well, i certainly agree with you about both terrific and heartbreaking. and i think that the, the parties in conflict resolution the, the usual rule is that you negotiate with the parties who are most alienated and who are using violence against each other. so that the, the immediate parties would be ukraine and russia. and, but it seems clear, especially given the history of this conflict and given the issues that are involved in it, that they can, you know, she can't stop there. they might well start with the green russia and deal with issues and immediately in the spirit between those 2 countries. but they would have to proceed to the next phase in which europe and the united states were also involved. i think that's again, a very interesting and indeed

a crucial point, whether the talks need to start or proceed to involve the united states. because when we consider the openness of the parties, russia is open for negotiations. i mean, must go produce a statement almost on a daily basis that it's open for talks. it is the ukrainian leadership that pass certain legislation banning itself from engaging in the talks. but is any of that relevant without more explicit and frankly, more genuine and more principal position of the united states on the issues of war and peace and ukraine. again, taking into account all the contacts, the under surface on the ground context that lead to this war. yes, i think you make a very good point and they will have to, when we think about how we get, we've began. and i have to say that in my opinion,

i think, i think, i think for, for russia to move against ukraine as it did, i think was a mistake in the one who strikes the 1st blow is always a disadvantage afterwards. but even so that conflict that blow, it may be unjustly struck, but it was not provoked. there was a really a deliberate refusal to discuss major security issues with, with russia, with president putin who wanted to discuss the wanted to talk about a restructuring of the european security architecture that has to be done. it seems to me that that issue has not disappeared. hasn't gone away and certainly if the united states were in the same position i having, you know, rocket base is positioned on its borders and so forth and we were, you know, we wouldn't sit back and take it either. so those issues are got to,

it seems to me we appear at some stage in those years, even if not in the 1st year. it is quite russians decision to move into your crane as a, as a mistake. i think that's a huge and as essential tragedy. for russia and, you know, all the strategic calculations notwithstanding. i think it's still, it's a major tragedy for, for our people because many of us have relatives in ukraine. and we suffer from that war, not as much as the craniums, but it pains us a huge deal. but going back to the strategic issues as far as i know, more than half of your cranes, current budget is subsidized by the west. how many of the weapons it's using on the battlefields come on either from the west or with the help of western financing and many western countries. and 1st and foremost, the united states. and it took trina documents, strategic documents, described russia as, as anatomy, as, as an adversary and advocate the policy of active containment of my country through

neither expansion. do you think that war would ever be able to come about or be sustained without the help of the united states? no, i think the united states was, it was a moving party in the war and the united states domination of nato is also it is also clear. the great tragedy is, i think, really, exactly as you say that this relations us, russian relations have been framed in terms of this, an intense animosity and not simply based on that and it disagreements over policy. but something that goes deeper and we've been trying, we've been some of my colleagues and i have been trying to analyze this for, we've been working for 2 or 3 years, talking to people and stuff. we're trying to find out where this is coming from,

where, why, special tense and in my study, if you take a newspaper like the new york times, i mean, you simply can't find an article that has anything nice to say about russia at all . and by the way, they also don't have anything nice to say about china. so ok. so one possibility is that the u. s. position in the world now in some ways is being challenged. i'm the u. s. position in the world has become uncertain. and it's a very strange situation since the u. s. is by far the dominant military power in the world, as several people says, not since the roman empire is 1. 1 power been so militarily dominant, but, and yet there are signs of weakening of the weakening of this, you know, this kind of this global gemini. so in other words, there's

a kind of defensiveness about the united states position. when you say that there is animosity, i think it's one sided, animosity the russians don't have the americans. i mean, i myself started in the united states, we read the american literature. we have many friends in the united states and the american lifestyle has long been infatuated here in russia. but when you say that the america feels challenged, i don't understand what is that challenge? i mean, do we challenge the american by the american? stayed by the very fact of our existence by the very desire to develop our sounds or our neighborhood by our i think boy you know, birth given right to build connections with our neighbors and with other countries . what is it that is challenging the united states from our side? united states, i think, is not being challenged by russia. i think the challenges are over different, sure. made my own feeling about it. when i say defensive, by the way,

