now you and you k face a stand off over care of and customs controls on the flow of goods between the countries. tensions rose after the introduction of the bill in westminster to remove some trading rules with the e. u threatening legal action over the dispute. we spoke to independent journalist shabbos, who says funder lay and lacks an understanding of historical context. her remarks were made to an audience that she thought it would be seen as something positive, but i think it was seen as a little bit. it was seeing that a bit of discomfort here in our lunch, you know, i mean it showed in my view and in the view of many common observers or commentators that she has a very poor understanding of our history and very large minority of people who consider themselves irish for roman catholic and would have liked to have been part of the irish republic, the independent republic that broke away from britain and a so lot of similarities with the ethnic russian population and ukraine who found

themselves on the wrong side of history when the soviet union collapsed was destroyed, and huge volumes of russian speaking people. millions of them found themselves living in a new, independent ukraine with very, a resurgent nationalist use. looking to revise history of those, you know, the countries passed, et cetera. it displays her ignorance rather than an attempt to do anything. i mean, of course she's, she's also made a strange comment regarding the number of casualties in ukraine. a $100000.00 plus ukranian officers kills. of course, she probably meant soldiers, but i mean, she's displayed a particular talent for as saying think she apparently doesn't mean and that's our wrap on the hour's top news stories from around the globe. be sure to head over to r t dot com for 247. use updates and don't forget to follow us on rumble. odyssey,

and thanks for checking in. we'll see again at the top of the hour with ah hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things are considered, i'm funeral about like the weather, any talk of a political solution to the ukraine. conflict is in a very deep freeze. washington is against that ukraine does what it's told, and the russian see no pressing need to talk to the west. but this does not mean ukraine is a frozen conflict far from it. economic pain is just starting to reach a boiling point. ah,

discuss these issues and more. i'm joined by my guess, george samuel, we in budapest, he's a podcast or at the goggle which can be found on youtube and locals. and here in moscow we have maxine who is director of the center for advanced american studies at moscow state institute of international relations. reginald cross that goes with the fact that means you can jump any time you want, and i would appreciate it. when i start, i was george in budapest, georgia. you and i actually follow quite closely with the chancellor of germany, but we call sergeant schultz on this program. what he has to say from time to time . it's actually quite interesting, if not to the point of bizarre. he said that piece in europe depends on revival of post cold war security agreements with russia. well, why didn't he think of a year ago for a year, almost exactly on december 17th. i just want to really remarkable that a major european leader would say such a thing because yeah,

that's the problem. that's how we got here. george. yes, exactly. and it's very hard to see what exactly he means by post cold war security agreements with russia because, or remember, the post security agreement was native expansion. and it began immediately to leave the solution. also back in the demise of the soviet union. i mean, they didn't even pause for breath, and this happened despite repeated russian warnings, expressions of russia. again, that was coming from brazil, the person that a lot so much. so it's hard to know what he really is and then even mentions about, well, maybe we can discuss mr. deployment, we weren't deploy miss, i was in. great, well, that's a completely pointless exercise because this was something that the united states

talked about last december when the president presented it is to security last one for united states and want to later and said to be a, which was no for the late expansion of united states and later rejected the idea of the later expansion was, well, maybe we can talk about mr. deployments, but already said there was a peripheral issues because you can just move, you'll miss i was in need of the moment. so why do we need to discuss it? so it's very hard to know and it was a echo this theme of shows as well the other day. well, we got to talk about that as in what, what do you planning on and then the same. and then also said the other day is, well hey, what we need to set up a special tribunal to put russian aggression on trial. so least it completely meaningless shows in my room have been largely meaningless during the past 10

months. if i can get to your max, if i can continue with what that shows also says that, but is part of returning to the us post cold war security agreements. he also said this, which is again, really quite mystifying, given the events that we have. russia must make concessions acceptance quote, that there is no aggression coming from nato, unquote. read it again. there is no aggression coming from nato. i mean, is this a serious person here? because the problem is nato. ok? it's not, you know, you don't wish it way to say like wave a magic wand say, but it's ok. it's not evil, it won't hurt you. ok, again, this is a like a fancy that coming from a major european leader in the middle of a conflict in europe is really quite mystifying and actually quite terrifying. go ahead. well, i think at some point in history back a few months ago,

