ah ah ah ah hello in welcome to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle . is it time to talk? it would seem so the west rhetoric is at odds with hard realities on the ground in ukraine. the chinese have presented a proposal and it is believed the u. k. france and germany are cobbling together a plan for zalinski. but are they willing to talk to russia? i

cross sucking piece proposals. i'm joined by my guess. i nar, tangled in beijing. he's a senior fellow at the time institute as well as chairman of asia narratives in paris. we have shots up here. he is professor emeritus at the school for advanced studies at social sciences and in new mexico. we have been hellman, he is a professor of east asian and global history at new mexico state university. all right, gentlemen, cossack rosen, the fact that means you can jump any time you want and i always appreciate it. i want to talk about the european proposal here. i don't want to talk about the chinese when i'm for the european. when jack, i'm going to go to you 1st in paris. so we have the u. k. france and germany talking to ukraine. about a possible, a settlement esentially. it boils down to get as much land as you possibly can by summer, early fall, and will fill you up as much arms as you can carry. i don't understand how that is any kind of proposal at all, but that's what the media is telling us here. it doesn't make any sense and it,

it doesn't bring peace to europe, but that's what we're told they're pushing. does it make any sense to you? go ahead in paris. well, i'm actually not actually not, or are we no zat as a french government or of course i add are always a said zat are only negotiations called and as he swore bird. he also said zap negotiation and add to be decided a by a ukrainian side and earth so far. we are a see absolutely new ah, and no sign or from chief as that the ukrainians. oh, want to go over to a negotiation, or at least if they want to go to a negotiation, it's only only this off a complete withdrawal or off russian forces. and this is not, of course a solution. now what we can say is zed is this is,

or it's mounting a, grew wing fatigue of the war in europe, and mostly in barry's, or maybe landon a, certainly in berlin and all so acknowledgement is that the military forces are off for european or natal members or are no more less exhausted. and we had a several speeches made by high ranking and military officers are bought in berlin and in london. seeing that as their own armies are now completely depleted of any shell reserves. and this is probably the same situation in paris. so i think that there is also earn and believe a acknowledgement, a zat each time now to just because you've been

members of nato will not sustain ukraine anymore. well, okay, but can, if i go to union and new mexico here, what happened to as long as it takes whatever it takes, all the rhetoric coming out of the biden administration because react them facts on the ground below belie than the kind of a victory rhetoric that, that, that has been going on for over a year now. i mean, and on top of it can, it, you know, the european proposal doesn't really involve talking to russia. so what is this campaign negotiation if one of the main parties is not part of the negotiations as it were, go ahead, can sure. i think that, that, you know, there's 2 things that, that we're touching on here. one is of course that, that president biden's recent visit to kiva. his, i sort of pep rally and poland. these i think are not signs of, you know, the, the,

anything forever attitude. but these are sort of desperate attempts to try to shore up to situation. and try to manipulate the european allies into that continuing to maintain the supports, the support which is directed not at an actual resolution of the conflict, but which is directed at kind of a perpetual war. the goal of which is to try to bleed russia to damage russia to inflict as much harm as they can rather than, you know, caring about the interests of you, do the russian or the ukrainian peoples. as for the proposals that we're looking at today, you know, i, i agree with jack that the, you know, these, these are these rumors are the stories that are circulating about possible initiatives coming out of france or germany or even britain aren't really about serious efforts to resolve the conflict they're. busy still talking about kind of open ended military support for one side. and as you, as you've noted, not really talking about sitting down with people and talking back and forth across

the table. and that's a strong contrast to the chinese proposal. the chinese proposal, which has just been issued, you know, is really in many ways a reiteration of what have always been basic principles of chinese foreign policy. and which are also articulated in their global security initiative. they want respect for sovereignty. they want respect for territorial integrity. they want, you know, to have things resolved by negotiation and dialogues. i think some of the critical things are that the chinese are calling for ending the sanctions ending unilateral sanctions. they're calling for abandoning the cold war mentality, which is really what has brought us to this situation. the riddle expansion of nato . well, since the chinese proposal has been mentioned, let's go debasing. i know. let me read just a small fragment of the 12 point program that china recent release country should prevent block confrontation, which i think is talking about nato here, and work towards building a balance effective and sustainable european security architecture. i don't know

