sanchez, and i'm here to plead with you, whatever you do, you do not watch my new shell seriously. why watch something that's so different. my little opinion that you won't get anywhere else work of it. please do have the state department, the cia weapons makers, multi 1000000 dollar corporations. choose your facts for you, go ahead. i change and whatever you do. don't watch my show to stay main street because i'm probably going to make you uncomfortable. my show is called direct impact, but again, you probably don't want to watch it because it might just changing the wayne thing ah ah mm mm

mm mm. welcome to well to part being part of europe, if not geographically done culturally, has been a century long aspiration for the countries and its periphery, especially russia and turkey. they emulated european customs and tastes tried to borrow its best practices, but always foul shores all over snubbed. why they're enlightened european neighbors . does these idealization of europe have anything to do with the war in your crane? well, to discuss that, i'm now joined by facilities. first class, professor of international politics and economics at the university of east london, professor force because it's great to talk to thank you very much for time. thank you so much. nice to meet you. thank you. i'm not many people remember now, but the latter stage of the crisis in ukraine began in 2013 with

this whole argument around the ukranian association with the e. u seemingly an economic issue. and at that time, it was mostly about ukraine associating itself with europe rather than the collective west. 6 more generally, do you think there was ever or if there is still a distinction between the european and western hang it's, i don't know it. i to philosophical question i think is more of a kind of a practical question. or the west begins with europe in the collective imaginary, i mean, in history or in the western civilization. i mean, in european, in, in an american american curriculum. you see on the western civilization a course called western civilization. that begins with an sion greek philosophy,

ensign, great collectors, moving to rome, and then centered on europe within lightman philosophy and the french revolution. and then, you know, the theories of the light men and then on the dynamism switching to the united states. and then the dawn of the british empire, correct from, from then we have a system of european empires spread, spreading all over the world, a system the collapses in the 1st world war. we have a kind of an interim period banker. we're peer than then. i'm after the 2nd world war, the united states. i assumes high galani and over europe. now, there's a big debate here, which i don't know if i'm, if, if it's, it's well known or known in, in, in eastern europe, russia, china and elsewhere, which i examined with my team here long ago in fox. how the u. s. established high

game when you over europe, it wasn't easy. we had in the 4th is for exam the early for this during the war, while the russians were fighting the germans to kick. you know, the germans out of you credit effectively. it was a big debate within the american executive. there were 3 main attendances see main views. one was represented by the by franklin franklin delano roosevelt was a present for you, not jason. his theme, who saw that we can rule in the new world order via the united nations in the un security council. so if something goes wrong, cuz the war would, can have robust for robust the peacekeeping operations. and you know what? we are the majority within your insecurity because so we can isolate russia and to fit that. that was one view. that was one view. then we have kina,

which you know, it happens the they have the majority of, of, of historians and, and analysts believe that there was keenan's view that prevailed out of containment in the famous long telegraph rog from moscow wire to washington d. c, which keenan keenan was an officer balancer keen on fog because he knew rush and he knew russia very well. he thought the soviet system is weak internally. and with a little bit of push for a bus, we can make it collapse also what will make the system collapses by, by, by using germany and japan from each end of your asia harassing the soviet system. plus it's in pedo contradicts us, and that system will collaborate and one day. right. but i was gina fastest if, if i remember my history lessons correctly even, you know, in so many times there were one could argue legitimate ideological differences between russia and the west. and it was no longer the case after the collapse of

the soviet union. i think russia really wanted to get into western graces. and even during this, only a time sensitive only before that, i think the russians have long had the sack and very positive. i view all of your, of not so much of their west, but definitely if you are offended, we have long associated with the european continent, france, germany with progressive knowledge, you know ours, ours communicated with french philosophers and we always, you know, europe as a harmonious society. d, and i think the same goes for turkey. by the way. do you think your has ever be and what the non european ideal either of europe have? i imagine it to be in europe and russia philosophy and they grew up in life and have very many, very many things in commerce. actually, russia is part of europe or intellectually, politically,

politically. where there was even in the anchor war period when stalin was accused of. busy isolating russia with his 5 year plans and so on. and that is a good book actually, every recently would called a red globalization. styling never wanted to exclude to exclude russia from west and paid from western economist, but because of the, of the internal problems, economic problems of the west, with a collapse of, of, of the credit system in 19 dig. 1929 crash and so on. the west itself became isolationist and protectionist. their eyes are faces managing so therefore russia was exploited by the phoenician there, from the european, or into war settlements, whatever. and then we had the 2nd world war. and so what i'm trying to explain is to point, and we'll come to your question this about 19 now and so 20132014 ukraine. and the