who responded to a similar close by saying it's, it's not the intention channels that matter. you know, and i know that i are serious, may have some problem with this. you know, they would say tensions matter to how you read them, but i think it gives you a clear sense of a thinking on the russian side. you have to say, i also want to refer to one bigger issue to say that both. usually a problem in any conflict in any major military escalation is when parties have a divergence of physicians. here we have a general mas gap in the reverse of interest. and the interest bottom line is that the, the west european us in particular would like to return to in history where they were at the peak of their might, which is the post cold war water end of 98990 s. when they were the ones you know,

structuring the world according to their needs and interests. and russia in wants to return to its own point of its might, which is the end of the world war 2. when you know they, the russia, u. s. and u. k. dictated the rule southern regional for the rest of the world that fortunately or unfortunately, i don't know, none of the either claims can be realised in today's world. i would say that and but, you know, that's, and i think russia in a way has given up on those expectations that might be a grand deal because it clearly the us is not interested in any great deal received at the moment. it was on their side and then when i explored their, the picture of the scene here, they're getting right now to the best. and we've been long talking about the interest come in, which is now here. and a both parties expecting that the other one is going to pack sooner. okay,

well i mean, that's actually the, the other side of the coin that i want to talk about is the, the, and then the pain dial, but in georgia, which, which really fascinating is that the cold war architecture that was created in europe after the 2nd world war, it works ok, it kept the peace. all right? and so again, going back to the shelters, words, i mean, how can someone a series person say they say, well then what would change, what was the, what changed the post cold war order to get to where we are right now? he's my aunt. think about it, because just as you said, a soon as the warsaw pact came to an end, there was massive expansion of nato. and we all have to be clear here is this was a security agreement that only excluded russia but was against russia. and that's why the security order in europe has collapsed george. yes,

that's exactly right. and your choice of words is very interesting because sergeant schultz has said in the past that any future security arrangement of russia must include a security arrangement in europe. must include russia. must not be directed against russia. and then of course, he said something completely different the next day. i mean at least some realization of that fact. but if we go back to the historical analogies, then yes, during the cold war, the soviet union has enjoyed respect. and that is that the issue that has been lost and what russia wants to go back to that we, we will respect that as a great power whose interests needed to be taken account. you know, people didn't like communism. they didn't like the soviet union, none the less, you know, you didn't mention the soviet union, you have to just, you, except that it had interest and you didn't across any red line for the soviet union

that disappeared at the end of the cold war. and russia has repeatedly, i said, you know, we, we want to return to that. you show us the respect that is due to us as a great, a refuse to russia, time and time again. i mean, you know, we talk about all of the various agreements from which the western withdrawn, the united states is growing like the abm treaty, the i and i treat it all. it was just a reflection of the lack of respect the united states have garage and i think that what triggered you know, the launch of the civil special military operations is that i have to show you need to show respect for otherwise we're just not going to have any peace or security in europe, because ultimately when we're not going to just tolerate you, surrounding us with hostile states and just sort of boxing is in as if we, you know, we're, we're, you know, we're going to publish that. you could just dominate, well, you know,

it's interesting is that makes, if you go from across the shields even to biden, because we, you know, we have a state visit to the united states and you get it from these people that they can see that they still believe that they can unilaterally impose a security arrangement on europe without the participation of russia. isn't that kind of the, getting to the point where it is a faith complete that russia will always be deemed an enemy state because of a stake holder in agreement. you know, then what is their role? i mean, or, or because natal needs an enemy, it only for it to continue. existence must expansive. russia is the likely target here, but my point is they, they're not, they're less interested in security at the end of the day. and rushes primary issue is security, go ahead mass right indeed. and i want to pick up where you left off in saying

that the very rationale behind the beginning of the special military operation. i know people have a lot of understanding sure. are not entirely clear what exactly you know the situation with transitioning what to put it in very a kind of grew terms. russia, the what it did to produce favorable security outcomes for itself and it's near rod when and then the security outcomes in the last few years were not shaping up in russia's favor. so what, whatever, love, whatever, sholtes or micron have to say about whether, how russia should be engaged. there's got to be this idea in mind that the security outcomes for russia should be engaged in their st calculation and thinking. and here i think a lot of people in moscow have, or including in foreign policy domain and then or policy making circles are very skeptical about how serious is independent of policy makers. micron shows are at

the end of the day. so whatever they're saying, maybe just the signal that they're challenge channeling a coordination with united states or, you know, they have the okay to, to, to test to the grounds and see how russia will respond next. another you mentioned before we go to the break here. i mean it's in, there is a, a disparity here going on here. and then there seems me that the, under the guidance of washington, there is quite uniform security the definition of security for the west year. but they just opposed to that. i mean, the more they get type security wise more they follow how far out economically in that is, that is a tension. and that is really, really good. can you just address that for 30 seconds? i think it's, it's a very unfortunate the geopolitics kills economy. all over the world, these days, a very certain token of it. yeah.

