on a supply to be in this program. next year, you have a very interesting take on the current tension between russia and the west, which ultimately comes down to the side. deep seated perception of themselves and the nature of reality, which you summarize as the u. s. is insistence on being the 1st among equals and rushes claim on being an equal among 1st. do you think such a clash of self images could be resolved peacefully? well, i hope it's where it can be, but of course it is problematic given the how deep this cultural difference is even how deep the psychological difference is ultimately in terms of the collective psychology of the leadership of the 2 sides. right? indeed this, this is the idea who came to me probably as a result of my chin for a number of years at 2 religious institutions, ultimate, the right to small university here in edmonton,

both of which are protestant foundations as a beginning. and this, this is something that may make me, made me looked look into, into the religious origins of political culture, of the west end of the united states of america in particular. and then of course, my own research as a historian had to do with the cultural histories policy on the russian side, right. and specifically, the cultural history of the russian automotive wars. so there i'd be that a lot of attention to the once again, the, the cultural practices of the mall, diploma. the perceptions, so the representation will definitely discuss all of those differences. and i think your main point is that both russia and america exceptionally distinct in how they are both historically, economically and socially. and before we go into that, i wonder if you can see any similarity in how these 2 big nations to great powers

go about manifesting themselves in the world. well, you see she story and far above, above all, those who look for differences. 40 clarity for unique qualities of historical entities, right? the odds of confront each other. it is probably the task of the political scientists and the social interests to focus on the similarity is not the universal reproducible trance, right? but once again, i was above all emphasize this, this, this, this difference. and yes, you know, as much as the periods when the 2 sides treated each other on moral as equal terms . my argument would be that these were rather the exceptional in the, in the long history of their relations. let me see on that wars exceptional exceptional because it's 1st and foremost associated with them. merican exceptionally man you argued that the united states is exceptional in 2 major ways

. it's geography or rather geography. granted, security being buffer and by 2 oceans and 2 wicker and neighbors. and if exceptional ability to strike with impunity without fearing any retribution which essentially allow the americans to wage the wars over the last couple of decades and perhaps even longer. now, do you think russia is exceptional enough as an adversary to you? and my plan is intended to provide an exception to the typical ways of american exceptionalism. well, i would say that it's exceptional in his desire historically and his desire to be equal along the 1st, which was the product of its long efforts to join the european concert of the european balance of power of the european club of great powers. and also the fact that he was part of the club for about a century and a half what we have 2 centuries. and then it's exceptionalism is also

a reflection of the fact that he's pretty much the only remaining great power of this kind. now, in europe, or even in the brother world, right. the tragedy want to be, say, russia is that this club of european great powers of which it's wanted to the parts for such a long time is no longer there. why don't interesting observation you're making that russia is perhaps the only, as you said, power that sort of peers through these, that perception of being impervious on the part of the americans. and if we hear, if you listen to them or in the speech of american policy makers, they say that, you know, they're still the strongest nation in the world that nothing threatens them. but do you think the americans indeed feel as secure and now as they profess it to be it? well, certainly not. i mean, one has to understand that until the end of the 2nd world war right,

there was no feasible prospect of any major attack on the continental terry of the united states. right. and in that sense of the 1st century and a half of the american history passed in exceptionally secure conditions, right? that explains so much in the transformation of the united states of america, inter s a major power, a global power of power that was actually superior, right? and it's in its capacities to any of the european great powers of the previous period. right. and then of course, comes the cold war, which as i would argue for a very long time, was still and symmetrical. confrontation given still the grade discrepancy in the resources of the to the site as well as in the level of security that they enjoy. but still, i would say that the most significant achievement as it where of the storage unit was to close that gap in terms of the, again,

the relative security that the 2 sites enjoy. and in that sense, of course, i would say that the so that unions compromise show would say them better than security to the point of leading a lasting impression on of that. again, the approach to foreign policy on their collective stakeholders, you on the perception of russia even today, but you know, weeks are i've spoken to many historians lately. and many of them point out that during the cold war, i mean one distinct feature of the cold war was the fact that both the united states and russia engaged in proxy conflict de number for the to intervene directly in the neighborhood of which other, with the only exception of the cuban missile crisis, but it was also sparked by the ter case case and many of them are going to be united states move to change data approach recently by pushing