maiden thing. the strategy pursued by the united states, how united states embedded itself in europe after the 2nd world war was not because via keenan's theory of offshore balancing. he was not through the united nations security concept by was through a titian as sort of the nature son's plan, which was that united states troops must remain in europe. was keenan did not want us to ropes in europe. i thought because he thought this, well, this will make carbon in the gold desert and we'll start rearming and we're going to have a new war and things like that at ages and said, no, we need to build situation. so strength in europe against not just against russia, but mainly to keep europe apart from russia. because it h,

as soon saw that there is a potential of cooperation because in the same continent, after all economic corporation, political corporation, between germany, france, and russia. and once this continent unites economically, politically, that's the end of us supremacy in the new world. order built after the 2nd will work through the united states has, has had its troops and military bases in europe to can russia, europe are away from each other. although there has been some beneficial corporation energy trade out with germany, there was some corporation and trade with friends and many other european nations. but even when the american troops present here in europe, there were certain limits to how far in the united states with push. and one could argue that it all changed in ukraine. because for some reason, when it came to ukraine, somewhere around 20132014 definitely

a around the early 2020, the united states decided that, you know, those red lines no longer apply and we need to push as much as we can with militarized ukraine, with sending a trained instructors there and with making everything possible that its population becomes strongly. and i would even say virulently and to russian, what do you think changed in the in minds of american colace makers? why did they need to push that farm? like we need to see the structural tendencies all for the western ers economic system here. and why what globalization means for the united states globalization for the united states means the american business classes must have a free ride to global expansion ad. so the push to nate, the expansion u. s. a u. s. increasing intervention is bargaining. so on that bush is not,

this is not dissociated from the american business classes pushed to global domination. let me put that this way. and at the same time the united states protects its own business classes at hope. you see, look at what bane to use the inflation reduction act, but with no concern for european economy or social manila taught not to protection is thing. and if you like the, there were similar protectionist bills passed in the to war period, which started the 2nd world war. in my books i, i, i stress the fact that it was the united states started protectionist measures 1st in vain. the war period, not the, not the nazi germany. and so, you see, this is the structural tendency of economic system which are called capitalism. you may disagree with that, but that, that is so therefore we need to, to see the structural trends of the western economic system,

especially after the recession. the massive crisis of 2007, 2009. the global financial crisis on the system didn't collapse the only way for the system, the why the system didn't collect because they had, they had the support of the banking sector of the central bank to put the lo full of the funding to the system into the banking system and also they did not stop the global expansion, trying also incorporate that the war in ukraine is not dissociated with china. china is very much, very much part of it. the water ukraine disrupts chinese business. disrupt the project though belden road initiative, for example. you know, chinese capital penetration in eastern europe has been enormous intake is low. you know that we are killing many birds with just ones. so i think before we go to break, can i ask you all? one more question, because your analysis tends to be very practical, very rational and you know, russian political science has by and large subscribe to the really the school of

thinking i seeing the war in your craft through the lances of power bands. but i me, because i'm a woman that i see a lot of irrational factor, psychological factors there. and just as russia for centuries wanted to be your best perhaps doesn't even exist. i think in the same way, ukraine's to wants to be something that it's not at the moment. and i would even argue that the west needs a psychological boost from somebody admiring it in such a way because its own image is rather fading. what do you think about that? what's the scope of the irrational factors in this whole quagmire? there's always, i don't disagree with you, you're absolutely right to point this out. ideation of fact this in bolton does, and you called a rational the russian is always part of the rational in every movement. never strategic 12, you know, nothing can come. nothing can come in reality as it was planned. there's

always a gap between what we plan than was comes to the realization in the end they slower fuck. those are very important, especially the building of ukraine national identity here. i think that kremlin miscalculated, miscalculate, in what sense? now what's going on in the ukraine is a, is a building up often national identity. great for 1st time. i have, i, i've always had the impression and i'm, i wasn't wrong with that. that ukrainian and russians are more or less mingled. they have mixed identities. they're not very, you know, in ukraine. pope are historically as well as politically in everyday life. they said a lot of things, michelle, almost everything is like, if you, if you say people between like, you know, the greeks i'm recorded and the people living in western park to thank you. i mean,