what it sounds like in mandarin, but i know what that sounds like in russian. so this is what the russians have been talking about even before the conflict started, go ahead in beijing. well, i agree with my colleagues though, the conflict has ground to a halt. i mean, and at this juncture it go on for years the, the way it's been perpetuated. and quite frankly, he got great britain, france and germany are being hurt by this. and they are being drained, the amount of actual money that's flowing in to ukraine is actually now greater on a monthly basis than that was which was flowing into afghanistan. so i mean, right now i see this move is just trying to prod, zalinski kind of remind him that this can't go on forever. i mean, as a country that is lost, 35 percent of its g. d. p in the last year is now pre 2019. it had a per capita g d p of about

a less than $5000.00. now it's about $1250.00. that's a year. $1250.00 a year, g d p. so you know they, they're in dire straits. they, ukraine can't keep this up forever. there might be a desire on the us side to grind russia down in the same breath, take out a active competitor that is europe. but at some point, europe is going to say no or we're not willing to do that. we're not going to have a mutual drowning packed with russia and see ourselves in essence decimated. already, germany is facing tremendous pressure. they're laying off people left right and centre. their industries are fleeing to other places, the car company. so for instance, to china making deals with their joint venture partners that they can produce in china, so that there'll be competitive worldwide because they can't do so. or if they stay in germany. so at this point, there is no tremendous weariness. there's, you know,

a lot of bellicose jingoism. i've now everyone's trying to convince everyone else they're tough and ready to stand strong. hopefully, that's a pre k, sir, to actually sitting down the table. but do lensky isn't difficult, political situation after saying he won't give an inch? yeah. how do you backtrack on that? and would he be really that out? you know, it's been, you know, the word existential has been thrown around or a lot, but you know, whatever happens then you create, it will be existential for mr. zalinski, but he volunteered for the job. ok, that's his choice. shockey, you know, we had. so we had treasury secretary yeah, when go visit ukraine with a $10000000000.00 package basically to keep the lights on here. i mean if there is so much dependency there, why doesn't the americans, you know, it's up to them. i mean, you can, is a 100 percent reliable or i should say zalinski is 100 percent rely on the united

states right now. and in the european union, it's up the european union and particularly washington can call this off today. now go ahead and paris. well, actually i think that the landscape is of course relying much on the united states of for military procurements and not so on. you rob the europe is seen much more as me to long term opportunity for ukraine. now is a problem is that is a warning you clean as being gleaning out or all of the military stocks are all the stock pies accumulated for years. and for years, i recently read a beeper seen zet, daniels of stock pile. i've been dissipated in just

a 6 months in ukraine. so, ah, so far as the situation is, the mall are more and more driven by this problem. you know, i'm united states, all your rob called make some promises, like, you know, a 10000000000 dollars or 15 billions euro's okay. but the problem is, or what will be delivered in the next week or in the next month. and that's a real problem. now for ukraine, you know, e, it's, it's very good to say, well, we have to contribute forces reconstruction for the rebuilding of the grain to such and such level. okay. but now the problem is, the ukraine is fighting a war ease, expanding a huge quantity of ammunition. you know, it's more or less. well, it is hardly where i was out. we're almost out of time for this part of the program

. i don't understand why anybody's talking about reconstruction. we don't even know what ukraine is going to be for reconstruction to begin. it's farcical. i, they, they keep wanting to spend money without any kind of strategic goals. it really belies reality, gentlemen, i'm gonna jump in here. we're going to go to a short break, and after that short breaks, we'll continue our discussion on piece proposal. stay with our ah ah

at this hour, american and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm iraq, to free its people. and to defend the world from great with we will bring to the iraqi people, food and medicines, and supplies and free with

with government has been killing his own people and on buffet is it's amazing that vision not being covered in western media. it hasn't been covered for the last 8 years. i'm here for 5 minutes and then i'm told the 1st 5 people they found it was 5 decapitated heads up in a quarterly equus thought demand. a boy foster care that it can use me no fight, but to say it is on your father law kid, the v. v. inflammation wool. almost all the independent journalists to pointed out that nato and the u. s. would directly responsible for initiating the military conflict in ukraine, our casualties of it as long as we want the war to continue. we will fight that more using ukrainians as proxies and we will fight it to the last ukrainian

death. that's what's happened in dunbar. this whole time, this is, these aren't objects, these are people. and so that's why i do what i do. that's why i'm here. ah, welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered on peter level to remind you we're discussing piece proposals with okay, let's go back to can can one again with the european proposal. we haven't seen it on paper. okay. this is, it's um, leaks from the media. if it went to the french, the germans and the british are talking about it again, it doesn't solve any problems. it's actually just saying, hey, let's just take a break. so we can rebuild up ukraine with

