and see them perform badly and destroyed on the battlefield. but i was on the news on my colleague, rory, sushi will be with you at the top of the hour. i might have. i wish you all a wonderful day. ah, [000:00:00;00] ah .

ah with hello in welcome to cross talk. we're 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 ah cross sucking piece proposals, i'm joined by my guess. i'm not hanging in beijing. he's a senior fellow at the i hate 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 mexico state university are a gentleman cossack roles and the fact that means you can jump any time you want. and i always appreciate, i want to talk about the european proposal here, and i want to talk about the chinese when i'm for the european. when jack, i'm going to go to you 1st in paris. i'm so we have other, the u. k. france and germany talking to ukraine about a possible, a settlement ah, essentially boils down to, ah, 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. i, it doesn't make any sense and it is us and 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 enough, or are we new zat as a french government?

or of course ad always said zat are only negotiations called and as he swore bird. he also said that negotiation and add to be decided by a ukrainian side and the earth so far, we are see absolutely new or no sign or from key if that the ukrainian or want to go over to a negotiation or at least if they want to go to a negotiation, it's only on the this off a complete withdrawal of russian forces. and this is not, of course, a solution. now what we can say is that a, this is a, it's mounting a grow when fatigue of the war in europe and mostly berries. it may be landon

a certainly in bell lane and all so acknowledgement that the military forces are off for european or nato members, or are no more less exhausted. and we had a civil 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 of 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're been members of nato will not sustain ukraine anymore. well, okay, but can, if i go to an in new mexico here, or 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 the kind of a victory rhetoric 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 anything forever attitude. but these are sort of desperate attempts to try to shore up to situation. i tried 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 to 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, 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 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 real 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 and 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 that the conflict has ground to a halt. i mean,

and at this juncture it go on for years, the way it's been perpetuated. and quite frankly, he got great britain, france and germany are being heard by this. and they are being drained, the amount of actual money that's flowing into 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 his 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're in dire straits. i, 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 companies, 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 it can't do so. our, if they stay in germany. so at this point, there is no tremendous weariness. there's, you know, a lot of bellicose jingoism. i'm 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 her a lot. but you know, whatever happens then you create, it will be existential for mr. lensky. 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 in paris. well,

actually i think that the landscape is of course relying much on united states of for military procurements. and not su on you rob. you rob. it 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 piles 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 aim is, or what will be delivered in the next week or in the next months. and that's the 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 grain or to such and such level. okay. but now the problem is, ukraine is fighting. a war is expanding a huge quantity of ammunition. you know, it's more or less. well, it is shadley 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 going to 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 team. ah ah ah ah, ah,

government has been killing its own people and on bass ideas. it's amazing. the admission ought to be covered in western media 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 head valley up in a quarterly equest on demand a boy fos. get that. it's a down payment. can you use me? no fiber to say kid is on your father law kid evie. the information will almost all the independent journalists pointed out that nato and the u. s. were directly responsible for initiating the military conflict and 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 dumbass. this whole time, this is, these aren't objects,

these are people that 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 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, you know, 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 on keith. or to maybe, you know, suggested oh, maybe we are ready to, to, to think about some, some kind of negotiation. but everybody from zaleski 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 away 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 the admins 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 interlocutors for years or 7 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 a doesn't take things if it says things that are bright things, that side 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 of many of these powers insisting that they're 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 0. i'm sorry to regular, keep going. yeah. with the, you know, your peter, your ear, 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 me, 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. and they feel very strongly. i talked to

a lot of the ambassadors here in beijing. and there, 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. they 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 gentlemen, is that when something's important to washington, they want people to listen and act. but when other countries have issues is the russian though, the u. s. and it's western now i says, brush it up, i go go back to this statement. they are, are back of december, 17, 2021 when the russians had here is our proposal for european security and it was completely brush. wait 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 nord stream pipelines, do you want to trust those people in negotiations? well, i certainly am lost treme pipeline, but will be one or one topic or more precisely, or one bargaining chip in any negotiation. but, but i said before, you know, and that's a problem that is trust. there is, of course, no trust or very low level of trust. and from russia to war that european mostly, ah, germany and france end as they raised a very, very little trust us in europe to what russia. so this is as those of us proven now what it is also a p range, ease, mistrust, a between nato,

and now you, you are hearing in false are more and more people saying, well, ah, the 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 alone, but there is also now a growing 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 here. obviously,

washington doesn't care what the europeans think about anything, i'm sorry, but that's the truth. ok. listen to victoria know and you know that she doesn't have it and scant regard for her, so called allies in europe. can let me go to, 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. 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. you know, and, 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 russia's 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. a 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 in 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 our 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 russia's security interests are observed, as she said, you know, one country is, 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, i'll stop bull's eye on when i was showing wrong. when i'll please just don't hold any new world just to see how this thing becomes the advocate

and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves worlds apart, we choose to look for common ground. oh boy, is this the best of both? no issue. my for the mobile, when you visit annual g d. p per capita is about $4000.00 euros. the la garza, we've got drugs of well, are you in a mobile little, la milton with wash coast wants to go to sleep. i was off a man, i got an air planet consti sealed from quick pursuing chip, totally near prisoner. you. crucial for normal bellanca, mouthy nature, la. lowest thought they would have thought of unemployment is off the chance. moldova territorial integrity and sovereignty, are we respect of the country which enjoys financial support from the u. s. n. b,

you is constantly roth by political and corruption scandals, but older didn't stop moldova. obtaining e you turn to the state is in 2022. ah ah, in need to come to russian state. oh, never. i stayed on the north lansky div asking him now knocking. i'll send that for me within the 50 babel did. okay, so mine is 2000 speedy with. we will van in the european union the kremlin. yup. machine. restate on russia for date and c,

r t sport that came in our video agency roughly all band to on youtube. with ah, ah, the headlines right now. what are you into national as questions are raised about the integrity of nigeria is electoral system. the ruling party's candidates narrowly wins victory and the presidential election. russia has helped people about sort of a lot off meets with his indian and turkish account, up off the head of the g. 20 foreign ministers conference ongoing right now in new delhi. and as a combat on the don bass front lines intensifies odds. he listens to 1st time accounts of captured ukrainian soldiers who decided to switch sides and fight for russia,