we're sad ever the, all the other both and people will share almost everything. we don't have anything, you know. but now, with a invasion that it started the process of, you know, amalgamating a strong, national and nationally, steven, ukrainian identity not in every part of the population. don't take the role, but in, especially in central western parts of ukraine. where before we it was far more relaxed and to sail, we're brothers and sisters. we have nothing to do violence live together. so a, you know, in every a struggle you need to sacrifice something. you can achieve anything without losing something. but anyway, we have to take a very short break right now. we will come back to the discussion in just a few moments say can, ah ah,

ah, ah ah, welcome back to one of the party, miss ellis discussed professor of international politics and economics at the university of london. now this was because we've been talking about all this well, of the irrational and rational factors and all of that. and i know it's not very politically correct these days to quote the russian president. but he has his own

vision of what is happening and i want to run it by you without the obliging you to agree with that. in fact, i invite you to disagree with what he said, but essentially he vision is that if come to a point in history where the political domination of the west, which is also conditioned on pretty exploitive reliance on the resources of the rest of the world. that scheme, that paradigm is no longer sustainable by objective factors, and he believes that by picking up a battle with russia, the west is essentially trying to turn around this trend and perhaps 3 and the other nations. not only russia without the nations from pursuing their own authentic path that, that is not necessarily in line with western preferences or prescriptions. what do you think about that? part of the answer to this or coleman commentary,

if you like a president press it. is that what they referred to earlier on globalization and it's crisis i, it's makes sense. what the president says because, and the west doesn't deny that because part of the project of globalization is that we all, i mean the, what the world is flat, which has never been and can never become flat. because there's an even development, you know, that isn't even development. one part of the world grows, the other part of the world doesn't grow the same pace doesn't have the same to chronological means to grow industry because same pace as somebody but the cell of globalization is that it's also whale, far bringing all the goodness and all the transfers of humanity to everybody, so we can own benefit from common technology from common financial system, etc. no is no company. and even both pullman papers shooters come and visit in the

west and financial times unit every day that will say that new liberal globalization, because that's when somebody new liberal globalization has failed in pennsville. in pennsville, i keep in pays with a quality for exam with what is required. it is in inequality increases in the climate change issue. and now in the west, they talk about green gate, the culture called development assistant ability. so that means of no liberal globalization has failed. now you have one part that you said very well of the world would to include russia, iran, mid least parts of africa. obviously, the global south lead saying something like, what in for to be politically correct? well, actually not exactly, so, i mean, why should we be saw? no, no. i know. i know, i think it was. that's why i put in inverted commas. i, this is say the less than the rest. ok. but something i did something but then defy geographically, at least devote the vulcan,

the united nations that did not support the american motion with you. she, latin, american conscious african conversation companies did not support your right. don't know. well that's to class not dismissal. con, had produced raw materials counted here, produces, for example, rare filaments because without the red earth elements and the minerals that are produced, primarily in china and in africa and also in russia, has this, the west cannot have gained the clean, logical growth and sustainability. ok. many people forget thought that all of green, the co and o they're all of earth elements in building semiconductors. in building microchips, in creating electric hybrid cars will green development and the to click the 5th climate change to, to achieve the carbonic jason at their west. once very much is so because if the west the tubes does says so we love that of be dependent anymore on oil. busy

russian oil and gas or bid list and oil, or, and see, but in order for the west to have this to have bring the chronological development . and it root the globalization or, and, and, and to have sustainable society, the west. they still need in a different way in different respect or russia, china and africa, and latin america. now i want to bring us back to europe because your written that europe has never been an independent actor in global affairs. and that had always dependent on the united states militarily and politically. and i think it can be argued that the lack of independence would be ignored when times are good. when people are enjoying prosperity, i think that would be very likely to mistaken posterity for independence. but things are changing right now. they are turning sour in the united states,

but even more so in europe, how long do you think it will be like that this political discourse, variable legend, political discourse at a fair hearing from the european capitals? how long will it able and will be able to sustain itself until people protest not against the or for russia, but against our own living condition. you asked me to make a prediction, i would say hate. because that time i made the prediction. i doesn't come to i hate making a connection there because many european liter, judging from that speech, is believe that, you know, they can try and be the patients if you heard in citizens endlessly and that people will, the, whatever they given i for the sake of the political agenda, let's look at germany, which is the strongest european economy and the strongest country in political time, not in military, but in political and economic sense system, the strongest power in europe. german,