a lot more nato weapons and then we'll just continue the conflict. i mean, that's what, that's one interpretation of this. i don't know why they think that, that what that would work your thoughts go ahead. well, that seems, i couldn't agree more. i think that, that these, you know, and as you say there's nothing on paper. no government has issued an official kind of statement or anything. these are rumors, these are sort of feel trial balloons that are getting floated, although probably balloons aren't the best thing to talk about right now. but, you know, i think that, you know, the, the problem is that this is a situation that has gotten bogged down for the, for nato. and for the americans, they're making rather rather desperate most either to try to you know, pop up the, the attitude again to, to, you know, have bite and go and show up. does it give or to maybe, you know, suggested oh, maybe we are ready to, to think about some, some kind of negotiation. but everybody from zalinski on west is saying, you know,

but we, what we want negotiate was put, you know, we won't negotiate with the russians. well, who are you going to negotiate with? if you're not going to negotiate with, with, you know, president good. and you know, he's the leader of the russian federation right now. and, and that's the way it is. you know, eyes, it's just a situation that has, that has become unmanageable. certainly from, from the side of, of the west. and the irony, i think, is that what may well emerge from all of this in the end when finally, people do sit down and talk is a resolution that's going to look very much like what russia proposed to buy in with. i agree with the addition of territories and populations. now i absolutely, everybody does go back to december 17th, 2021. and the proposal is there. it was sent to nato. it was sent to washington and then 10 year writing. i think we're going to basically get that. okay. and what a pity it is for ukraine to have to go through that and all the suffering that's gone. i live in europe for example,

as result. i know. let me go back to you in beijing here. so we're talking about negotiations here, but i have a problem with that as well because we had that mince process, we had anglo merkel. we had president how long, and they've come out in the last couple of months saying that they weren't dealing in good faith. so if anyone from the west, you know, an intermediary and a whole, that the russians are going to say, well, who do we trust here? we, we had to lock enters for years. 37 years lied and deceived. i mean, so that is really the west is creating an enormous reputational problem for itself . i mean, it's a big doesn't take things that it says things that are bright things, that sign thing, but it's not worth anything. and that's another problem. the west has and try and do and to conflict that it started go ahead and beijing. well that, that is the irony, you have many of these powers insisting that they are upholding the international order and the rule of law, when in fact they're doing exactly the opposite 9. i'd have to agree, i mean,

the u. s. cannot claim to be anything but a, you know, road nation. it so walked away from treaties and i ran on climate change twice as well as an arm. the armies control were in very important arms control agreements, zeroes, walker, and i'm sorry to wrap it, keep going. yeah. but you know, you're a, peter, you're, you're right. i mean there, there is no trust and that is the basis. you cannot have an international order unless you have agreements and trust. and at this juncture, by exposing the fact that they were not dealing in good faith during made and one and 2, they basically destroyed that. so the only way you can do that is if, if there are power sitting at the table, who are going to offer guarantees. and i mean, i don't mean just china, there have to be, others are out there in india, et cetera, that world coming together. and we're at whether washington wants peace or not saying look, we'll guarantee this, i think that would give away out,

at least for most of the europeans. they feel very strongly. i talked to a lot of the ambassadors here in beijing. and they're, you know, they say, well, you know what russia did, is unconscionable and you, you have to side with us. and i said, well, what, what are you doing to help china with its problems? i mean, you, you seem to only one help when you want it. you don't want to give any help. you know, where's the trust on, on your side to trust goes both ways and they, they just, they don't want to talk about it. i just want to say, well, this is our problem, you gotta do something about it. i don't understand why that affects china, but that's the attitude there. so no trust, no going forward. well, it's very interesting, gentleman is that when something's important to washington, they want people to listen and act. but when other countries have issues is the russian, they leave the u. s. and it was to now, i says, brush it up, i go, go back to this statement. they are back of december 17th,

2021. when the russians had, here is our proposal for european security, and it was completely brush white because washington is an interested in that. jack, let me go to you in paris on the issue of trust here. you know, who below update the north stream pipelines, do you want to trust those people in negotiations? well, i certainly am not stream by plunk, but will be 11 topic or more precisely, or one bargaining chip in any negotiation. bet, bet. i said before, you know, and that's a problem that is trust. there is, of course, no trust or, or very low level of trust. and from russia to war that european mostly, ah, germany and france end as a reason. very, very little trust us in europe towards russia. so this is as those of us proven now

what it is also a p range is miss trust between nato and now you, you are hearing in false are more and more people saying, well, um, as a united states are acting without taking advice from other countries as are playing their own game and for some to some extent, they have all sued the major a europe, and most of precisely germany. so we have of course, mistrust between russia and nato. and from the russian side is perfectly understandable because of the declaration. often he says, merkel and mister francois long, but there is also now a new role when feeling of mistrust inside the nato. and this is miss king. any negotiation extremely extremely well shakun, i mean out,

