ah, with a with with,

[000:00:00;00] with,

[000:00:00;00] with, for me. that's what it was for this hour. thanks for watching archie international. and we hope you have a great day. ah ah, with

a ah . i am my name is frank richardson. so daughter got in the movement in any age, 13 or 14, we were violent towards those people because we believe that word is raised. we were here 1st and this is our country being part of that movement. i got your sense of power. when i felt powerless, we got attention when i felt invisible and accepted when i talked to level life after, hey, is an organization that was founded by for a skinhead neo nazi white supremacist in the u. s. in canada. and they found each other and they knew that they wanted to help other guys get out was 2 parts to getting out of a violent extreme. this was the 1st part of disengagement, which is where you leave the social group. and then the next part is d, radicalization. work belief systems. you know,

you all are too far removed. it was very impactful when someone finally came along with no fear, no judgement. you heard my story did nothing to challenge it without a leash. so glad they shall cloth it. what is the best time to go about them? this is a little bit of a community you could easily believe what i see. school car wasn't report backwards, but some say me something in my scheme report to me it got daughter in the study is different countries. they love it really. it can, you know, kind of get by to pick it up, which it, it said to jeff. so i'm using mean you to one that you even don't can be comma a utah and the communist somebody. and the community that deep comma lp,

2 left for the knob is all like it's supposed to the start up. they can still affect it. door bully out of that. so i did meet it with us. that's it is clear. but then the wooden desk blooming right now with a cling to close as looking at them. what to do with some of it. look at massena was up in the was it the reason i wish and show kathy so much pity them? we cannot create world was it was just the loser. and then you build us a love for you will go that the choice is good. that i think it's an open till she comes to now we're still a to past after little things donald productions. when i open up, what about 11? i think it's an opposite. i

ah, deputy foreign minister, you're most welcome to the program. can we begin with the stalls negotiations on reducing nuclear weapons? do you agree? the new star treaty could be a significant step not only towards reviving broader arms control talks between rush and the u. s, but perhaps also towards enhanced overall communication with washington at this 10th time. why were they postponed? number 12, these are on our aren't we have never stopped any of the talks? aw, ah, any forms of dialogue on a wise beyond the talks, white country we underscore, and on the line, ah, all the time our redness to continue from the point where this u. s. administration, the by an administration decided to halt these dialogue. it happens

ah, after our special military operation started without any explanation whatsoever, unilaterally, ah, and this is it, ah, the, you start country to this, a continues to be implemented her. this is an important tool that ensure predictability and sustainability all the remains of what earlier was quite sophisticated, complicated, and functional architecture of arms control in the world. but now we only have probably these bilateral treaty that limits the most dangerous or nuclear weapons of strategic reach. but it functions because apart from inspections that the attract that much of attention, both in washington and elsewhere. as we understand. there is

a great deal of other means, how to ensure visibility or was going on in this area for both sides. now, i recognise that m a russia i took decision to postpone. ah, the already planned or irregular sessional, bilateral consulting commission, due to be held these very days in cairo, egypt. but we did so because we couldn't just ignore, ah, what has been an ongoing attempt by the us to add a problems to the plate. and then, undeniably the overall situation in and around ukraine and around new territories of russia, rob ease and so difficult,

troubling. and in many ways, ah, this is because of the u. s. actions that just for gas on fire now and again that we couldn't continue this business as usual. but the moment a u. s. wants to come back to the table and resume strategic security dialogue with russia will, will be there. ah, on the other hand, that aids are away too premature for me to predict. when a russia will come back with bell turns if dates for this forcible bilateral consulting commission meeting, ah, in any case, lease is not going to happen right away. ah, and i have my doubts in regard to possibility to do so. before christmas, before new year,

it was rumored that during recent talks in an cra deputy foreign minister between russia and the u. s. that the nuclear issue was raised. can you perhaps tell us a little more about that discussion you heard before from russian high ranking officials. but this conflicts a was a very close one. ah, i am not supposed to dwell on any of the details with respect to what was discussed, what was not discussed there. and he said that i would also offer you a point on how we see for public messaging on the part the washing them. this is troubling because as ever and as this happens all the time. and as it happened many times in the past, despite old understandings that we have something delicate, sensitive, something that should not be disclosed. despite all this, washington leaks,

and also portrays i situation in a manner that suits or eats, interests. bab, for instance. ah, we have several messages of substantial character on the part though view as high ranking officials on what transpired in ankara. ah, i will limit my comments further to this end. ah, only to state that in some important aspects of these messages are not exactly compatible with our knowledge. how this meeting went on and what was discussed their terms like nuclear, a war on world war 3 were increasingly hearing that both in the media and on a government level. what's the purpose of that? who benefits from this type of aggressive rhetoric?

