ah ah hello and welcome to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle, russian. the west survived the cold war because both recognized and practice the concept of indivisibility of security. one country should not attempt to attain security at the expense of another country. this is exactly what the west has done against russia to the point of claiming russia has no right to any security guarantees. ah, cross sucking security guarantees. i'm joined by my guess. the boy mileage in washington. he is a blogger, and calm is in quebec. we have dmitri last caught us, he is a lawyer and freelance journalist and,

and we're thing we crossed anthony webber. he is an independent political commentator. all right, gentlemen, cross huck rules and effect, that means you can jump in any time you want. and i always appreciated a boy, let me go to you 1st in the imperial city. um, this idea of indivisibility of, of security has been quite lost and ever since the end of the cold war, because it was the hallmark of the helsinki process. and nato is just thrown that into the wind and i would say that speed and that is to be the result is a conflict. do we have in ukraine though? no one in the west seems to want to use that logic, but it was the west and the soviet union that came up with that logic that kept the peace in europe during the cold war. so what are they missing? go ahead in the boucher well this do you are quite correct. this was where it ended, the call ended up preventing the cold war from turning hot. unfortunately, it was red con from history and to 90 each. amid this whole end of history, triumphalism that,

that became the ideology to sure in washington. and the helsinki process basically became a conveyor belt for the us to browbeat other countries into doing it, speeding. and this doctor and it wasn't quite so clearly formulated. but they basically said that the only sovereign truly sovereign country in the world is us. and everybody else has to do what they're told or else. and we saw what or else meant in 1999. when nato proceeded to attack you, then you was flavio without any sort of breaking, do you want charter, its own charter to health? think you charter all imaginable charters? it was privy to and it did that was just basically ok. we did it because we wanted to and what are you going to do about it? and you know, 23 years later we are, we are, we are as so with each one of those. obviously none of us would have happened had the west abided by the treaties that it side by that has really never been the case

has it to me treat me. it was a few days ago that the german chancellor came out and said that, you know, there has to be new security guarantees per europe after the conflict ends in ukraine, which russia, obviously in his mind, will lose which he is obviously wrong. but it's really kind of befuddled me, is that when does the german chancello that those low security guarantees were in place before nato expanded? i mean it's, there is this sense of, of forgetting history. it's really extraordinary how the german chancellor could say something like that. your thoughts, dimitri? well, we have an overwhelming tendency in the west to have a shorter non existent historical memory. and we tend to choose the date of the starting point for history. that is most convenient to the narrative of the u. s. hedge them on the united states government. and the fact of the matter is that it has been eminently well established by the historical record. in fact,

that beyond reasonable dispute, not only that europe signed onto the, know the notion of indivisible security and recognize that the insecurity of one state affects all others within the european region. something we're seeing today and very vivid and painful and a very, very painful way. but it's also absolutely clear from a historical perspective that the leaders of the soviet union and russia received assurances that there would be no expansion eastward of nato. and there were repeated warnings from luminaries across the, the west, including george kennan, including henry kissinger, including even william burns, the current director of the ca, that across the political spectrum and russia, there was at antipathy, entirely understandable, and typically towards nato expansion. that there had been assurances given that the breaking of those assurances would have potentially catastrophic consequences for europe and the west relationships with russia. and we simply conveniently forgot

all of that. because the ice days decided that its status is the world sole superpower was at risk. and that it needed to take measures to weaken russia and then beyond that to weaken what it seems to regard as its prime competitor, china. well, you, anthony, almost. exactly. one year ago, russia sent to nato in to washington to notes ultimatums, whatever you want to call them about, you know, it's, you know, basically they're up against the wall and you have to listen to it because the security architecture is collapse. or that is that be something that could be possibly entertained now, maybe because we have mixed voices in europe. you know, there's no relationship. no future with russia, then crawl near it, got criticized for it. so there has to be security guarantees. your thoughts, anthony? well, the problem is, sir, there's a huge amounts of distrust are which has been caused by what's happened because has been rightly said from the 19 ninety's when the cobra ended. and

they were these assurances, but there wouldn't be an expansion of nato, even though they weren't in written format. ah, but the problem is since the end of the cold pool, ah, they chose early, massively expanded it, especially since the town of the century are. so it's been a complete our sense of distrust there, because why should the need russia, our trust and a peak people in nato. but i yourself to look at the situation office, see any country needs to have some security. and the united states swarms in security where may have the cuban missile. ready crisis and you have to look at what are the former president gorbachev said, and because he was the architects with agreements between the old soviet union and

