, when you have economy and, and, and, and, and the state is powerful as russia is completely different question. and as we have seen, practically, every set of sanctions has boomerang back on the west and, and not only on the west, i think i've spoken to many people on this forum, some of them from south africa, others from latin american. they all was a saying that even though they have no direct interest or no direct role in the, in this conflict between russian, there was there also being upset, penalize absolutely. the 3rd world is being penalized in a variety of ways,

particularly in relation to food supply. in relation to energy prices and all sorts of other essentials. and as you said, they have no, they have no direct stick in this. they have not caused this conflict like the pakistan floods you know, with climate change and so on. and i think that the, that the vast majority of the people in the world will see the injustice of this. and quite frankly, is going to make the united states even less popular than before. one really key market has been that india, which has historically been a very but way at this in the last many decades. been a very pro u. s. power is staying out of this. it's and it's not supporting the west. it is not condemning russia, and i think that's important as a key. rather when you're, if even india is not doing it. i think it shows that the world is not happy with the united states. now, many experts, including western experts, noted that the united states fail to properly assess the effects of those sanctions . and 3rd countries which think of the house, the united states, a certain benefit of ignorance as somebody who started that issue academically.

do you believe that's an, an, an unfortunate. a failure of foresight, or is it actually a deliberate decision to simply ignore and to believe that you know, they can take it if we decided they can take it? well, i think that the issue, the we argued in my paper is that the issue of why the united states keeps imposing sanctions, even though it is very clear that they don't, they're not effective in having the effect the united states want them to have. cuba has not become capitalist venezuela's as standing north. korea is to standing . it has these sanctions on the whole, they do not succeed. what they do is kill a lot of people, but they do not have the effect of the united states wants them to have his relation to behavior, behavior or, or in the regime or change the behavior of regime or change the regime. this has not happened in most of the majority of cases. you know, they say it is madness. if you keep on repeating the same action and expecting

different results. this is what the united states is doing. and i think that after 40 years of neoliberalism, 40 years of, and 30 years of unilateral power projection, et cetera, the united states and many western countries are in a spiral of irrationality. and i basically call that what the u. s. is, you know, the u. s. position because of the sanctions as a kind of mania. they keep repeating the same actions and i think they're doing this because they want to show that they still rule the world. but in fact, every, especially against russia, every sanction they have in both has shown has underline how much they don't rule the world. i sanitary conversation with their reference to this post world war 2 poem by the german lutheran pastor, martin new miller, who like 1st they came and it was essentially about the silence of german intellectuals and the clergy and the rise of nazi ideology and then very targeted that purging of their opponents and for the record, i'm not making a direct comparison. but what strikes me is that those more functions,

structural know functions, are apparent to everyone. and yet very few people, a brain, not even brave enough, but seen enough to talk about that and the things are only getting worse. why do you think with all these lip service to freedom of speech, critical thinking, rationality? what have you? why do you think there so little people who are ready to voice or skepticism or their doubt, even from their own seeing, because i assume they one die country the united states to prosper? will i'm reminded of 2 things in response to this. in addition to a past anomalous little poem, there is also the whole. there's also that quote, you know, those, that the gods wish to destroy the 1st make mad. and i think that's what's happening to the united states collectively. the 2nd thing it makes me think is that you remember you earlier asked me why are there more americans here, etc. and you know, what are they afraid of? i think the same thing that makes americans afraid to come here is what is blocking

that ability to see just how sick this system actually is. because they're not coming here because they're still looking for those little pieces of, you know, trivial treats they will get if they don't come if they appear to conform. but the fact is that they are actually these, these things are nothing compared to the dangers they are reinforcing by not questioning the consensus in their society. and i think of course i have to say many americans are standing up. many americans are demonstrating a many americans are part of organizations that are spreading the, the real information rather than the disinformation but, but they're obviously a small minority. i don't know if you agree with me, but i think from better or worse, this very inconsiderate or ill considered moved by the united states to introduce very, very broad sanctions against russia and penalize the rest of the world. as a consequence, it produces certain