ever closer to rational borders and by militarize and ukraine. you agree with this thesis? what do you think prompted this change of tactics on the american side? you know, essentially picking up a bottle with, with russian directly almost directly through ukraine. oh, yes, so, but 1st of all, i will actually question the, the magnitude of that change. because as you mentioned, recall the war was above all conflict characterized by proxy words between the 2 superpowers that were taking place in africa. se asia, other places, right? but which never turns into our actual war. and i think this is part of the broader trends that we see in the 2nd world war in terms of this transition and a gray zone. busy of peace, no war right. and this clear distinction in peace and rule that was once again,

the characteristic of the european system of international relations in the 18th and 19th century. right? it's, it's, it's disappearing gradually. right? and we are again, in this, increasingly in the grades on what, what makes the current conflict different of course, is it's geography, right? it's no longer goal. it's no longer yet. it's no longer cuba, it is in, in the ukraine, right? and this is something that makes this conflict different, including in terms of how re i'm free, are the 2 sides to disengage right now. all we've got before this self assured attitude that the united states historically had about security. and i think russia couldn't have been more different. you argue in your article that russia from never been privileged by an abiding sense of security, quite on the contrary, has been chronically insecure. how has it shaped its own national and

political psychology? well, i think that in the years of the cold war that's ultimately resulted in that rather sound i would say approach of the solvent military strategist. so that consistency in challenging the security of the opponent rather than trying to secure and sold absolute security, which i think is, is absolutely unattainable, is an illusion. ultimately, you see, but ultimately it's on attainable for, for, for any, any power in today's world. and the reason for that is well known to any specialist on strategy. it's much cheaper, it technically easy to deny security. you who want them to secure an absolute comfort for your for, for you, for yourself as it were right to, to make sure that there is no. busy possible attack on your territory, right? and that's all to be something that let in the context of the cold war to that famous or in famous doctrine of mutually assured destruction whereby the security

of the 2 sides was kind of partially achieved through some, some kind of equity librium of terror. and thinking that's also an attempt on the part of russia to take that concept of the balance of power the that is that on which the european concert was promised further or brought broader and applied to the americans as well. why do you think that americans played along with it for some time and now seem to be refusing to do so? yes, yes. so in that sense why they say that a man or mutual assured destruction was a kind of recreational reproduction of, of the principles and approaches to foreign policy that characterize the european concert. and in that sense, you know, as much as russia and the soviet union, we're trying to continue that approach and international relations. they have success. but it's important to remember that this, this concept and the overall interaction between the united states and the soviet

union in terms of de taunting terms of the, you know, they said she arms limitation talks, the anti ballistic missile treaty of the early 19 seventy's then was i would argue, or other exceptional periods, right? of parity in the context of the cold war from which ultimately the united states, you know, diverged or a parted by the late 19 seventies. right? so i would once again emphasize the exceptionality of this parity based approach in the name of security. and that only means that russia, any other power, has to make extra effort to bring it about. now, speaking about exceptions, there's absolutely no exception to the rule that we have. take a break in the middle of our conversation, so stay tuned for him. we will be back in just a few moments. ah

ah ah ah ah i rick sanchez and i am here to plead with you whatever you do,

you do not watch my new show. seriously why watch something that's so different. my little opinions that you won't get anywhere else. look of it please. if you have the state department, the cia weapons makers, multi $1000000000.00 corporations, choose your facts for you. go ahead. i 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 wayne thing. the me i welcome back to world smith, victor. i talk to teachers at concordia university. i meant and now victor, you have another fascinating view onto this conflict which i haven't seen many specialist wars. and essentially,

it's an argument and this of illusion of the american self perception as sort of the direct presentation all of god on this planet has been in fact, a combination of not only geography, but also it's, it's a religious thinking, particularly be the influence of the calvinist ideas of dividing people into and perhaps nations as well into the elect once and be what was the terrific rep, robert? yes. do you see playing out in their current politics as well? well, in the general sense. yes. well, 1st of all, if you say that, of course you say says no, the only country was politically thought of themselves along those terms. and indeed, one can find similar seems in the history of britain of france, russia, right? but when you look, for example, as the russian version of this nation,