i mean what i mean, what i'm trying to point out is that very often aggression, aggressive activities and anti social activities are the result of fish of a person feeling threatened feeling or feeling the fear of the exactly, that's the underlying emotion there, but what i'm trying to understand is, what is it that the united states is fearing, given that again, it's the most powerful country of the world is the most prosperous country that will, it still has lots of the leverages to, you know, produce outcomes that it desires what is it, what is it that threatening it on the inside i'm? i'm almost tempted to tell you, go back and look at the history of the, of the late roman empire. and you'll see a nation that was threatened not so much from outside, but from by the internal divisions and in an unsolved social problems. many of the u. s. as a, as a nation, which and you know, in many ways it's got

a wonderful history and it's done wonderful things. but it also is one of the most unequal societies on earth. it has a, there's a radical growth in any quality, social and economic inequality. the very rich have never been richer, the pretty much everybody else control compared with them is for, there's great suffering among large sectors of the population in the country, and particularly people living in the industrialized areas and, and in urban gatos and so on. there's tremendous suffering and yet, of these problems are not being solved for a number, for reasons that we could talk about this. and i'm sure you would agree with me that projecting those problems on to other nations is not going to how the situation. i'm sure that there was a little people in power who are trying to make those strategic decisions, including a decision to, you know, pump your crane with weapons or provoke china over taiwan incessantly. i'm sure

they understand that this in and of itself is not going to how the, you know, power divide or the income divide within the united states. what do you think is that ultimate motivation? what are they trying to get for themselves without people there? well, it's not rational when you, you know, they, when you talk about motivation, you're talking about rationality. and what i'm saying is that when people are feeling threat when failure, people threaten by internal dis, unity and people feeling. if you talk to look at the polls and ask the people in the us how they think the country is doing, the man, the great mass of people say they think it's doing very badly. and people start looking around for scapegoats, especially, you know, if you're not, if you're, if you've been taught not to blame your own system. if you're not supposed to be thinking about ways that the system could be restructured to become more fair and equitable and so forth. to everybody, then there's

a tendency to strike out at others and as scapegoats. i mean that's one part of it . the other part of it. and the answer your question seems to me is that the world in many ways is becoming multi polar. that you use the u. s. has been the supervisee sole superpower really now for some considerable period of time for decades. but now we're dealing not only with russia, which is in many ways, resurgent great power. china, which is clearly a great power. can this country learn to deal and used to operate in a multi polar world as one great power among others? that's a big question and it's, it's going to take some re education here is going to take some work on our part to accept that new reality model. professor romans thing, let's discuss some of the ways how the united states can take that very difficult

and perhaps unpleasant lesson after a short break. we will be back in just a few moments. stay tuned. ah ah ah ah, what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy confrontation, let it be an arms race is on offensive, very dramatic development. only personally, i'm going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very difficult, time time to sit down and talk who is the aggressor today? i'm authorizing additional strong sanctions. today. russia is the country with the

most sanctions imposed against it. a number that's constantly growing for each of the problems the course renewed us is becoming louisiana mostly more in the bush. were banding all in port russian, oil and gas. i know they said he vocals with regard to joe by imposing the sanctions on russia, has destroyed the american economy. so there's your boomerang ah, with mm.

