ah, welcome to wells at heart. over the decades many words have been written about the nature of the russia tricky relationship, but perhaps one words would be enough to describe it. for a doctor called on the one hand turkey supplies weapons to your brain. but on the other hand, it's trade including war, inspire, trade with russia is booming. turkey is a member, but it also purchased russian made air defense systems. what's behind these geopolitical versatility? well, to discuss it, i'm now in joint from anchor. i buy to door, i'm an assistant professor and the department of international relations and bo can't university professor and that is great to talk to you. thank you very much for time. it's a pleasure to be on your show. now over the last couple of weeks, we've heard the number of western officials warned,

and the course of the ukrainian war may be changed dramatically if not decided altogether within a coming weeks and months. in which way do you think it's leaning? i don't necessarily think there's a huge change because, you know, a sense of this war has started. we all read the weight, the weight, and we are waiting to see what the balance on the battlefield. now the way i see this good play about both ways or perhaps, you know, the one that you know correspond supposed to wishful thinking on both sides is the straight victory. and that the other side simply decides to concede. it froze in the tower, but far more likely possibility is so for a port full scale makes to be between the 2 sides. so you don't have a key or we narrow your loser and you reach the point where, you know, the culture is the site that they have enough and they've for negotiation. probably

this is the most likely c r u, but there is also the possibility. and this is probably the most worrisome but one of the 2 sides, because both sides of the moment are preparing for what we understand offensive and save of what all this 2 sides gathers, gains the oper, sunday, other thoughts rest, predict either by using more legal webpage or a lodging or conflict, so they directional or, well let's talk about that because we are recording this conversation on wednesday . and they began with the news from the russian minister of defense about one of us warships in the atlantic, successfully testing a hypersonic missile with that 1000 kilometer range. and we've also heard that when the last couple of days, some news from germany, about nato countries, expanding the guy list of armaments and weapons that they want to send to ukraine.

they're becoming ever more sophisticated. what do you make of all that showmanship of g thing? there is a chance of that. those weapons being used on by that i mean, specifically the russian hypersonic missiles. i mean, as far as like on the stones, all weapons of this. i mean, if you're talking, thank you since the start of the war, it's just, you know, that ukraine as entreaty used. western maids thanks tried, and as for us, hypersonic missiles are concerned, you know, if the below this conventional bizarre, know, necessarily different from other types of nissan strides. and so, i mean, it will, it will not necessarily be a huge escalation was, i mean in terms of escalation is weapons that are more little tried in terms. so for a low particularly that the worrisome um ah factor here is the possibility of fuselage

conventional i, you know, i'm speaking about unconventional weapons. i mean, i, hypersonic missiles is, is as i'm conventional as against and i agree with you that there is no point military point or strategic point for action to use it against ukraine. but to use it against some of the countries that supplying ukraine with weapons. and advisors that then attack russian military personnel that makes perfect sense. i'm in business war. after all, do you think moscow was trying to send any signal to the west? and if so, how do you think that single will be read? well, rational has tried to deter invention by nato since august article to conflict. and i should also say that this has as large in successful what the, as been pretty slides to do is to say, hey, you're counts for the sun weapons to ukraine or we are going with that q. and this

will be a very, i sure will, did a very dangerous escalation on the part of russia. it's the, exactly the same sort of argument that a germany used and we're one right to united states was at the time supplying weapons, the all gone. and the germany launched on unrestricted summary war for in order to stop the supplies. so this, this, like b would be with be probably us a step too far because so far, you can really are given this is still a war between 2 sides. well, and depending how you define the sides, because when the russians is definitely not the one between russia and ukraine and the russian seed as a war against nita and they made definite to see that as an existential issue. by the way, the west also doesn't really hide its intentions to, so the quote unquote the russian question and to fight until the very end, whatever it means. so if i'm in the war is really of such proportion. if it's an

essential in nature and involves the survival of russia as a state, do you think that would be such an illogical move for russia to at least came that using those weapons against those who sponsor this conflict? no. when we were saying or exist, does it mean but the rational uses, the war rashid says, is to exist and a single on. so here is no, no rush, i will continue to exist. ah, even if it, you know, i made using the war with, with a late to rashaw, essentially using to 3030, it's no control. so ukraine and also the crimea up bots can rush, i exist with all the course and i may look on the falls and 40, gosh, i would still be there. now, what would be a fact however, would be rational. the does as a great power of the 1st track and it is,

