ah ah with hello and welcome to worlds apart, the russian military operation in ukraine. it will soon mark its 1st anniversary having demo, catered millions of lives on both sides of the conflict into before and after. how well do the protagonist understand the child, their motives and goals and with the damage already inflicted?

is any reconciliation even possible? well, to discuss that i'm now joined by geoffrey roberts, professor emeritus of history at the university college cork. robinson's great to talk to thank you very much for your time. thanks for you to say she, as you pointed out in one of your articles at western media, i still a wash with the theories and narratives of what was on vladimir put his mind when here authorized is incursion into your brain. but according to you, they all missed one important factor we just put into apocalyptic vision of a nuclear arm, few brain embedded in nato. what do you mean by that? and do you think that vision as apocalyptic as it may be? that has any grounding in reality, it will, it will, it will, i describe patricia decision to go to what would you cry as a decision a preventative, right. to prevent the,

you build up um the ukrainian. ready offices on, on rushes, rushes border. yeah. so if i see perspective was that build up on a, me here. he taught french russia in the me too long with actually represent an existential french russian. he's you, he's all committee and he said this time and again, since the war began, was the rush have to take action to liquidate that front. now, because it would probably be the greater the situation be western russia in the future. so that's why she was little but in the process leading up to decision for a particular moment, which i think my chit put his calculations in favor will because ok, so this over it will say well there is this threat with. ready the 2 way to preventative work always seems community a very risky, dangerous. i'm the times i such a huge to, to put in to mike, but who says,

but you get a moment is the community security conference it mid, mid february, when lensky makes a speech and the conference, if you require new nuclear weapons and there's actually a comment on in the western press is no do not change or so just by the fact that the policy of nuclear proliferation is supposed to be a uniform policy and endorsed by all international organizations. now, professor roberts, you also argue that we can believe that he was backed into the corner by the west and to recognize that fact that you know, he didn't have many great options, was not to endorse his perception or not to approve the war as a policy but simply a need to the fact that a meeting to the fact also requires some degree of analysis of the western policy. because at pushing your nuclear armed adversary into the corner is hardly prudent.

all wise, do you see any appetite for this kind of reflection in the west, especially given indeed disaster consequences both for ukraine and to some extent from the european union? a common th on international test. i see my function to try to explain what's going on to, to explain people so much of a sions, right? and that's, that's what it tries to relation to, to pollution and the russian decision to, to attack your cry. now you said that she indicated that doesn't mean to say that i accept pollutants rationale, and i agree with calculations. i don't are i for the very beginning, i thought opposed to and i continue to post and i think we need to have a nice discussion. we will also have the forefront discussions very clear of you about what's going on in, you know, what kind of scripts long as people be killed to do that. ukraine has been

a devastated. there is a risk i haven't named and torture every single day. thousands of ukraine soldiers and russian soldiers die on, on, on the front. so we need to be far as i'm concerned. the war is a disaster and it needs to be brought to an end. i see as soon as possible. yeah, that's over. so can i, can i stop you here for just a 2nd? because i think this is a very important juncture because when, whenever i have these discussions about security and morality, they are always sort of intertwined in a way that isn't very difficult to make sense. because i don't know a single human being who would say that war is a good thing. there is no one who approves of war. i'm sure putting in sound doesn't improve war, but when you come to matters of my national security,

morality and i think so, you know, they and they don't always play along with the prerogatives of commander in chief. and wasn't it also the moral duty of any commander in chief and british command and ship and americans lunch about rushing from under a chip or ukrainian one to defend that country if they feel that as a central interest and being threatened, it's also tomorrow to, to your citizens to actually judge they're literally just on their decisions and their consequences. and it's the mark you're taken off outside of service like me, to sign. and my judgement is that that decision was wrong. that other possibilities of resolving the problem disputed. so it was still press drug, i don't, i don't think that they reach the end of the road too much. so that's my argument is that pretty should continue to pursue the part of the part of the policy. now

having said that, by saying i disagree with purchase decision to go to law, doesn't mean to say that i blame him entirely for the war. i in one says it is a good decision. well, because that will be no. ready in your boss, but others have responsibility to the situation. well, you know, pulled the trigger. well, but it was the western, loaded by the nato, ukrainian military rushes borders. it was your crime but by refusing to make story against and says that what we've, we've had the development of this conflict into a proxy will russia and west now you wrote before and that from put into apocalyptic perspective, going to were in your crane. i in ukraine to stop this country from becoming another native breach. had, was not a difficult decision to make. and then the russians didn't make that decision in 2014 and didn't make that decision in 2020. and even in 2021.