in, in. well, what you can, both of them can continue in the same trajectory or there's going to be some kind of tension, some kind of break. there are gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on some real estate. ah, ah, a kid and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves will support. we choose to look for common ground.

ah ah, ah ah. well the magic crossed out were all things are considered on funeral. well, this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing surreal news ah. over to georgia, budapest church,

which one of the interesting things of the conflict and ukraine is presented to the world. and i think it was, it had already started, but ukraine is a pivot point. is it? it goes across a administrations in the united states. we've talked a lot about trump in his trade policies, but now when we look at them with buying with inflation reduction act, which has nothing to do with inflation. but basically i'm giving preferences to american companies, particularly in the green sector, which was, oh, that was supposed to be your job. ok, when of course, the leader in the world is china. what we have now is that the u. s. is turning its back on 3040 years of globalization and wanting to have its own globalization. because now they will have multiple globalization that are b a just opposed and opposed to each other. and american, one with the other europeans, as their underlings to be able to exploit. and then of course, we have the east,

we have china and it's, it's growing globalization here. and that doesn't bode well for security, george. and it's actually very amusing to listen to the european complaints as if the united states and ever in the past can very much about the european economy and your economic security. well, of course, the american government is going to take up as their priority, who will be american companies, and the europe's companies are going to fail in getting them market share in the united states. so be it the that how the united states has always run its economy. i mean it's, it's always been a protectionist power. the real question, why hasn't europe done anything to protect its interest?

is why i mean the whole resume, dasher of the european union have been all to be able to build up the cutting edge industries that will challenge the united states. i mean, it is saying this for years and then you, you look around, is it? well, in what area it is, you're a producing cutting edge industry, starting computers, not in software, not in the internet, not in social media. so you know, not even a biotech. so what exactly is you are waiting for? so my own goes to the united states warning, well, you know, maybe we're going to do some subsidizing in the future. we haven't done it in the past, and then buying a few little tweaks to the inflation reduction act. and it comes back and says, victory is ours. we want, we've achieved everything we can. so again, again, all the talk about chapter presenting. so you can only challenge to the united

states and to china. it mass, you know, the, the, the, to this point, i mean the, me and the americans have done really quite well. i mean, the, the, the economic pain that has been as a result of western sanctions on russia, the brunt of it has been built by the europeans. ok. and then this year, inflation reduction, i guess that's almost like insult to injury. not only do the europeans have to pick up the, the pain tab if i can put it that way. now going to pick up the economic one. and i think the, you know, the media to underestimate what, what's happening in europe. they talk about getting to this winter. how about getting through the next 5? because that's what's really in the cards right now. and europe's economic crown, this productivity will only continue to decline. so i don't see. and in the longer term, i don't see what the price of europe for the america it is. when it's interpretation

of globalization, it's going to become a place to become poor and poor and, and then that it's still the same time you have to pay for their security. i mean, it seems like a mixture of all worst possible outcomes. go ahead. well, in the them, in also, in this sense, you get your, that is likely to be a lot more dependent on the united states in terms of, you eliminate europe as an independent actor, either as a european union as a whole, or individual european states that would be totally know subjugated to us national security interest and on policy concerns in this kind of global struggle against china. you know, to shut down the european market for the chinese you know, goods and technology and all that. and i guess that's the idea kind of behind trying to break the european so the royalty and kind of use the ukraine conflict as

a common denominator for global interests. one perhaps, could argue and say, you know, the elite, running european countries are more, you know, oriented to it's kind of global and global interests. and less concerned about the national priorities. that may be a political price to pay for that. eventually, if you can do that in, definitely jump in their george because i agree with math. i mean they're, they're ideologically captured. but idea how g in politics, they don't, they're not always good bit. fellows go ahead. no, that's right. and this is been the european problems since the end of the cold war, it had a chance in 1990 the sentence, a cold war is over. now we have to pursue our own interests. you know, we can just, you know, go on, you know, this, that frame a soviet invasion. we need the protection of the united states. you know,

