ah mm hm. mm. mm. welcome to was a part being part of your, of, of, not geographically and culturally, has been a century long aspiration for the countries and it's periphery, especially russia and turkey. they emulated european customs and tastes tried to borrow its best practices. but always felt sure golf over snuff, why their enlightened european neighbors does these idealization of europe have anything to do with the war in ukraine. well, to discuss that i am now joined by a series, 1st 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 your 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. at that time, it was mostly about ukraine associating itself with europe rather than on the collective west. more generally, do you think there was ever or if there is still a distinction between the european and western i don't know it a bunch of 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 europe, in, in,

in an american american curriculum. you see on the western civilization a course called western civilization, that begins with n sion greek philosophy, ensign, gree collectors, moving to rome and then center to europe with enlightenment 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 that collapses in the 1st world war, we have a kind of an interim period, vain to war pier than then. i'm after the 2nd world war, the united states. i assumes high galani and over europe. now, days a big debate here, which i don't know if i, 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 fact, how the us established high game when you're over europe, it wasn't easy. we had in the forty's, for example, early for this during the war, while the russians were fighting the germans to keep, you know, the thomas out of you creating effectively. it was a big debate within the american executive. there were 3 main attendance is 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 the rule in the new world order via the united nations in the year in security council. so if something goes wrong, can the war would, can have robust a robust the peacekeeping operations. and you know what,

we are the majority within the year and security can. so we can isolate thrush and to fit it. that was one view. that was one view. then we have keenan which, you know, it happens the they have the majority of, of, of historians and analysts believe that there was keenan's view that prevailed out of containment. and the famous long telegram rog from moscow wire to washington, d. c, which keenan keenan was an officer balancer keen on fog because he knew russian in your us a very well he thought the soviet system is weak internally. and with a little bit of push robot us, 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 internal contradictions and that system will collaborate and one day,

right, but i was too fast of if, if i remember my history lessons correctly or 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 before that, i think the russians have long had a sack and very positive. i view all of your of not so much of there was but definitely if you are going to be, have long associated with the european continent. france, germany with progressive knowledge, you know ours, ours communicated with french philosophers and i, we always, you know, europe as a homogeneous society, di and i think the same goes for turkey. by the way, do you think you're has ever be in what the non european idealized there's of europe, have i imagine it to be in europe and russia,

philosophy and the european life, and have very many, very many things in commerce. actually, russia is part of europe or intellectually, politically, politically, with a what, even in being to war period. when styling was accused of isolating russia with his 5 year plans and so on. and that is a very good book actually never recently would called a red globalization. styling never wanted to exclude to exclude russia from western trade or from western economist. but because of the, of the internal, the problems of crime, 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 excluded by the phoenician there from the european her 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 is about 19 nerd. 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 are security constant by was through a to soon as sort of the nature some plan which was that united states troops must remain in europe was kinnen, did not want us to ropes in europe. i thought because he thought this, well, this will make carbon in the gold dessert 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 a soon saw that there is a potential of cooperation because they're 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 the u. s. 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 in europe far away from each other. although there has been some beneficial corporation energy trade out with germany. there was some corporation and trade with france and many other european nations, but even with 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. and definitely a, around the early 2000 twenties, 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 ad 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 policymakers? why did they need to push that far? like a 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 nato expansion, the u. s. u s. increasing intervention is bargaining, so on that force 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 it. so business classes at hope, you see, look at what band could use inflation reduction act, but with no concern for european economy or social. the top notch 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. 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 lawful of the fun into the system, into the banking system. and also they did not stop the global expansion, trying also incorporate 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, the belgian road initiative, for example. you know, chinese capital penetration in eastern europe has been enormous in low, you know, 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 scientists, by and large subscribe to the really school of thinking. i'm seeing the war in your grand, through the lances of power bands. but i me, because i'm a woman that i see a lot of irrational factors, psychological factors there. and just as russia for centuries wanted to be, if you're does 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 the scope of the irrational factors in this whole quagmire is always, i don't disagree with you. you're absolutely right. to point this out,

ideation of fact this involved in that and you called a rational the russian is always part of the rational in every movement that never strategic move, you know, nothing can come, nothing can come in reality as it was planned. there's always a gap between what we planned and what comes to the realization in the n v i d, a slower fuck. those are very important. especially the building of ukraine national identity here. i think the kremlin miscalculated miscalculate, in what sense? now what's going on in the ukraine is a, is a building up for national identity. if you credit for fresh stud i have, i always had the impression and i wasn't drawn will not that ukrainian and russians are more or less mingled. they have mixed identities, are not very, you know, in ukraine. pope are historically as well as politically in everyday life. they

said a lot of michelle, most everything is like if you, if you say the people between like you know, the greeks. i'm with origin and the people live in western park. thank you. i mean, we're sad ever the, all the other bolton people with cheryl most, 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 i nationally, steven ukrainian identity not the never 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 are 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 on a cheve, 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 they can, ah ah, in 1834 grants invaded algeria, and straight away the french started inhabiting it to strengthen their position. the colonists, known as p a no ours took the best land from day one, the local population was put into an unequal position and was brutally exploited. this gauze, mazda is content. the people of algeria began their long term fight for independence