it is distant their policy of, for washington over ukraine. and you see that it is 4 years and germany wanted to have since the years of the us politic friendly relationship with, with russia, if you like it. this is bismark policy, it goes back to bismark. bismark always exists, that if we want to have the mean nation of western europe, although in his time was by different means. but if we want to have to dominate western europe, we need to have good relations with russia. ok, so, so terminate resisted. but the more did with germany, it was resisting 2 to 2 years policy. the more the years was pressurizing, germany, to accept us policy. in my view, in this war, primarily humiliates germany, this war. it's a humiliation of germany, germany now,

if america or you know, supply grain with whatever weapon of them, i don't know, it, it, it depends to answer your question depends how far the united states wants to go on with escalation with escalation of the war. because if the united states escalates, if they give f 60 an order of 35 war, you know, military, you know, judge to the ukraine, then russia will respond. and then the big, you know, says with something else there, russia will less kill it. so that is what i don't like. so the question is how to be escalate? well, i don't know, my question is not about how to de escalate. because i think at this point of time it's pretty clear that the americans are opting for prolong conflict then. why would they not do that because it's a relatively cheap war for them. they're not losing soldiers there. it's you being a major strategic geopolitical goal through the means of all of that. so called l.

a. so, i mean, it makes a certain sense, geopolitical sense for the americans to continue fighting. i'm asking you about europe and i've seen an interesting pull the other day that i think 60 percent of the europeans believe that ukraine with the support of the west will win this conflict. but when it comes to sanctions, only 40 percent of the europeans and 35 percent of germans believe that sanctions and being effective. and to me that says that when it comes to sort of bread and butter issues, people tend to be far more pragmatic. and i'm all, if i left letters tray by various, you know, glorious ideas and narrative. so let me ask you this way. do you think the full scope of european losses and you've written about that that you believe that your will be a big loser in this culture? do you think the full scope of european losses have already been manifested? no, no, i don't think so. i think there is more to come to europe. um there be

a very harsh transition period for, for europe if they want to switch completely. for example, american l, l, n, g, and they have to, you know, european have to sort out in place and problems. and during that period, there'll be a lot of protest and apart from the part of the european public and public opinion and into respect, i think russia should never stop talking to europe. ah, the civil society level are political level, all levels of the same time. i believe that domestically in russia, when i see that russian russian defense budget go, goes going up to come to one 3rd of their total budget them into something i 100155 1000000000, which is, i mean, which is minuscule compared to what united states spends, but that increase in defense budget, it tells me that there will not be enough money to invest, to spend for schooling,

for education, for social welfare, for hospitals, for pensions and things like that. so in other words, i see what my, my, my major, my major point of making here is that a lot depends not just what the europeans will be doing, but what also, what kremlin will be doing domestically to show that we care about our society here. our society and not just about winning a war. absolutely. and then professor was because i am just fresh from their presidential address to the problem and i was there in the audience. and it's pretty clear that, you know, i think for 3 quarters, at least of his address, where about the russian domestic politics. and the main point he was making is that we have everything here to develop. we have the resources, we don't need that much to rely on, on the west that we can develop our own technology. and we are going to use this

moment in history and not to adapt to western sanctions, but to take russia on the whole new level of the stain, the will and self sufficient development. we one that we want to piece, we want a piece of the west. we want to piece and mutual respect with all the other nations . but from now on we are centered on itself and we ourselves are the that have been the masters of our own destiny. i have to leave it there, but the conversation. thank you so much. so pleasure talking to you. thank you so much. thank you and thank you for watching hope to see or again on well, the part ah mm hm. mm.

blue gray will never be a victory for russia. we solution with a new modem, but look at a mean crane war is a proxy war. this is a war between russia and the united states. naz on maybe comes to not shoot, get them in carbon dioxide. america forces are and you're not in your gauge in conflict with russian forges. american forces are here and defend nato ally with nato escalates even more indiscretion. military operations become a war when you, but they'll set of rules that y'all are showing. that doesn't is much. i see it that i see your to us. thank you. custody of got totally live. so i you sleep issue

. you can you stuff to with only just to finish that are in your sewage. never speak of the girl who's a exclusively to former us mercenary in crane, who defected the russia to report led to the world choirs. why keith also was leading the role of u. s. intelligence in the conflict. he had a satellite phone and a computer provided by the eye. and every day he would call his contacts and he would get some information about the positions troop movements and so on. and so forth. nearly a 100 civilians including children are injured this year. ukraine continues.