i truly regret that this happens. ah, ah, more broadly apart from my, the immediate situation in the media and i, in public discourse these weeks and months. ah, i am disturbed by the fact bad them. the very idea of a nuclear war became over time. more and more acceptable if you wish for general public this, this is one of the dangerous consequences of how new generations that never experienced any of the wars and troubles associated with this. and take it very in a very like a light way in a very laid back manner as if we're talking here on something similar to a computer game. ah, this is dangerous. i and the,

it's in admissible him our view for russia spart. we stay very firm with both what is spelled out in alameda trade doctrine and other relative is for men's . and that's a has to do with these are very important than central essential issue. the one that fundamentally on the pins, our national security. but we also fully subscribe to the formula which was coin several date decades ago on the fact that nuclear war and not be one and thus should not be fought ah, as laid as junior this year. these famous formula was reconfirmed once again. now on a collective basis by all nuclear powers, so cold p 5. and we were gratified with the ways how counterparts, how

a partners and our opponents worked together to send this message out to the broad public, to them through the world. ah, on november 2nd, russia once again sent out an important message, informal press statement by the foreign ministry from here, from beach, very building. ah, to explain once again where we are. so i see no reason why these discourse continues. it's in interest of those who want to stir fur further on the general sense of uncertainty and find ways how to continue this litany of blames, blame game on russia. we can not accept it. it's completely completely absorbed them has nothing to do with the reality. you mentioned in the last number of days of the situation. iran, ukraine has no influence over the nuclear deterrence. i believe that's right. what

i'm saying. but it's in contrast to western views, what we're hearing, who try and tie up ukraine and nuclear issues together. can you maybe elaborate a little on that? there is simply no connection between the 2. we see situation in ukraine unfolding, ah, in a disturbing manner because of us and so called like minded allies and some others ah, decide to they decided so and they continue to implement this decision, ah, to all for ever broader forms of assistance to ukraine in order to inflict so called strategic defeat upon russia, this is the hugest strategic miscalculation ever made by western governors,

a governments and western elites. russia will never be defeated. russia will sustain the course and old goals and objectives of this special military operation will be achieved. this is a very firm, ah, unwavering resolved by our political leadership. ah, the whole government and the russian people, the people of russia. ah, having said that, i would underscore that there is meaningless to discuss and debate. ah, what a possible relation. ah hypothetical use of nuclear weapons may have ah, over the situation in ukraine. again, there is no other way. but to see these as effectual statement on my part, ah, that is ah no 1st use of nuclear weapons apart from 2 highly hypothetical

scenarios described fully and completely, ah, in a very in ambiguous for me. now, a military doctrine, the one we want the 1st perio ease this scenarios, hypothetical aggression against russia, with use of nuclear, a weapon or other weapons of mass destruction. and the 2nd one, aggression against russia, ah, with use of conventional weapons. ah, that takes form where the very existence of the russian state is in jeopardy. otherwise, there is no possibility for us to consider the use of nuclear weapons, as you see, as you easily imagine and conclude that it has nothing to do with the current situation in ukraine. russia's foreign ministry has said multiple times that the u . s. is increasingly close to becoming a party in the conflict in at ukraine. don bos, through its weapons,

supplies to key of us veterans, private contractors. they have been at documented, widely fighting against russian troops. so is america actually not a party in the conflict? and are you concerned that endless decorations from moscow without any real follow up will be seen as toothless on perhaps a sign of witness globally? first of all, ah, i disagree with the idea that there is no fall on ah much happens behind the scenes . much happens in terms on how we configure own military posture and what we do in terms of our military planning and our actual tactics. this is not for of, or in service officer like myself, to, to discuss and debate about. i know what i'm telling here about number 2 on my part . yes,

we do believe that us and others come closer and closer to the point when they would be regarded as parties to these conflicts. the risks associated with this evolution and development are undeniable, and that huge and they're growing. but we all so ah, act in our pronouncements, in the most responsible manner, we understand and appreciate that such a statement may have not on lee political but legal and other consequences. so we measure our pronouncements with great care. i know these days when people are more inclined to send and receive simple messages, ah, such a game one as we said, ah, in our part of the world in the diplomatic world, shades and nuances such game is probably not the most popular one. but we do not