the laser. and he said a, you may not humiliate a country and expect prayer where to be no consequences or the cause. there are consequences. good miss batler, pamela, really heights in russia, which is what's been happening now, but it's as though these agreements we had, ah, the helsinki, the, the, the structures we have in place to our bridges tension. i have been totally ignored, as, as he said. and the voices for peace are shut down and are one of the objectives of nation nato is see supposed to be to protect freedom. but there's a freedom in the, in the west at the moment about our free and open debate each all this whole issue . and is it really in the interest data countryside, conflicts with russia, ukraine,

and it really isn't. so we all have to look at our interest in the countries points, again, there's no strategic tool, other interest in being involved in this conflicts or the voice. i mean, if there are going to be relations that you're going to, it's going to have to be mutual. that's not a message. it's coming out of european capitals. it's a, it's a to our way or the highway. i mean, it's really extraordinary that they don't reflect upon how we got here. they don't want to do that and it has been pointed out, they choose their dates. ok, right, well that the thing about europe and capital is, is that i see a lot of rhetoric coming out of there, but not a lot of agency. essentially, micron and sholtes and others talk a big game. but they do what they're told at the end of the day. now, they're being told that by, you know, i choose to believe that it's not joe biden, because that would be even more humiliating than the alternative. but the problem with the collective west is twofold. one,

they can't under that they wouldn't recognize their own interests if they, you know, literally fell in their lap. that's one and 2, they're not agreement capable. there is a very clumsy but wonderful rush in the ologist. that literally translates it's not agreement capable. these are to people you cannot make deals with because, and this is something that collective west forgotten, and i'll put it in terms of pop culture terms that everybody could understand. if, if your method of dealing with people is to say i'm altering the deal, pray i do not alter it further. you are a villain in this story, not a good guy. so, you know, this is, this is a bit of self reflection that's needed to be done in the west, and i don't see it an effect anywhere. i think microns passing thought about giving security guarantees to russia, which is of about a year too late. is the closest it's come to it and he's been viciously attacked over that. and yet, you know, he's been said, sorry,

is at home at band any sort of criticism as, as you know, russian propaganda saying what sholtes in germany and they entertain these fantasies that, you know, once russia will lose things, we'll go back to the way they were before, well, i've got a, i've got news for them. first of all, russia not going to lose. and secondly, nothing is ever going to be like, as it was before, no matter what the outcome of this current conflict, which is that's not how these things work. yeah, and dmitri impression is not granted security guarantees, it will create its own. that's what the west doesn't understand. dmitri again, i want to come back to the point we meet at the outset about the historical amnesia from which we seem to suffer in the west. we forget that the soviet union, according to 1993 study of the russian academy of sciences, suffered some estimated 27000000 losses in the 1st world war, the 2nd one. and that included approximately $9000000.00 military deaths. of course, the,

these horrific casualties were inflicted upon the soviet union in the 2nd world war by an aggressive nazi regime emanating from germany. and i think, well, dmitri demetrius to point out collective west minus the u. k. at the time, it's really interesting. ok, because you have the entire european land mass. ok. joining nazi germany keep going . i'm sorry to interrupt. well, obviously this is a historical trauma of tremendous proportions. i mean these losses that the soviet union sustained were vastly in excess of those of the axis powers. the united kingdom, the united states and canada combined. and yet we seem not to understand that this historical trauma affects the perspective on of the russian people and the russian government with respect to security, particularly under western border. and in lesson until we come to grips without reality, we are going to be at risk of interminable conflict,

military conflict with potentially disastrous consequences because of the risk of nuclear. a nuclear hi jimmy 3, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a hard break gentleman and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion on security guarantees. stay with our team. ah ah, what i you crazy? i yes. or took a lot. i lost most of my friends. but did i was broken. i wasn't able to save anyone. i get nothing in that i met wilson,

2013 and god, but really in my way to make me start talking to willy waiting for me to them. i'm happy that trying to find is willie little john, you can go to sleep. mom, i had become my new friend. the one was love gonna die or i was he is. i would stay alive those day next to me. if i'm not crazy enough, i'm not gonna make it. ah

with yourself for the all new business and you will clean a b, e r w that was chosen. yeah, americans. great you. when you wrote, you got to really just touching up the group just feeling in for you was just touching sure. it was nice talking to different student info with you guys her own the with them the problem you're still with you

with jewish thought it was a community off all thought it which, which in the longer it was just a push to to stream with home because or, you know, your personal do school course, i don't know who stevie i know for the don't know if i should just with the 1st opinion, finances come on both . welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered on peter level. to remind you we're discussing security guarantees with let's go back to anthony where they, it's interesting that in the mainstream it's her bowden, to talk about what we're talking about on this program here. and one of the things