having a mass. this very sizable contingent on the border with ukraine put in engaged in the last round of diplomatic talks with his american counterpart of joseph biden, which unfortunately led to nothing. i assure that pushing with his indeed apocalyptic i would even say, biblically apocalyptic nations, are you sure that it was nothing difficult decision for him to me, given everything you sad about the russians and the ukrainians being, you know, essentially one people in his view. i mean, it's not difficult decision for him to make even what he believes, situations, situations. that's what i was trying to get in relation to that particular point. but you're right, you mean you quoted, well, he didn't go to war in 2014. yes, he showed tremendous restraint and tremendous statesmanship,

which was actually so disappointed when he didn't continue to pass off sites which i mean, i think that's true. a roberts to what i mean and diplomacy for the sake of diplomacy . is it fine? i mean, ultimately, diplomacy should serve some practical goal. you know, what else could he have done to, you know, make sure that rushes concerns and not only listen to but actually taking into account because, you know, it doesn't get higher than meeting with the american counterpart than saying essentially, well, you know, we will do what we will do, i, i think the russian. ok, so what we're talking about is the western response to the russian security proposal. so december 2121. yeah. i think actually there is some progress in those negotiations. did you recall when put in the february i conversation with law?

he said well well well it wrote and like i said, no, this is still we should still continue with a few items. that diplomacy was actually achieving some results right now because of the some results there was a possibility of more results. so if you're a minister of foreign minister law, all 4 minutes to log off is not responsible for the security of portfolio. and he doesn't receive the, the security briefings that president received. so, you know, many of put it in a circle pick many people with input in, in a circle, were shocked, afraid of this action as most of us here in russia. because it is inconceivable for many russians still, that we wouldn't be in war with our ukrainian neighbors. but at the same time, you know, i bring back that question. what kind of when you go shaded outcome,

what would you welcome and do you think would, how to i said i've turned in the course of events in some other and more positive direction. i ok, we can, we can all, if you just went back and forth bred, i would just like to choose this. actually. i think that what he knows now about what actually happens as a result edition to devastating consequences is the kind of war that he's had to fight. i think that he was, he wasn't going to walk. i think he was, he was decided that a lot prudent course of action. would it be to continue with the policy at least for least leave for well, no, no, no, no, he has a very consistent saying yes, he recognizes the consequences after he takes responsibility for and you still think it's around just by suspect that the actually a crystal ball the end of february 2022. i don't think he

would like to decision decision for but anyway, here we have this for the key question. i was not arguing retrospectively about what might happen whether diplomacy could have succeeded with his calculation was the correct one on a case is what i'm saying. yes is how do we actually, how the system will come to an end to a secure piece? we repair relation between russia and the west. another company they listen. those are actually very good questions. and you wrote that prior to this operation who didn't have the reputation for being realistic and pragmatic decision maker, perhaps q pragmatic. so that some of his wasn't counterparts and believe that he would never take a kinetic military action to defend the country's interest. but judging from your current understanding of his pragmatism and use your best judgment on that,

not none of us have crystal balls here. how far do you think his vision, off aim goals, costs and means of this operation go? what do you think these are? what do you think would be in russia's best interest? as far as the end of this operation is a pretty starting to school, he continues, well, the position is also going to be the person that ends this for right. if, if the west and if the ukrainians are willing to actually to go show on the, on, on us it's a serious, serious basis. i think go home and discuss what we think about. we can speculate, but what might happen. but i also think we need to or so, so actually ok, let's speculate list of what we'd like to happen. what do we want to happen? right? why won't happen now? i want to watch come to an end as soon as possible. be realistic about it. the territory that is occupied by, by, by russia remind call of russia. ok. i want to play you crazy to get security

to, to be neutralized, which is interesting, but i also wanted to get security guarantees. i think i request massey by post war reconstruction. i'd like to see your current become a major member you, if not later, i'd like to see a whole series of a completely different system of security and developed in your okay, so that's more like a realistic problem. that probably won't happen. it was more likely it's a very messy end to the war in the fall of some kind of farm and well, some people do frozen, frozen conflict which will be a very long well professor roberts, we have to take a very short break right now. but we will be back in just