welcome back to was the parts with return to winston professor of conflict resolution and public affairs and george mason university. professor robinson before the break, we were talking about this very convenient habit on the part of the american to leads to sort of project that own and competency on to other nations and constantly search for the enemy an external enemy. but, and i'm conscious as it may seem, there are also many people who believe that that is a deliberate policy, deliberate strategy on the part of the american decision makers. and as you can imagine here in moscow, they are not many people who believe in moral or democratic underpinnings of american actions in the ukraine. but many here give washington a credit for actually being quite strategic and rational because they believe that, you know, whether we like it or not. washington has succeeded in pitching ukraine against

russia. and it's exceeded doing that at a very low cost, you know, roughly $19000000000.00 and you know, thousands of ukrainian and russian, but not the american lives and the from a strategic point of view. that's not a bad outcome. do you think that's really something that came without any deliberate thought on the part of american decision makers? oh, you know, it's hard to say which deliberately was not deliberate. so i think that the, i think that the, that the decision to, to support ukraine. but it doesn't to support ukraine. i mean, you might say in one way it was made quite early was made in 2014, if not earlier, because the weapons flow started to started in a large scale at that time. so it was not simply your response to the invasion,

although the invasion made it to some ways impossible for washington not to respond . but i think you're, you're right to denote at the beginning of your statement that there is, there is some rationality involved here. and i think it's important to point out that all sides in the school, both especially russia and united states have in some ways limited the kinds of military activity that they're engaged in. there is a lot of self limitation going on on both sides in the united states is armed gradings to the teeth, but in many with many modern weapons, but has avoided giving them weapons. they could strike deep into into worse. i would argue that they're the only reason for that is to maintain the appearance of a proxy war and prevented from, you know, becoming a true kinetic war. because if that happens,

the cost to the united states would be much higher than they are at the moment. and again, this could be, you know, a rational way of waging a war, but pretending not to wage a war. which brings me to a question we sort of touch before, but didn't quite answer. do you think there any motivation at this point of time for the united states to support peace talks? what could be possible piece benefits for the united states? because from a strategic point of view, it seems to be getting quite a lot well, and that's where i think there's a change in a change in the air that things are starting to shift their united states is as a, as a, as an electoral democracy as a, as a country divided between 2 parties has probably never been more intentionally to, by leach, not since the american civil war has been so intentionally divided between the democrats and republicans. but also it's almost,

it's so even very evenly divided. and i think that in this kind of situation, ah, welcome to the national, the think you live russian for mr. study rob is in the town voting capital attorney . he some of the south east asian nation today is the final day of the meeting. and mr. level is now holding and media conference, most of them. so if you look, look, i thought it was, it was included even though there is now an inclusive open and the equal structure of security and cooperation stuff and the united states and allies. and then the nato alliance and now trying to take control over that space. and they have a strategy concept that is promoting formats that are not open to everyone.

and that actually compete with the inclusive structures that have been created around a sample is up. and that means that the region should be a militarized, in order to contain china and russian interest in the asia pacific. and everybody understands naps. and one of the manifestations of this policy is the august military block where the united states has tell in britain that we are now trying to drag and new zealand, canada, and japan into that. and they are promoting a closed initiatives to organize on a train of naval activities the ship and all those are like use are confronted so openly geared towards the western confrontation

of actions in the south china sea. and we sort of see that it is necessary, but to maintain the formats that have been traded around a c and was, and the respect suggestion for the role as in this is playing you. what did you in the regional processes the west has its own plans and we heard that today. clearly, they are admitting the rule of icy and certainly only only nominally while promoting their own instrument. nato is not saying that it's a defensive lines anymore. it used to be defensive lines, said during the times of the warsaw pact to the soviet union, so there is no soviet union anymore. so it's not clear what what the

defense is aimed at. so they have moved towards our borders several times. and now they have declared on the madrid summit this year that they are, they have taken up responsibilities and that you are atlantic and individualistic, security are indivisible. and they're moving based on what their loan of defense to the south china seas are committed. that is us. and it's obvious that there is a trend to militarize the region by joining the efforts of u. s. allies in new zealand, japan and the region as a whole or to increase a to presence. we have said that openly and the chinese premier also has a similar assessment, but rather we lustre lewis. so we see that this is

not likely to bring the united states and its allies to consider the interest of the majority of countries in the region. but we will continue our position. it is a finding an understanding that among as the in countries, even though there is a no single opinion among the regional countries on how to address their job security in the region. so if the, if the go is to so the score them out among the countries that goes, i think the united states have been somewhat successful watson, most sensation members not start. well, you can see this is the opinion that's which is own interests should come 1st and that as in the interests should not be subjected to regional plays. and