it's not talked about is that a european security architecture would not only excluded russia, but was excluded russian was against russia. and this is something that if we're going to have peace in europe, has to be rectified. and given the voices that we're hearing in europe and in obviously, washington in london, we have a very long way to go. maybe a generational issue. go ahead anthony. yes, that's very free. but we got to recognize what the real agenda is here. and i told he, god, that the american poets issue our sunday plot for a well, when she said the ukraine wool is all about regime change in russia, and it's not really about anything else. and it's about our god bless vested interest at play. a big about change so that they get the comfy bratia ah, plays the game and they had me go this way. i know we need to look at what sub present pacing said in to thousands about our euro,

because he said russia is passive european culture. and i cannot imagine my, an country in isolation from europe and what we often call lee civilized. ready worlds, so it is hard for me to visualize nay terrorism enemy. so i don't think russia ever wanted a comb brakes or nature as an enemy, bob regal hitting powers. who have been trying to bring about this tongue for ex, between certain countries in the west and russia. i'm sorry, is interesting if any, not that long ago that the united kingdom members of the role of family was visiting russia and improving relations between the u. k. roster, and now we have a situation where the former prime minister of the united kingdom brought us johnson is actively war mongering,

encouraging the suddenly of mo weapons and the bull. our aids to the bustle, bliss, pensive president, said, and steve, are you crying? i and the u. k. and certain other countries had goal blood on their hands because a lot of the weapons which should been supplied to the ukraine that ended up being to bomb the civilians, as well as all li, military or casualties as well as she right. the said, we've got a proper the, the windstream major in the west of the u. k as well. he's not on debate. so the public does not actually know the trade that was, is going on. but a little bit of a was sad because nate, i was supposed to have an objective of securing peace, promising co operation, and guarding freedom and night. i was doing none of those in the crying.

and dr. europe as a whole lot. and the by say, i mean south and burn, makes it very existential. a, i know we must win. russia must be defeated. well, what happens or in the reverse happens, the boy ship, i mean, how, how does nato survive? this which i'm rubbing my hands with glee because it's a failed alliance. it when it's being proven. well nato's mission, according to its 1st secretary general, who was a british peer, unlike suttonberg, who is an absolute nbc said that the mission of the alliance was to keep the americans in the russians out in the germans down. and it has been doing that. and it has been beneficial doing that ever since. the problem is that you cannot have european security without russia. you cannot have, you know, europe with, with germany suppressed. and obviously, american tutelage is turning out to be not really

a blessing of liberty that everybody thought it would be. nato is a fail alliance. if, if there is any justice in the world, it needs to be dissolved. it has manifestly served the opposite purpose of its official one. again, lord, his mace definition worked out much better in that respect. but again, not to the interest of the people involved. i would argue that goldenberg's in his infinite stupidity and i'm sorry, i don't have any respect for this man. he basically admitted that nato was a party to the conflict. he's actually insisting. right? so, you know, if you, if you're not involved in the war, how can you win or lose? and if you are involved in more than welcome to the consequences, the one big issue is that what we've discussed before is that it's not just historically many amnesia. it is, it is a very deliberate destruction of historical memory to the point where most people in the west have this vision of world war 2,

as seen on the silver screen and spielberg, movies were to soviet union doesn't even exist. right. and unfortunately, i've, i've been saying for the past few years before this calamity happened upon us that, you know, give him another half a generation and they will have red condit. the soviet union is actually responsible for the war and even the holocaust because that's where things were headed. well, no, no, boy, i don't know if you've noticed. i'm a big fan of the world war theories that came up 1974. i think it was, it's been completely erased from youtube. i think this one episode, and if wiped it because of what exactly what you said, because it would, it would make, well, keep the memory of the war. authentic memory. dmitri, i mean what, where nato is drawn a line in the sand. i mean, how does it survive when it loses in ukraine? it, well, it's great. ok. i find it in thinkable that nato will survive in any meaningful

form. perhaps some rump of nato, confined to a core of states and western europe, might survive this disaster from a reputational perspective. but we need those in this, in this sort of existential crisis because it stated credibility on total victory and ukraine, which from a practical perspective is achievable. and you know, quite apart from that nato's credibility, in any rational world would have taken a massive hit. well, before the commencement of the special military operation in february, because for example, nato committed, you know, extraordinary trillions of dollars of resources. apparently, the nexus of a trillion dollars to the war and f dentist in an over 20 year period was unable to work with taliban, who were armed with soviet era, small arms. nato in the name of human rights and the doctrine of the responsibility protect doctrine which is abused. shamelessly effectively destroyed libya, which was at that point in time. up until that point of time, the most prosperous state in africa, needle bombarded serbia and even to this very day,