. in 1954, the banner of freedom was raised by the national liberation front. a guerrilla war against the occupants broke out. the french tried to suppress to rebellion using cruel measures. full villages were wiped out packs of georgia and executions of civil people, including pregnant women children and old people took place more than 2000000 people were put into concentration camps. however, these punitive measures didn't help the algerian patriots managed to induce france to start these negotiations. in 1962 evian records were signed, voting algeria on the past towards independence. but this was achieved at a colossal price. algeria by rights is considered to be a country of martyrs. according to the calculations of historians, the french colonists are responsible for the deaths of one and a half 1000000 algerians.

ah, mm. mm. welcome back to one of the fort smith. i'm actually supposed cussed professor of international politics and economics at the university of it's london. now, because of course this we've been talking about all this well as 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 obliging you to agree with that. in fact, i invite you to disagree with, with what he said, but essentially his vision is that they've come to the point in history when the political domination of the west,

which is also conditioned on pretty exploited. if reliance on the resources of the rest of the world that came, that paradigm is no longer sustainable by get this factors. and he believe the by picking up and battle with, with russia. the west is essentially trying to turn around this trend and perhaps 3 amp, the other nations, not only russia, but other nations from pursuing that own of them to pass. that is not necessarily in line with western preferences or prescriptions. what do you think about that part of this or common commentary, if you like, and on the use of the president oppressor, is that what they referred to earlier on us 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 is an 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 and somebody but the cell of globalization is that it's also whale, far bringing all the goodness and all the treasures of humanity. everybody is. so we can all benefit from common technology from common financial system, etc. no is no company. and even the old woman papers sheet is common business in the west and financial times unit every day that will say that new liberal globalization because that's what somebody in the liberal globalization has failed in pennsville. in pennsville, i keep in pays with a quality, for example, with what is required. it is in inequality increases is a climate change issue. and now in the west, they talk about green gate,

the color to call development assistant ability. so that means of no liberal go, but as a say 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 and what to be politically correct. well alice, you know, exactly. so, i mean, why should we be saw? no, no. i know. i know it was. that's why i put in invite of coma side to say the less than the rest. ok, but something i something but then defy geographically. at least devote the vote in the united nations that did not support the american motion. if you see like an american congress, 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 pick up and oh, they're all of earth elements in building semiconductors. in building microchips, in creating electron hybrid cars will green development and the to click the 5th climate change to, to achieve the carbonic jason at the west. once very much is so because if the west the tubes doesn't so we love that of be dependent anymore on oil. busy russian oil and gas or bid list, and oil, or etc. but in order to fully 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 need still need in a different when different, a respect for russia,

china, and africa, and latin america. now i want to bring us back to your own because you 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 this lack of independence would be ignored when times are good. when people are enjoying prosperity, i think there would be very likely to mistaken posterity for independence. but things are changing right now. they are turning sour in the united states, but they were more saw in europe. how long do you think it will be like that this political discourse, very belligerent political discourse at the very hearing from the europe, capital, how long really able will be able to sustain itself until people protest not against the or for russia, but against the old living condition you asked me to make a prediction,

i would say hate. because any time i made the prediction, i doesn't come to i, i hate making a connection there because many european liter, judging from that speech, is believe that, you know, they can try me. the patients, if you are being at citizens endlessly and that people will, the, whatever they given i, for the sake of this political agenda. let's look at germany, which is the strongest european economy and the strongest country in political time, not in military sense, but in political and economic sense, is them the strongest power in europe? germany is distant. they policy of for washington, over ukraine. you see that it is for years and germany wanted to have since the years of the aust politic friendly relationship with, with russia, if you like. it is, is bismark policy,

it goes back to bismark. bismark always insist that if we want to have the mean nation of western europe, although it in his times was by different means. but if we want to have to dominate western europe, we need to have good relations with russia. ok. ok, so 10 minute resistant. but the merge with germany who is 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 16 or f said defy war, you know,

military, you know, jets to the ukraine, then russia will respond. and then the united says with something else and then russia will, let's kill it. so that is what i don't like. and so the question is how to be escalate? well, no, my question is not about how to this going. because i think this one of tom is pretty clear that the americans are opting for and prolong conflict then. why would they not do that because it's a relative which is war for them. they're not losing soldiers, they're achieving a major strategic geopolitical goal through the means of, of that so called allies. 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 the interesting told 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 are 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 formal. i left flood astray by various, you know, glory is ideas and narrative. so let me ask you this way. do you think the full scope of european losses that you've written about 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, they have to, you know, europeans have to sort out in place and problems. and during that period, or there be a lot of protest on deposit on the part of the european public and public opinion

and into this fact 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 go to one 3rd of their total budget them into something i 100155 1000000000, which is a 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 are our society and not just about winning a war. absolutely. and then professor 1st, because i am just fresh from their residential address to the problem and i was there in the audience. and it's pretty clear that, you know, i think for weak waters 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 dont 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 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 a piece of 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 monasteries of our own destiny. i have to leave it there, but i thank you so much. a pleasure talking to you. thank you so much. thank you and thank you for watching hope to see you again on will the part ah with me. oh ah, ah,

a with the headlines on i think international as the 2 main opposition parties in nigeria according to nullify the presidential elections, stating the preliminary results are a sham and other peoples of votes have been manipulating the head of the russian house and the central african republic dmitri seated who was injured in an assassination attempt to speak to r t after law enforcement publishers. details of the attack with the yield was comparable to deal with 40 millimeter growth while.