a few moments station ah, ah. with a suffered because we're getting the business and you will clean them a, b, e l does not a shoes on. yeah, americans, grey, you reorder it. you know, you got to really just touching up correctly. now. ceiling in for you was just touching sure. ruckel im was nervous. your doctor did not sit in full, a child voicing that you use her own the would them the proud in just a moment. that was true. i was you the last year it was i was sick yesterday. character as you does yours, that are both in the study skills on bristol,

many points of to watch, so blooming to on off on all kinds of sort of good. it was huge and longer, it was just in useful, posted sustainable mom because or lose no divorce or beautiful cold. i don't know who's got to know for the delano as i said to do given me other than that you're comfortable with these 1st opinion. finances come on both with ah

welcome back to was appoint with jeffrey roberts, professor emeritus of history at the university college court. professor robert before the break, we were talking about the possible solutions and your very expensive christmas, a wishlist for, for ukraine in europe and everybody else. so rich, i think we agreed on not very is not very realistic. but speaking of a frozen conflict, what i'm hearing a lot from the russian thinkers, and observers, and even decision makers, is that they, they are strongly disappointed. and in fact, angry. and by the way, the whole, the conflicting procedure, the piece talks have been exploited by the ukrainian and western side as a means of supply more weapons to ukraine as a means of training the ukrainian military and, but not as the as something that they actually committed to that is trying to

institute genuine peace. do you think it because you are an avid observer and i think you are trying to be a fair in this process. a fair observe in this process. do you think the russians can trust the west or the ukrainians, or with any other negotiations until they accomplish what they deem as necessary for their security goals? i think the future you said was going to be posted to a c, a p supplement by russian military success on russia is with the war slowly but surely. i'm not sure what foam or russian military. ready fee of your credit because for a full full for i'm fairly confident i have nothing in that circumstance. then the cruise and west will be forced to negotiate. and i think also in that kind of circumstances, you know, it was, it was like myself

a piece of the western restraint or some kind of deal. and the whole thing, i think those voices. ready will become become stronger, but yeah, but look even in kind of like a rosy scenario with christmas wish because i find that would be a very risky piece agreement for russia to to take a boat given even what happened given the mistrust. yeah. given broken agreements broke broken promises, but i think russia is going to, that is a huge risk. going to war. i think russia, so can i have to take another huge risk in actually ending the war and making some, some kind of a place. and actually in that respect, i think putting is the right political leader, right? brain, magic rush, you know, actually politically touching might that, that know, that kind of do so in the why i'm kind of expecting, you know, the states like 2 to 2 reasons incentive. so when,

when we get to say some kind of see spots on basic gram, i think i can be easy. somebody told me your story, refuse refugees. so i'm convinced that the protein will be prepared. so to, to make compromises with price and with the west, i was actually no doubt about that. but you yourself road that any idea of. 8 i peace settlement with their current leader in the kremlin would be absolutely repugnant to ukraine and not only to its leadership, but perhaps also to it's wider population. is there anything that the thing that the west could offer and provide for ukraine to make these neil this very big deal a little bit sweeter with your point? yeah. did you wish this forest continues to so long stay because of western school, for you credit on the car to support an amazing coma fi. i have to say,

surprise me, surprise everyone probably surprised us, but they want to be able to, to fight. this will continue slow because of western supposed to wesley growth support, resist that your cry, casey patient, go shoes. that's what's gonna happen. unless, of course you get some kind of internal law people. are you crying? which breaks to pass on really from national, neo nazi government. this was what was going to what's going to happen. yeah. so ok. yeah, i mean you, you, crane is a west to purchase will be right katie and streaming tools piece and go sure, sure. but i think in the end that is what is going to happen. now i know that you are one of the world's top specialists in style and, and not many people know that the problem of ukrainian nationalism was not. i was not dealt with even by styling. i mean, he tried very hard,

but he didn't succeed in the ukrainian nationalist, were hiding in the forest and burglarizing neighboring communities well into the fifty's, long after style and on death. given the size and the attitudes of ukrainian abroad in the united states in the united kingdom, in canada and many other countries, i think it's pretty clear that the ukranian factor will remain a factor of hostility for 4 years. and if not decades to com, do you think though it's going to be a problem just for russia or do you think there and they will come a time when it will become a western problem as well? because look, for example, in the church and problem in austria and a european countries, you know, it used to be a russian problem now is a widespread security problem for the european union. and the same happens with other supports or national movements or religious moments. do you think sooner or