it's during this entire process. harry, obviously washington doesn't care what the europeans think about anything. i'm sorry, but that's the truth. ok. listen to victoria new and you know it, she doesn't have, it's a scant regard for her. so called allies in europe. can let me go to you, you know, one of the, one way we got here is that the whole post war security arrangement in europe was, was designed without russia and against russia. and our peace in ukraine has to allow russia to be part of that process. do you think the, the west can do that to make such a dramatic change and say, hey, you're part of the process here. okay. i can't see any poet or virtually no politician in the west, being able to say that, and that's really the problem that we face go ahead, can well, that is absolutely a major problem. and, and, you know, i think, said that joe biden is, in some ways he's kind of the last old cold warrior, you know,

and now he's right at the forefront of what is becoming the new cold war. and he just doesn't seem to think that anything has changed since 1962. no. and i think that that's a very dangerous mentality. it's, it's, it's hard to imagine the united states making a and honest and sincere effort to resolve this conflict because the united states sought out and, and generated this conflict. you know, the, the, the, the progressive a movement of nato east, the step by step expansion, know the approach to rushes, borders. something which, you know was promised not to happen and then did happened yet again, an example of not keeping one's word on the part of the americans. this is sam, this is what brought us to the situation in which we find ourselves today. and there's no indication whatsoever that america's political elite are prepared to think about the world in a way other than, you know,

it's our way or the highway. and that's, that's obviously not working. yeah. i know are in beijing, in your personal opinion, what do you think the chinese learn leadership has learned about international affairs and dealing with the west, particularly washington during this last 12 months? well, i mean, it's nothing new. i mean, it's american exceptionalism. this idea that the u. s. has to be in control of the world in order to prevent world war 3. unfortunately, that thinking is probably going to lead to it. odd. china is extremely concerned. it's, it's not, you know, they really do fear that there could be a nuclear war if russia is pushed more arms go into this. eventually it spreads the contagion. and at that juncture, you know, it all bets are off. and, and quite frankly, they're concerned about whether the u. s. is going to use us as an excuse to, to cause trouble in more trouble in taiwan. so they see

a lot of parallels. a mirror of, you know, using proxy countries as tools to weaken. ha, what they perceive as competitor. so at this juncture, us eyes, not some entity to be trusted, and china knows that. but they're looking outside of that area. they're looking to europe at which has, you know, visceral interests involved in this. they're looking to the rest of the world, including the global south to say, listen, if we don't act together, we're going to her literally be killed alone. so at this juncture, china is looking for the alternate way of bringing trust at the table. you're not going to get it between europe and russia and the united states. so there has to be another way of doing it, bringing more countries into this kind of pressure point to bring the sides together and do it. but i do think it goes back to min swan that at that juncture. so, you know, you can have a united ukraine, but it's a loose federation of states which would retake her super majority to allow any

kind of, of, you know, nato or are or n e. you to come in plus, there would have to be an agreement to make sure that rushes security interests are observed, as she said, you know, one countries security cannot rests on the insecurity of others. that's what it's called, the indivisibility of security. that's all the time we have gentlemen. i want to thank my guests in beijing, paris, and in new mexico. and i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at ortiz. see you next time. remember roster bulls ah look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings except where such order that

conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about personal intelligence at that point obviously is too great trust rather than fear. so we'd like to take on various char with artificial intelligence. real, somebody with a robot must protect its own existence with a mac, sanchez, i'm here to plead with you. whatever you do, you do not watch my new show. certainly why watch something that's so different. my little opinion that you won't get anywhere else work of it. please, or do you have the state department, the c i a weapons makers, multi 1000000000 dollar corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead,

change and whatever you do. don't watch my show, stay mainstream 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 change the main thing i may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities another company, the united states of america is different. wearable people long to be free, they will find a friend in the united states. ah, with a little bit about a they've all ready basie. so the city, if you draw the look at the incentives of each cigarette, peel color. reverend notions is one among several of means to reach the goal of conquering foreign lands and bringing them on to the helm of

u. s. weston. it could all make interest to pop in sadie. i didn't that he did to everybody did them. okay. yeah. during returning clack they, so no, we just say low their softball, m a cat. the final goal of the sing revolutions is to ensure that there are no independent players in the world anymore. oh, some say the world is a global village where every human being is connected to a sheed history and destiny. 510000000 square kilometers of mass. and 326000000 cubic miles of water. but nowhere is never spot per person. i came.