or this objective, but i believe the war is taking place. ah, this would be, by the way, this is a very important top jack is that there is indeed all you know and draw g, 3 bits. if i've been, you know, 4 great powers, great powers are not buying in inversely seek of old age of they are usually defeated on the battle. so the question is, it has the time come for, for russia. now you mentioned the issue of grace powers, and you wrote the grade book on the ground strategies. the great power, i wonder, is the definition of what it means to be a great power in this day and age has in any way changed, let's say, from the 20th century. i don't think so. i mean, it's still, it's still based on 3 criteria. essentially, as they tries to get all 3 of the criteria in order to get great power and stay

a create power and describe your criteria are seeing the power behavior recognition . so we're actually in order to be a great ball where you lodge resources and buried resources are intentional population in terms of well, but it's very forest. and in terms of technology, at the very least, also you have to behave like a great ball, which is you have to have larger and father, we interests and you know, joy, media, they both with oak. so great are, is usually involved in several regions at the same time or in the region, just in case of the us, then you'll have to take part in the international management. and finally, it will be a great ball. you have to be treated as one as an equal number of the club by the other. great out. this is probably what the speak your because it's pretty much where the ross is treated as well by the united states or not. now,

i think your definition of great powers is pretty much concurrent with how it's described it within the, the russian political circles. it's primarily when the russians about their ability to project various forms of power beyond the border, cultural, social, financial, and military and august, the russian power is constrained in some of those rails. but when it comes to, for example, security and military, and i mean, russia has been increasingly present in some of the middle eastern countries in africa. it's the number one provider weapons to africa and also provide military services to a number of african countries. much to the chagrin of the united states. i wonder if you see any connection between the russia emerging confidence in those affairs and the western decision to stop to start weaponized the grain very fast, which came, well, at least this is something that the russian cited as a, as

a reason for that military campaign in the ukraine, as far as, as i see, this is ultimately not so much a conflict over security. all, obviously, i mean there, this, the argument is being made ultimately, you know, you voting security is that, is that just that the only legitimate reason to go to war either your under attack or, you know, your ela is under attack, and this is why you're taking security measures, but in fact, every one he's saying this, and if you're looking got, you know, what's ukraine and what's russian are saying they are both bitching this argument, right? oh, i would say however, particularly because you know, great, all, we're sorry, evolve. this is far more of a conflict over power and status involving the united states and russia. it's so question of all russia assert deep a sphere of influence in the former soviet space market constant year abroad, and ukraine easy sunshine in order. ready to update this,

did all these things doesn't want to allow us to happen and offices, you know, at the bottom of what, what is going on. of course, very supply and demand, right? so there is an interest on the art off of farm. they don't use space to supply you with this robbins burger's old. so a nationalist id. ology and dog identity is in your grade that wants to assert itself and requires us or miss robinson. now in your analysis i you called lighting and put in at risk averse loss minimizer, and as much as i actually agree with this, jack sir, is ation at the seemingly most illogical way off on minimizing the risk for us or would be just to sit still try to reach some backdoor agreements when the americans to avoid public humiliation but and to deal with that, it's resentment and it's criticism all fine. and nader encroachment in santa ana

rather than military way. why do you think the kremlin took the decision and took which, whatever you think about it could not have been an easy one, not only because of its international repercussions, but also because of the domestic sensibilities. most of us have relatives and ukraine. well, this is a story, this is a point that you know, future historians are going to salivate over. so this is definitely going to lead falls and books, right? why did rashaw all start to start to warn you? great. but as far as i'm concerned, i believe, and you know, this plays in to what we have said before with 1st last any visor as probably the last chance rush or had all not losing your claim to the last. all ukraine was army day by day. it was becoming stronger and in fact we see but you know the results. ready battlefield, if this had been got to close at 40, you know,

that would have left with different all got it was right. and so the idea your was if roger allowed to continue to allow this process to go on back. no, you great without being caught without becoming denser ball. great. what i've tried the day to completely into the orbit and brush. all this will happen. so really the last chance for voice. well, this is a very interesting point that we have to return to after short break taken. mm. uh i am, my name is frank from

a reserves and philadelphia got in the movement in age 13 going on 14. we were violent towards those people because we believed that were this race. we were here for some certain country being part of that movement. i got your sense of power. when i felt powerless, we got attention when i felt invisible, accepted when i talked to level life after hey, is an organization that was founded by for a neo nazi white supremacists in the u. s. in canada. and they found each other and they knew that they wanted to help other guys get out. is 2 parts to getting out of a violent extreme was the 1st part of disengagement which is where you leave the social group. and then the next part is d. radicalization we're belief systems audiology are removed. it was very impactful. when someone finally came along, no fear, no judgement. you heard my story did nothing to challenge it out. mm