later the, the west will have to confront the ukrainian problem itself? i think it's a problem for both, for sure. in the west of the present time, you crank, she wasn't ready for the nationalistic, for 1st i can say extreme. national knox is the alters. they're not the majority of your currently i'm returning pop, you know, going towards it. but as you know, a bolshevik whenever the majority within the russian population, and they managed to turn the russian history in the director. because because they also because they also had a huge place of my spoke to school. i had dinner support from abroad by the way. well that's a slumber. she could do it. we can discuss the history another time, i think the old one, but your g all your credit years will actually read me. so we try to reconcile themselves to piece i don't, i don't think this them being held hostage,

but the new nauseous doctrine. i mean, i would try to do that. sure. that will resist any kind of compromise, any pressure, any, any and, and to war. and he lost territory losses, but i remember we commit so be able to succeed in the political, i'm sorry, but i'm relatively optimistic that you know, if that can be a piece you did, that it can quite, you know, rapidly developing benign things wrong with an unstable and threatening situation. i have to say, i'm grateful to you for recognizing the disdain that the russian leader and i think they're the wider russian population feels when they see all those new knots and marches and symbolism in ukraine. and it's hard for us to understand why would the west be so nonchalant about that while they are prosecuting the use of plastic and all the swastika. but the sort of hint isn't symbols used for positive connotation

. they do not allow this kind of symbol is be displayed at traditional kinda ceremonies, but for some reason in ukraine and that raises very little. i very few. i was actually the only discussion about to, to live i should. yeah. it was basically, this is for a strategic calculation. bosis usually call it was his perception of this what he calls an anti russia, you cry development with this ultra nationalist, russell phobic influences. and he, russia, a site which was a credit which was the west, was perfectly happy to go along with it's supposed to close was to, to, to, to. so let's use abuse of power is repression of opposition. politicians to your suppression of russian ethnic minority speakers. all of a, a russian orthodox church or as you may have heard

a russian campaign that's been going on inside your crime for at least 2000 a win win win. soleski is elected president of 90. that was out of that situation. but he got lucky with the support of russia, ukraine, you know, you would replace reconciliation there be some kind of a settlement of ukrainian, of your credit cross. but that didn't happen to allow himself to become prisoner of the outs rooms. he refused to talk to miss agreements. you kind of lost privately nationalistic, and he rushing it himself so. so let's go. i hope so. that's his turned out to be sure he's off of your current. i'm probably one of the biggest, the sources vote for your current. i want to ask one last question as, as a historian and i'm sure you know that the russians and particularly the russian president have the most respect for history. i mean,

they treat history not as some, you know, like filter entertain themselves or, you know, to lie down on a couch with a history book. rather, it is taken as a field that directly informs the domestic governance and foreign policy. and historically, as i'm sure, you know, most security threats, devastating security threats that took millions of lives of my countrymen came from the west. do you think that perhaps the russians have all were invested or perhaps the west has under invested in history as a basis for strategic decision making? well, i'm on record to us is actually a historian many professional historians. yeah, he takes tremendous inter interested history or shapes his perception to you know, the speech is a full historical references. so yeah. so history story, i'm yeah,

yeah, you have to problem is that to western have this shit he's you. if you still have a very different groups, every a, right, all of you, a very painful view of history. oh russia. i mean that there was, doesn't share it is important to you of history isn't the way of thing to do was simply, doesn't care about the cancer, doesn't know it. well. no, no, no, no, no, take care by street. they said that it's a history of a policy could he sees himself as russia savior doesn't. i guess he's papa a kind of a long tradition of a suitcase. have to subscribe to some notion of being a savior. i mean, you go to that position to do good for your people or what else i wasn't using a picture to play what was going on besides this because the list of your beauties completely different book is self image or perception that most russians are

possession while i say hymns dictated, i see him as a new hitler, an imperialist i might of that use, grab it in your history, are distorted and completely wrong. your history in your so, you know, we are possible. i ga perceptions. we have a clashes of historical perspective. we're going to, well in writing are referred to as the politics of memory and it's, it's very troubling that we cannot then agree even on historic events anymore. but i'm grateful that we still can have these conversations. professor roberts, we have to leave it there. but it's been great pleasure, great honor for me to talk to thank you very much for that. thank you. thank you for watching hope to see her again was a part ah ah

for ah, it was a .