a very strong reserve resentment among the 3rd countries, and you can hear them both and develop that for my i sounds that in many of my interviews, do you think that's enough for, for producing any m in practical change when the countries of the won't will say that in the global economy belongs to all of us, and it's ultimately not to one country to decide how we're supposed to leave and there who are we supposed to deal with? well, i think if you look at what's happening, you know, when the united states demanded that everybody should impose sanctions on russia, everybody should support ukraine, et cetera. a small number of countries, essentially the old imperialist score of the world economy. plus a few added hangers on like the eastern european, some eastern european countries, i should say. but beyond that, the basic, the vast majority of the peoples of the world and the people of the world have refused to support the united states, what we are entries. and i should also add,

by the way, that the europeans, whose governments are currently cooperating, seemed to be bent on economic suicide as everybody can see that economies are being destroyed as a result of complying with us demands. so even the so called a lion, this idea that somehow suddenly president biden has found a way of uniting the west. this is not true, it is creating new cracks in the european union. it is creating new cracks in the alliance. is that the, you know, that pro american alliances and it is creating cracks within european societies is going to sharpen political contradictions in them. so that's a 2nd thing. so basically what we are increasingly looking at is, okay, europe is and certainly still clinging to the united states. but increasingly, the rest of the world is going to look elsewhere for the economic relationships and the economic models that they wish to have. and that will be more towards china, russia and other such countries. and i feel that we are in now looking at a new bipolar world. but you know,

in the all bipolar world you had 2 sets of societies that were all reasonably prosperous and reasonably stable. this new bi polarity is more dangerous because on the one hand you have the western polls which is increasingly unit possessed, not only of collective madness, but the material basis of that is economic decline. and along with its social division, political division, cultural degeneration, et cetera. and on the other hand, you have a set of societies that have the possibility and in many cases, the reality of greater stability, a greater prosperity. so i would say that up, the weaker side in the madder site is going to potentially create a lot of problems. so that is the key danger in the world. that's why we're entering this dangerous world. we have to take a very short break right now, but we will discuss that particular danger in a few moments stationed. ah

ha ah, need to come to the russian state. total narrative type as i'm phone and the most i'm seeing with 55 with anyone else with will ban in the european union. the kremlin. yup. machine. the state on russia for date and our t spoke neck. even our video agency, roughly all band on youtube with

me. ah ah

welcome back to windsor parts with radical decide professor at the department of political studies and director of the geopolitical economy research group at the university of manitoba, professor decided before the break when we were talking about the potential dangers ah, that the world is facing right now, and i was recently reading through the ladder, is that nikita khrushchev and john of kennedy exchange during the cuban missile crisis, because we're marking the 60th anniversary of it this month. and i was trying to pay the sense of shared responsibility. both leaders expressed the desire for negotiations and called on each other to demonstrate some sort of state wisdom. i think that was a direct quote from crucial. do you see that same sentiment, all fi, sharon's, you to not only before your own people but also before the rest of the world express these days? absolutely not. and this is obvious at so many levels. so 1st of all,

let's say in terms of, and by the way, i would say that it's the west that does not display the same set, seemed a sense of responsibility. so 1st of all, they are fighting all these wars in the name of democracy and human rights, but in fact, what they're doing is extremely unpopular, which is why president biden is going to lose the mid term elections, or his democrats are going to lose them into molecular, unless it is your son tricks, obviously. well maybe, but we'll have to see. and in which case, i think the other side is not going to sit quietly aside. so we will have another civil war like situation in the united states. then at the international level, the central responsibilities absolutely absent and at least 2 or 3 different ways. number one, russia is being demonized in a way and not mr. booting russians are being demonized. and this is something really scary. you are demonizing a nation of nearly a 150000000 people has a group like what kind of a thing is that i thought we left that behind with the,

with the demonization to hit this nazi demonization of jews, et cetera. so that's the 1st thing, and that's really scary. the 2nd thing is that the biden administration is basically out to and they don't want to talk to russians and russia on the whole. i mean, i know many channels are open, but the, the key points, the channels and then they openly express that it's below them. i mean, there is a sense of superiority that really to exactly, and that is something that our world cannot afford. so that's the 2nd danger, because, you know, remember the cold war was a heavy li stage managed just as a stage member, heavily managed to fade and meet the 2 sites. always had communication with one another. this is not so anymore. and this is why we are very, it's very dangerous. and finally, i'd like to say that there are so many problems in the, in the world, primarily climate change, but many others of that need. international cooperation. we need international agreements to, to, to, to,