abandon needs irrespective of how our adversary's and opponents describe or interpret this just because they don't like us. we do so deliberately not to always stretch our own messaging. and also let me be very frank, to maintain a great deal of flexibility on how to configure our further action. because this is something that will be, that will be with us for a while yet. and we should be prepared to all sorts of contingencies in future big attempts right now, debbie, foreign minister, on from months really previously to isolate russia at you had for mister love raw, for instance, bun from the o. s. c e parliamentary assembly and the russian delegation from the munich security conference as well. will such actions? will they work in separating russia from the global community?

the munich security conference is just ridiculous. ah, it degenerated over recent years into the platform where only the western nurse entertained themselves and enjoyed. ah, nice companies of each other. ah, the formal fog, denial of alternative messages that was practice sized in munich brought us well before this year of 2022. and the next year 2023. so low were the level of russian participation there. and we were close to boycotting these events on our own, or even in absence, in a hypothetical world with no special military operation, oil, c. e. e's are collapsing as a structure ah,

it's being cynically abused by the very same a group of countries to diminish importance. of alternative views on global architecture and on european architecture. so ah, absence of minister law girls in lloyds is regrettable. but this is also a sign on how furious our adversaries are in john's of, for just destroying the fundamentals of procedures. not only the fundamental or political and security architecture, but the very essence on how the international system works. they are afraid of truth, and they continue this ah, culture of denial in diplomacy. a b, a bullish presidency at o a c. e completely completely nullified any relevance

ah, to the sand by the section. i want to get your thoughts finally on the big issue that they the big picture right now in the world. a multi polar world is that coming around is not close because russia, russia is not alone, but it is clearly seeking to develop its partnerships. busy all around the globe. what is moscow's vision of such a world as an aside to that as well? if existing powerful nations resist the rise of the east, the global saif, what's the consequences of that? i think that rise over new centers of gravity. let me use the word not centers of power, although this is also a relative notion. but centers of civilization of gravity ah, cannot be stopped. much less stopped by will, willing to re means by

a group of countries who ah, entertain, ah, the sense of their own superiority or others. our vision of the new world order would be the one where international law is abs. and where there is sovereignty and mutual respect at the center, ah, of any relationship between countries, ah, no matter big or small, close neighbors or someone at a distance. i would suggest that this division nowadays is probably a further away ben ah, many would wish. but i am very convicted and i firmly believe that there is no other way if there western the unit paulo world, ah,

with all its deficiencies and distortions, politically, economically psychological in whatever form and also in the important barrier or values prevail, then we will have a long term period of conflicts began small. ah, and the troubles that will grow well beyond what we see to they. we should not allow these to happen. and we should have an upper hand in our defense of poor human values, beth, from what russia will do on international arena in the time to come. while we appreciate you coming on the program and giving us your time today. thank you so much, sir. gay. rob, cough rushes deputy foreign minister ah,

ah, ah hunter, russian state. oh, never on minas landscape diva. how cents am i? oh me could been a city baffled it's been okay. so mine is cuz i'm speaking with little fan in the european union. the kremlin media machine, the state aren't russia today and spoke r t spoke neck. even our video agency, roughly all band on youtube with

me. ah, ah ah, [000:00:00;00] a magic you might look and you live muscles. if you look on the initial be white glove, not to get a can use the but by you and you who did origin, but you also still listed on the thought it was

a what i see the steam the bus is the little gear motivation says diesel you don't, you don't bob? oh, i just don't know if you have to figure out the scene because the african and engagement it was the trail. when so many find themselves well the part we choose to look so common ground. ah. moved to no one. no, sir, no, no. admiral hooker, no,

no. what go more real than what they should end up unit 731 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. and grill. oh, you know, to production with sure. sure. did enough good candidates. when you suddenly we're going to put you on more more general martha. this is ms. newman from omar. i got the sale. i got your name. i understood. i wish to know about the only whole new date

on more or less enough, jr. let's i had to put the sky mother on all it buddy bill could you could help us out. nice. oh boy, that's good to go. so i want on this, well, she my a new on it. i'm all i can send more a year. you're not allowed to give us a lot with the