that problem hasn't been resolved, it's festering, and there could be war in kosovo. so when you look across the spectrum of nato intervention, what you see is one failed, stayed in one disaster after another. and on top of that, you have nato demanding clamoring stilton burge and others, that every natal members spend 2 percent of its g d. p on the military, whether there is a legitimate need for them to do so. and whether, even though there are pressing domestic issues, that every member of nato has to confront, including poverty and an environmental and be environmental crisis currently confront, you know, anthony, and one of the things is very curious in this propaganda rich environment, that this is an elite wore it because if you look at polling, if you dig down, most people are interested in domestic issues here. but this isn't an elite agenda . yes, it definitely is a we just had problems about the record of nights which should be one

failure. in fact, the one instance where they could have succeeded to get his son, but they totally didn't grade job. but we tried $26.00 with in afghans shaban ride city caisson standards for women and so on. i said they because they did a deal with the taliban. no, never lost a major battle with the tyler so that he conveniently left afghanistan to get enrolled in the crime lab we. we have to process a wider picture and it's all very sad. other people in the event saw controlling what is happening ah, but we have to do our best to are in all respects of countries feel involved in the crime should encourage our governments to exit from those policies

certain. oh, but that would be appeased. men, munich, gay, yeah, that's all you hear. it's all you hear. and then, you know, you know, all of you, the people that say that, don't even know what it means. ok, it's a slogan. it's simply a slogan. it's pretty good. and so you guys about the deal with the taliban? good for peace. so it's all done. well, yeah, well, i've got, you know, there, but i'm glad that afghanistan was brought up here because the ukraine is the new gripped. ok, because afghanistan was a 20 year griff, now this is a new grift. yeah. well, it is the problem. the problem with with this is that obviously it's much bigger grid for the weapons manufacturers. except that they hoped that, you know, there was banks would actually get the job done in 3 to 6 months. they're the ones who are hoping for short, victoria, it's war. and it hasn't been that then now they're facing the cold hard reality that their production rates cannot possibly compete with water in warfare and also of gas. stan was a typical western expedition war,

something that happened far away that didn't really impact anybody at home. busy aside from those poor souls who came back with p t s d, this is having immediate consequences not just for, not just for europe, which is obviously directly impacted with, with the energy collapse. but even in the us, because the, you know, dividing government tried blaming the gas prices on, on the conflict. so here's for the 1st time in, god knows how many here certainly was living memory, a conflict that's actually hitting home. however indirectly. and the population doesn't like it. and guess what the population doesn't get. it doesn't get a vote. it doesn't matter how hard they're they're put upon because nobody cares what they think. it's let them eat cake all the way down. and it's too absolutely destroying any sort of delusion that might be persisting in the west about some sort of, you know, government talk to people in democracy. let me jump in here to make sure the last 30 seconds go to you. how is the west going to accept defeat and ukraine?

well, my great fear is that it won't. ok, i seem to. yeah, yeah, that speed is full speed ahead. they don't know how to deescalate. right now we're talking about sending patriot missiles to ukraine. every single reaction to a russian intervention in this theater of war is one of escalation. and i think at some point we as we, as a people are going to have to take matters into our own hands, get out into the street and demand that our governments finally engage in a process of negotiation. and yet, yeah, a little bit of democracy wouldn't be a bad thing right now gentlemen, you know, and i, yeah, well, you know, that, that's the one of the biggest casualties is, is democracy and, and listening to what people have to say gentlemen, fascinating discussion. as all the time we have many thanks them i guess in washington, quebec and wording and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at r t c you next time. remember cross cycles.

ah, a. ringback ringback because she changed with barclay's new that was the name is us a. ringback forced of national guido, which is obviously you still with you on the limit controller who lives from when you do a number of who do a medical with national anthem. com protect a campus that the copy of

a working mm for hayden, is the aggressor today. i'm authorizing the additional strong sanctions today. russia is the country with the most sanctions imposed against it. a number that's constantly growing. i think you're probably when was the question, as you speak on like when you're sitting in which the mind the we're we're, we're banding all imports of russian oil and gas new g. i g with the letter with joe by imposing these sanctions on russia. you know, has destroyed the american economy. you so there's your boomerang.

huh. with pledges to extend its combat preparation program for ukrainian soldiers as thousands more troops already being prepared in other nato countries. we speak with the ukrainian p, o w. he went through the program which is a funny thing, but for 2 days they taught us how to hold a weapon. did you use any of the skills that you learned in england, or at least try to know why there was nowhere to use them? the u. s or the caught down on protest is in peru that's according to the else did president petro castillo.