to solve climate change or international terrorism or whatever problem. that's your favorite problem. you cannot have it without international cooperation and we have just undermine any basis of that. now present it. i also have to say that the military campaign that russia is waging in ukraine is also very unpopular in russia because nobody like sending their sons to the battlefield. and nobody likes being extremely worried for their relatives across the border. many of us have families in ukraine, but the biggest question i think for the russian political establishment is whether they had any other choice of stopping a very arrogant and i would say very ignorant. i had gentlemen who ignores all the previous efforts off or solving this issue diplomatically. i'm not asking you to take rush aside, but i'm sort of trying to rely on your academic expertise and geopolitical expertise to see what means. were there thrushes disposal to put an end to this

constant pushing by then by the united states? well, i think like in the so 1st for my position is that no matter what you think of russia and in, i have to say in my case, i do try to follow the war and its conduct as much as possible. and my understanding is that there are not that many choices for russia between fall of 2021 and early 2022 russians. it everything possible to try to achieve a negotiated settlement to their concerns. but this was not given to them by the west. so having said that, i would say that the russians are kind of doing what they are doing. and a, to me, the most important thing is that should need tool, which is basically the force that is at war and the united states, which is the other major force that is at war with russia through ukraine. should they win this war? it would be a disaster for the world. so it seems to me that once again, like in the 2nd world war, the russians are going to pay a disproportionate price for world peace. and it's very unfortunate,

and i totally sympathize with everybody who has relatives on the front who is worried about their children going to the front. i think obviously this is terrible, but i think that if nato wins this war, which it is fighting extremely irresponsibly including well, there are 2 things that i should say irresponsibly. but with the support of fascists in your, in ukraine. and in a way that is actually destroying ukraine, while claiming to stand for ukraine. i find that, you know, we are living in an orwellian world where everything is, it's opposite what people are saying. and what is really happened. what are affinities are seeing and what's really happening could not be further upon. but even in their raelynn world, you don't have claims of a potential use of nuclear bombs. and this is something that is very much are in the focus of the russian officials lately they've reached out to the american british turkish,

french colleagues. fearing that there could be some provocation involving a staged explosion of a don't involve and they were essentially dismissed without any interest in the technicalities of the intelligence that they had to they could provide. what does it tell you about the stage of this conflict and the stakes involved? because one can, you know, the argument that here from the russian side is that right radiation, there was no borders or if there, if there is an incident, it will affect all of us and it would be a major escalation. it would be extremely difficult to sort of put that genie back into the bottom bottom. why do you think there's so little sort of self preservation in things in the west, at least in europe? well, i mean, i've thought about this a lot. i've listened to various sites before the present, a russian attempt to try to get western powers to pay attention to the possibility of this dirty bomb. there were a couple of other things. remember, the western countries were seeing all russia is going to use tactical nuclear

weapons in the battle field. and before that, there was this whole issue of who was bombing does up rogia nuclear power plant. so i think we have a lot of really irresponsible actors that play on the other side. on the western side, on the ukrainian side. number 2, i would say that it's important to remember that historically the united states is not only the only country to have used nuclear weapons without any reason to do so . it's not true that they needed to be used to stop japan. there was absolutely no and, and americans, scholars have shown this. so they're the only country in the world to have used nuclear weapons. they have driven the nuclear arms race. they have been offensive. they have never accepted, no 1st use. and they have also been known to have used radioactive weapons in, in wars. so they are the ones i feel that they have been creating 1st one, they have been spreading stories about potential russian use, spreading stories about potential russian of tax on nuclear power plans. these are