especially in special relation to god, right. but we find the bubble in the russia 17th century. busy right, it definitely bears of the influence of the bees and sign a political culture in which exceptionalities was confirmed as it whereby exceptionally great challenges, hardships, sufferings, that the nation went through. because of course, god loves god may suffer. those whom he'll make sure i may be wrong, karen, but i think at least in the russian conception of this idea that it does not presume that you know, this exceptionality denies everybody else exceptionality. there is no sort of aspiration. she be the only arbiter of world affairs. yeah. well, that does, because in addition to having that kind of busy time legacy, once again that we could see in the 17th century, russia was of the same time jo,

graphically objectively peripheral power. a peripheral nation, which very early on on the level of its political elites are recognized. it's very thorough situation and began to make efforts to overcome it. right? so as a result of this exception is this really, really just providential is became diluted with a very healthy attitudes of disciples of europe and of the more advanced technologically advanced nations. was also tested by reality becka because you make an argument that every major european power also aspire to be a gentleman, but it's in the morning. ambitions. have all, all we've gotten some push back from, from the neighbors. that's just, you know, essentially a benefit. so to say also in a european environment. absolutely. while there was the case of staying the suffered major defeat in the sunday century, that was the case of france suffered

a number of defeats of the cent early 19th century and the port and being a major was right. and that was even the case of great britain, the right that while the global power for a long time. but then of course, the moment of the conclusion of the 2nd world war was very dramatically kind of declassified and turned into a medium sized country. right? so all european nations ultimately experienced that transformation where they, where they are, exception that is was kind of defeated by the car. reality is right. or at least confronted with them in the, you know, very significant way. and, you know, the face of moral moral is the only exception to the general tendency. that, of course, has to do with the fact that the geographical situation of the states is fundamental . that of an island, that is the size of the continent. right. and that's something that makes them so secure i one day said also manifest and solve domestically. because if you look at all day in recent presidential campaigns, you always get some variation of the hillary clinton's deplorable comment. you know,

i think donald trump talk about, talked about humans, campbell bite and also made some disparaging remarks about a sizable part of the population. do you think this sort of the division of people on nations in to be elect and the retro grades also manifests itself in domestic with perhaps in the current or is ation in the united states of us? yes, certainly liberal progressive. it can be seen as yet another kind of secular manifestation off off off of that kind of approach, right? because we have to understand that in its pure pre stein form, this religious consciousness of radical calvinists was present the bubble in the 17th century. in the time of the creation of the 13 colonies, but since then it has become secularized for sure. already by the time of the

american gordon independence, we can see significant stickler is ation of that of that of that trans. that turns into a kind of ideology of success, right? that seems to be kind of confirmed by the actual developments again, as a reflection above all, the exceptionally comfortable geographical situation or bubble. now, why can't, i think i understand why the americans would be so infatuated with their own orange and myth, but i think many countries have a similar miss, but again, claiming that you're only miss supersedes all others. isn't that ultimately as well wishing as it may appear? isn't that ultimately an attempt to deny all ought and they all have nations to manifest their own destiny? because i mean, in personal psychology, we accept that each one of us is unique and have, as he's or her own unique way. but essentially what the american political doctrine

try it tries to put forward is that know we know the right way for everybody else. while others, yes, yes, of course, i mean, one of the qualities that distinguishes human beings is the ability to recognize the other side. just the same human beings as yourself, right? and you know, that sense if we apply these psychological categories to the level of political leads of different countries against the exceptional geographical situation of the states, the exceptionally positive economic and demographic and social development of this country of war all night and the 20th century. definitely made it difficult wed say for the american leaders to recognize in the leaders of other countries that equals, as it were right. because once again, the situation is been concerns the circumstances in which the european leaders,

in particular, historically where acting where sol so manifested different from those. so for the united states, now, i don't know if you would agree with that, but i think this very concept of the end of history could only be born on the american soil. and as present shows it as it may be. it reminds me on that 1000 moment. you know, it's a beautiful moment and essentially to stop the flow of history and prevent others from leaving their own version of what the americans have leaked through. i mean, that sounds so impossible to even consider. and yet, for some reason the americans seem to be fully devoted to, do you think that's an authentic belief, or is it ultimately a deliberate calculation to use the rest of the world and their resource base? do you think the american can stand on their own 2 feet without using the rest of

the world as a supporting base? oh well oh, certainly much of that success story was the product of that had gone to just come all me so easy relations and we need a space where with, with other countries, right. but at the same time, i think that we have to take culture and political culture and particularly seriously, right? because i do think that here we are dealing with things with psychological realities that definitely determine or at least condition the choices, the foreign political choices, including the current crisis. now, as you mentioned in your p s, b in the united states, unlike the united states, europe has never been insulated from the interest of conflict. and it gave rise to this very specific diplomatic and political culture which we have already discussed . the european concert and based on the idea of the balance of power balance of