that the whole issue of soviet union, so really racial and gone. and that was the moment really the europe to thinking because it's own destiny. obviously it's destiny. lay with some sort of an economic partnership with russia. i mean, i was always, that was where everything was differently cheap energy keep going cheap energy. and this is something that united states was absolutely determined to stop. but when you, when you, when i actually studied openly, when both of it said, when i'm going to allow any power to dominate any continent in the world, you know, it's always going to be the united states that will prevail in europe and asia. and that's where the united states and united states and continue to insist not only on the maintenance of nato expansion and expansion of nato, that meant essentially moving the dividing line in the cold war,

a 1000 miles east of a partnership with russia. you're actually intensified the conflict with russia. i mean, it is a lot more intensely. it was of the cold war. i mean, we didn't get this, we didn't get anything like this year. so the like to say says prevail because the united states succeeded in breaking up any possible future partnership between europe and russia. and now europe is in a very weak position and unable to challenge the united states as any serious economic. i am unable to challenge china. think of any kind of economic rival you know, makes it's, it's really interesting. if you look at western media, mainstream media, there's always, and it's something i'm a child of the cold or something i was brought up. i'm sure george will say the same thing the how you manage the russian thread,

either it's soviet or it's today who's russia, russian, all of the, all the non. but if the, if you, if you look at, in a more sober way, the biggest threat to europe is the connected state is not russia, then there is. and right now the connections between europe and russia are very, very limited in said to get even fewer links. ok, so really the, the, what's impacting europe is american policy, american dicked out because because the, the, the, the contact russia has with europe now is the lease, it's been in my life time. and i think probably a lot longer than that. go ahead mess. well, the united states has spent a lot of time and effort on grooming its presence in europe, in western europe after the world war 2 of in eastern europe after the call of the berlin wall. and then the break up of the soviet union. and the process needs the trans atlantic community. so the see that is incredibly, regardless of who's in power, who's in office. he's out here. they were,

he entered towards a greater alliance with the united states. so it's not easy, of course to out even not even the us presence, but the very thinking that the u. s. is ultimately the course of russia is the force of evil. and you know, occasionally, i mean, it's pretty clear, i guess, the pattern line, you know, kind of a roller coaster and now we see the russia threat kind of dominating the narrative . i wonder what the, you know, there might be some intellectual or it's not existential crisis. in terms of thinking of what to do with russia when and if we're stuffs and, you know, running the country now they have this beautiful bottom until the form of credit. and then perhaps the talks about, you know, hopes for russia being liberal, then they will run against the harsh reality. a lot of things that russia's been doing is not just proven. it's a foreign policy. well,

i don't know if the content or, or but, but there is indeed a lot of things that are in russia strategic talks historically. and yeah, i mean, is that you bring up a very good point george. i mean, i always on the, to the point of humorous, if it weren't so dangerous, is that all, everything is personified. it's, you know, it's yelton, you know, you personify and then, then it can, you know, it has rushes national interest. it doesn't really change very much. ok. the only grade leader? well, no leader that ever betrayed russia's national interest. was me help. got a bunch of all the rest. it is been continuity. george go ahead. yeah, of course, the biggest going to you it is that yes, the west celebrates on a regular basis, some new leader. and then it becomes disenchanted with the new leader because the new leader insist on pursuing national interest. let me go back to the 19th. it is

a popular figure out for a while and then he became reviled figured by the early $900.00. 60. is this terrifying monster issue on the table and shaking with western leaders? well, yeah, i mean, you know, if you were trying to somehow you deploy a, you to spice light. so the soviet union, you know, you're going to get a leader who's going to be angry and was also a time when it will celebrate that, you know, used to travel around the west. you visit the texas, you know, you know, yes, t with the queen. you know, was a popular figure, but again, when was put in stuff, you know, you know, insisting on russian national interest suddenly became

a middle aged madrid. it was also all right, now we've got rid of a. so i think this is this personification of politics, which is absolutely did and, and has nothing to do with security. i want to thank my guests in moscow and in budapest, and thanks to our view or for watching us here, larkey. see you next time remember ah, ah, watching it was a in a shorter one, and i'm not trying to stay like a

national z. m. shylie. or if you buy, when you sit down with a 6 in moscow, was working on mechanisms to ban the use of the price cap for russian oil. russia will supply oil and petroleum products only on market terms. moscow again rejects weston price, cut on its oil trade with the country. that doesn't mean you've been on the boat. russian oil impulse also comes. it's a force on monday also in the program. moscow lashes out here over what it's called the persecution of the orthodox christine community. after recent cracked down on the russian orthodox churches, most sacred monastery in ukraine, over a legit pro russian activity.