for stories in order that they may prepare the ground for essentially launching a false flag operation. you mentioned that the united states was the only country in the used the nuclear weapons before, but it also has a very painful experience of supporting certain proxy forces and then being attacked by those very proxy forces and the other day russia foreign minister spokeswoman compare led him is the lensky tube, in latin, saying that he's actually even worn dangerous because he has the, the power of the state at his hands. and he also has access to pretty dangerous technology. and what are the chances do thing? and again, it's hard to say, but based on your knowledge of history, do you think there's any chance the ukrainian leadership after not getting what they want from the west will turn against it in the same manner that i've been loving. gosh, i actually haven't listened to that to a interview myself, but i have personally made

a similar analogy. you see what happened in ukraine over the last many months? is that not only do they have new, not c, supporting the government going back to 2014, but now most of the opposition is gone. so they're basically reliant on these extremely new, essentially new. and i see forces, in addition to that, they have issued a call for other people who think like the as of battalion to come and fight with them. i'm not sure how successful it's been, but whatever success it's had. now you have an international brigade of essentially fascists forces who are fighting on the side of ukraine. this is not unlike the creation of al qaeda and which i had dean and so on. so on the, the model is the same. you essentially attract people on the basis of a really reactionary ideology and you know, in the kind of sick world in which we live, there are always some people in every society who will be attracted to these ideologies. and so they're encouraging the worst aspects of our society. and i suppose, i mean, you know, this is a frightening thought. if it is, if,

as i believe is quite likely ukraine is mr. zelinski is not going to get what he claims he's going to get, which is, you know, the restoration of the all ukraine, including crimea. i mean, this is completely, you know, to completely nuts. and in fact, everybody who is for peace should be, should be telling him that this is not going to be possible. but anyway, if he does not get, i have no idea what will happen. and certainly this is among the possibilities of what could happen because who is going to control this force, or if the state authority collapses, or even if it doesn't collapse, the state of florida is tries to use it against other forces. i think within the russian culture, including governing culture, there is a certain respect for the enemies in an understanding that you need to accommodate your enemies interests for your own sake, to preserve peace, medium or long term. and what puzzles me is why something like that is lacking on the american or for that reason,

the in the ukrainian side because he like russia, whatever you think of it is a huge country with an enormous military potential. you, you see, we talked about rationality, you usually are not able to make those analysis. i mean, this is this, it goes back to what i said earlier. because american blood is not being spilled russian. russia is spilling its own blood in order to, you know, essentially achieve, it's what i think are fairly limited military object is i don't think russia is out to take all of give, unless, of course, something changes and it is forced to, you know, all of ukraine unless something changes and it is forced to do so, but i don't think that was the aim at the start, but the russians they, they are. and as far as i know, by the way, the conduct of the war is broadly speaking, you know, many of the so called retreats for example, have been undertaken in order to ensure that there is no excessive loss of life on the, on the opposite side. however, you have the mirror image, you have a, essentially, a, essentially an army which is into putting on

a show of going to war a. so there is a lot of smoke and mirrors on their part. and they seem to also have an army leadership that wants to defend undefended bull positions, even if it sacrifices a lot of life. so they're going to think the americans, when the americans want, you know, winning to television image, exactly sunday. so that, you know, in the west, this completely shall we say, completely nuts type of strategic behavior on the part of those who are governing the ukranian army is portrayed as bravery. this is ludicrous. armies don't need this sort of bravery. what armies need is cool, collected decision making about where it is, where it is a reasonable and where it is advantageous to fight, and where it is advantageous to withdraw from. can you or not in this to, you know, when some kind of a psychiatric, victor, you're in this to been a real victory. well person is that we have to live there,

but let's hope that the world will still be in place for the next year. we'll be meeting, hopefully we'll talk some other time. thank you very much. and thank you for watching hope to see her again and will depart a with . mm hm. so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy, even foundation, let it be an arms race is on, often very dramatic development. only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very difficult time. time to sit down and talk

with us voters gear out for the key mid term elections, labeling the economy and domestic issues as their top concerns that those washington approved the latest multi $1000000.00 aid package to ukraine. pakistan these a 4th executive day, a protest after an assassination attempt on former prime minister in brand cod as russia becomes new delhi is top oil supplier. india's foreign minister is on a visit to moscow to further boost bilateral relations. and demonstrators was the streets of donna's capital demanding the.