interest as a way to peacefully co exist and ensure and logical of what you want. you argued that this way of diplomacy, these whales existing, was destroyed during the day. and the 1st 2 world war, do you think there's any chance of recreating it as a ways away the 3rd world war perhaps as a result of it? well, i think that he's everybody's for, it should be everybody's hope that there is such a possibility, right. and indeed, an ideal situation would be something like the reemergence of this european call search of bigger players on a, on an international scale. right? so obviously including mobile only the united states and russia, but that also china, india, brazil. and so perhaps other other, other brick nations, right. of course there is, there is one problem. so will say with great power equality concept that was characteristic off of the earth on call search of the night century. and that was

of the fact that the great powers sometimes treated the rather cavalierly in those nations that are smaller than that. right? so why has that they have to reinvent these of these idea over global comsearch off of big powers in ways that would be accommodating lee as durations and interests of the smaller regional nations. now are also in one of your articles. a, you mentioned that the united states or the americans always got surprised when other nations, non western, in the mentality, gets sort of westernized or get developmental boost without becoming lag down, or rather down becoming subservient to them. and that applies not only to russia, but also to turn key to china. and perhaps there are many other countries reducing and just the russians who cannot find keys to read them. merican version of the world as lead only by them. no, i think that russia,

you shouldn't need the 1st nor west the nation to on the goal westernization without losing its job goals, solar energy as well. right. but it's not the only one, right, because one can probably place awesome empire than turkey in the same category. one can place japan until the 2nd world war into this category, which chinese to be a little bit difficult different because of course, there was of all the century of almost like, well they colonial situation in which in which china china was right in the late ninety's and early 20th century, but definitely we are dealing here with a fundamentally similar entities, right? that are distinguished not only by the military importance, by their comic size, but that also by certain psychology, collective psychology of their lead. so that seek to integrate certain measured amounts of westernization western influences with the job clinical sovereignty. one

could also replace the iran in the same category there use likewise, the country that has a long history of westernization, but then also into western attitudes. you mentioned in your article, very diplomatically that this historic lack of experience of weighing or negotiating your own interest against the interest of others may be somewhat problematic for the world today. do you think that americans could be disabused of this kind of entitlement? if so, how? well, i think that we have some, some, some examples off of all of that in the past and dimensions of the daytime, of the late night and sixes in early seventy's when the significant form. but it, it will defeats brought him all about for a moment of these, this pre valence of essentially european style diplomatic culture embodied by henry kissinger writes the presidential adviser to richard nixon and later,

fam space is by the way on the european concert as well. absolutely. on the european diplomacy as the time of the younger congress, the high point of the european all search, right, because of the great powers, right off of the european influences in the daytime and the american aspects of the data and os mistaken goal and undeniable. right. so of course, it is not excluded in principle, but of course it will be a very long process that will require a lot of effort on the part of once again, those are those countries that we mentioned, right? that, that combine certain degree of westernization with the attachment to an independent and joe political mixture. it's been a fascinating conversation. thank you very much for that. thank you. it's been a pleasure for me to thank you and thank you for watching the focus here again. was the parts

ah, ah ah . hi, i'm rick sanchez and i'm here to play with you. whatever you do, you do not watch my new shelf. seriously. why watch something that's so different, my little opinions that you won't get anywhere else. look, if it pleases you to have the state department, the cia weapons makers, multi $1000000000.00 corporations, choose your fax for you. go ahead. i changed 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. and dwayne thing lou needs to come to the russian state to never. i've stayed on the most landscape with eclipse in 55 when. okay, so mine is 2000 speedy when else calls with will van in the european union, the kremlin media machine, the state on russia today and switch r t spoof. even our video agency, roughly all band on youtube said with

ah, us secretary of state anthony blanket, visits ethiopia, niger to booth you with influence in africa. that's as they were trivia accuses washington of impeding fees in the whole region. australia's plan to buy 5 nuclear powered submarines from the us and develop more in the future draws criticism from china and mid concerns. the deal puts non proliferation agreements at brit. russia agrees to extend the black sea green deal, which was set to expire this saturday.