mm. welcome back to wells appointment to door on their assistant professor at the department of international relations at bill counts university professor and they . and just before the break you, you mentioned, and you also made that point in some of your articles, that the reason why russia intervened in ukraine is because it wants to have it sphere of influence there. i wonder if it's really the case because if we are, i'm in milledgeville and honest about the political analysis of your grant. it's been under western political domination for many years prior to the start of russian military campaign. wasn't it more about not allowing the west to train its

project in ukraine from the political one into a military one, in which case it will not be about ukraine. it would be about the west and maintenance military infrastructure moving ab closer to the russian capital yielded to the question here is why would you necessarily want to look a little closer nowadays? i mean, you'll have the technology to annihilate the state also. and so, kilometers away, this is not, you know, the time. so, you know, napoleon, it's so if you're where you have to send in the thanks, russia as the being stood there an attack against itself. it has the means to defend itself. they de, we smelt crazy. ah, so this is not so much a question off we are going, but thank you as it was general free. well, to actually expand our influence in ukraine. so the question sure is where your grade was going to go. was it going to go to the european union? was it going to go into the eurasian project economic project?

but you know, is supposed to rival, the, you isn't going to go into a nato. is it going to going from the collective of security, treat your organization? so this is the problem you're able to course of each says, but wasn't really an agreement with this organization or potential idea of that was of all banded about at, at the time was a potential neutralization or great, you know, make, make your grade. they loved or belgium a but this didn't, didn't come about all there is the result was ultimately this, this conflict. now, you know, one of the, you know, international political analysts who actually ran blending input and speech and or his articles on the issue. and he's been pretty clear, i think, in most of his writing, that he didn't want the ukraine to be part of russia. he insisted ukrainian needed to remain an independent state. and from a russian perspective, when that wasn't

a good idea, because it actually allowed russia and vested interest in ukraine somewhere to intend it's early integrity with creating buffer zone to fit it in the west. and from that was the best security guarantee for your plan. now that this is a think of the past and some parts of your brain already incorporated into russia. what do you think that division line and boundary is going to be? and that's it. it's, it's got, this is really the problem. and this is going to be, you know, the double in the for the lego sheesh, right? so the devil is always seem to be belts. all right? so who gets walked? ultimately it's be fine. so what is going to happen really? 3rd, but i would say despite you know, the many declarations. busy hopes, you know, ukrainian, st. bratia leaders. it, will it still spill all them of me on that? they've been for negotiations. nothing is really subtle yet. oh, so it will,

it will pretty much be decided by whoever ends up in about the position at the end of seattle. this will still it, it's for any and mediation or authentic negotiation to proceed all sides, including converts actors or behind the theme actors. they all need to make the calculation that. 8 continuing hostilities and more detrimental to that interest than piece. and i think i can figure out what would be a russian and ukrainian constraints because they're, they're fighting on the battlefield. they're losing people, they're losing resources. but what about the americans and they european allies, they don't seem to be losing as much what could possibly inspire them to be more in favor of peace. oh, essentially are right now both saw it and you know, here we are talking here about you, cree blah. say that will be sure source you,

craig, which is nato you. american allies in asia are off and on the other side, your horizon. and so the problem, uri's, but built side, still believe that victory is boston. as long as they will pertain this b, b, they are willing to spend resources in order to get to the own. oh bill, it is supposed to let those will go. oh, what is needed in order for priests happen is for these thoughts. oh, give up on the prospect of victory. so victories simply too expensive that is out of reach. and therefore, if this go, since this is up of thought back to order some, some useful stuff, and those simply we are open but for just but so, you know, and this also shows the magnitude of the stakes. oh, because it's you start, you know, all the resources that are required so far. it's interesting that the,

you mentioned that all sides, i still going for victory, but the russians have never actually defined clearly that military objectives. so it's, it's very difficult to say what they would regard as victoria, from most perspective, it's already achieved the why the number of goals and so to sort of put them in stone with the acquisition of those regions. do you think the status quo as of now would be satisfactory for all sides? given that it's very unlikely that most people back track on any of the recent moves. oh, probably not. oh no. so were you gray? you green has all set on, you know, maximilian goal. so every angel cary theory bloss growing your needs to be all the way they, they both it was liberated. and as far as russia has been, sir, we know that, you know, the mini mo, the man there is for,

is for the dumbass value of all this new territories. but, you know, have been added to the dom, us. but the thing is, even if this was considered to date brush on this, we're going to release that. his i rises, political objectives, which are to, you know, force crane into essentially it's orbit. and this is not likely to happen here. the only way you know this with, you know, the war with and in a way that would satisfy rational would be either with you grain, simply capitulating and this were, was probably the objective at, you know, the beginning of the horse. the lift is, you know, complete occupation of pro russian government in just a government that gives up on the dom bostic government. that keeps up on joining nato, a government that read the march and joins the russian project or failing best. a,