sometimes china senior and other partners which may have a high opinion of the role as in and we support that. we have a voice to our principal positions and underlined priorities, not political discussions, but promoting concrete top ration projects on this platform. but i have a couple years ago, the summit accepted our former corporation to find as to find pandemic threats. we haven't seen much implementation from that yet. but it has been confirmed that professional representatives over which the member countries that needs to be helped. and our initiative has been approved for that has that has been about tourism and to promote

tourism in the region. and this initiative as a direct significance you make, making for improving the economy, the post and then make period 2. what does that is quite relevant for regions, countries and, and other initiative by russia has been supported to promote volunteer movements and whole into contacts between the summit countries that you should use and make sure that such projects when you talk about civil society and humanitarian contact between country and so that is about it says wouldn't have been no collective decision today as the united states and other western colleagues insisted on unacceptable language with regard to the printing

situation and the situation around it. so what i'm saying is that further cooperation will be reflected in the communicate was issued by the presidency. thank you for you. were listening there to sergei. love ross, the foreign minister of rasa, speaking in the can body and capital are attending a key somebody southeast asian nations. the osteo group and meeting will be going through the main aspects of that speech in the coming hours as well. ok.

just come up to 5 minutes to 10 am here in moscow, and we're going for a short break, but we'll be back at the top of the hour with all the headlines affecting your world today. this is our to international. ah ah, and i had to business with bishop another boss with you are going to speed them up . but i did. miss stewart with key at the washington housekeeper process was to the dealer. molly complete with a new will spoke with of guys to phone us in the full claims. did you need video with you of the proxy professional lithium to walk you prevalence zavala,

but yet with ah, ah, nice to come to russian state. little never. i've side as i'm phoning most landscape div. mm hm. and i'm not getting all set up for me. could be an assistant babel did. okay, so mine is 2000 speedy. when else with we will ban in the european union. the kremlin. ca yep. machine. the state aren't russia to date and split our tea sport mckibbin our video agency, roughly all band on youtube with

mm ah, the 1st time in history, the entire country's culture has been canceled to the very modern weapon council culture. really desperate. wonderful. i wish i feel my love, so when you get just me sitting there with the phrase now, particularly for us to counseling russian culture yet that know what she creates a few orders because you have to when your mouth for cure, which will be all there is cha, whatsoever that go with most of the separate random eat them way. what rushes created over the past 1500 years is now question. ashley condemned,

reviled and reject it. to sort of like a will of bell. there's a lot closer on a whole bunch. thank you said a little short list. joining total condemnation, gross daily and now includes dostoevsky to cascade, shostakovich. i need to you all the pool left, but yes, you think that would just be the time when you do a bomb lee, you're not going to do that. a little bit more ah ah

has actually found safety in the braces. naziism is a joke. all of a sudden you're placed in a position where i can defend myself. now. i don't have to be afraid any more. on one hand, i'm terrified that they're going to find out i'm jewish, but on the other, i think it's so far away. i distinctly remember my mom sitting me down one night and cursing john, they're going to hurt. one guy hunched me. hi, my ear or somebody. so now the rest in the punch was a started flying. can somebody shouted out, died, you boy died. and at that point i knew they're stuck back. remember, had an indian doctor. they came in and looked and said, there's no medical reason why you're,

you should be alive. you to find something to believe. john story is a story of how the story of victory and whatever i can do to help him. i went to a u. s. president joe biden's democratic party is expected to clinch control of the senate following mid term elections, but the extremely narrow margin of the vote can chose a country that's highly divided in the stories that shape the week of russia withdrawals that trips from the city of her song that made fears that ukrainian attack to local dumb could cause catastrophic. so ahead from the fact that i'm here today, the delegation to review of cooperation to see how we can pick it forward to pay it to long.