you grand, but it is so dramatically weakened salt, the coffee, but it will then pull both march challenge in the future. so, for instance, an ability to got ukraine away from, you know, the black sea, through se, occupying goddess and that would be a ukraine. but will be dramatically weaker economically, politically, and it will be a question or flush of and finishing their job at some later point. i have a problem with this kind of analysis and which i hear a lot in western media primarily because i think as these and put in is at risk of hers a loss minimizer. and he's pretty sure, with the man understanding that there as a russian sentiment in the ukraine is extremely strong. there. they've never been much appetite in moscow for, you know, western ukraine, you know, deletion other lines like that. so why would the russia ever want to get that soft involved into those lance when it faced even under joseph style and under the

soviet tool, there was many separatist and insurgent issues there. so don't you think that most would much rather be satisfied with the west taking the rest of ukraine on their own wing and you know, paying for their reconstruction and taking care of the people? well, a possible did vision of the state is also on the table. this is also, this is also possibility. so you might have a short goal. like you had to further old republic of germany that you have the whole credit german. you might add up with great ease to grade. you know if i could be more like northwest versus se all to tell you the truth. but one point i think should be made very clear. this is not. busy about draw shark recreating the soviet you it's impossible to call or political or another state as you say, that this would be, you know, prohibitively expensive and i don't trust i was interested in this,

but all that really wants is for a government that is looked on should do it security interest to it's all, you know, do state as tweets power, right. so ultimately what it won't, it won't is some formal foot line government. jeff, this is, by the way, i mean it's, it's not, it's not unheard of it's, it's actually what this bureau, all, you don't necessarily control all of this data as much as you control. it's more a policy. so this i believe is what is what is on is off now a professor and i have to ask you about tricky because this is something i announced in my introduction and we barely spoke about that and her and yet so fine has been by far i think the only international player that has made any in the roads in terms of bringing the 2 sides together. there was an meeting between our foreign ministers of russia, ukraine in turkey last year, which even to reach to some agreement which none the less was

later appended by the ukrainian side. do you think it's still it is still worthwhile for turnkey to try to negotiate the dispute or it's still too early for that. oh, it's definitely worth it alternately. it elevates 30 is position. all right. it 1st of all, it makes 30 year as the team maker. right. and in this conflict, and also if you, you know, manage us to deliver diplomatic shuttle, well, it is success and success. so you 2 points. international relations are the problem here. and as far as like in c n, you're, you're, you're absolutely right. you need to evolve more sides of the one size that you really need particular to the oldest states. you cannot just ukraine and russia

booking for each other, but at the same time your door at dialogue between, between the great powers and in this group us the all don't know you 30 just to live or because at the moment therapy the american relations are fairly dense and then that's also something that, that russia relies on because it's been very active in trying to rely on trinkets you is the pressure of western sanction than many were inspired enterprises, including the proposal to build and gas. hop in turkey. do you think it's sensible for russian to rely on turkey given even not only a long history, very allentown turn between our 2 countries history and that it was a. 5 full with there is the trails, but also recent history over syrian meaning disagreements. there why do you think russia is entrusting itself to trick? and it's very sensitive point of time. if you rush by your actually looking for

friends wherever you can find and you cannot really be picky or choose the. but you, the fact if you're looking at the houston yoga relation, this goes for the back. and so there was but increasing garage hm. all between russia, cherokee, since, right, and since, so i think governmental prussia actually came out very much in support of the government on products. and i would say of course there are differences. barbara also over lot big interests and some are back to concert series. are in fact it is, as you know, i have bunch for marine w, quite also billed that we are dollar, you know, the possibility of a syrian gate which actually would bring together on not only you know, the president of russia durkee, but maybe we might have a patient all the hospice, so we might have a future, a meeting between the preston deadline and price. well, professor,

now we have to leave it there. thank you very much for your time today. thank you. and thank you for watching. poke to sir again on was apart. ah ah ah, ah. so what we got to do is identify the threats that we have it crave implementation, let it be an arms race is on offense. very dramatic development only personally and

getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very critical time time to sit down and talk. i was standing in an alley smoking a joint one day and a man came up to me and pulled the joint from my mouth. and he said, don't you know that that's what the capitalists and the jews want you to do. we are violent towards those people because we believe that we're the superior race we're here 1st and this is our pantry, guns, ammo, still tow doc martens, tattooing violence or just prerequisite.