ah ton of welcome to wells, a part of the americans have many itself gratifying metaphors of why they and only they are supposed to be at the top of the international pecking order. there was living democracy, shining city on a heel and benevolent have gentlemen all to support the idea that in the final analysis, they have an inborn prerogative to know and decide what's best for the rest. and as order and peace preserving. as this positioning wishes to appear, isn't it bound to lead to conflict? want to discuss that i'm now joined from canada by victor tacky, who teaches concord de university of edmonton bixler. it's great to talk to you. thank you very much for your time. thank you for the invitation. excited to

pleasure to be in this program. make sure you have a very interesting take on the current tensions between russia and the west, which ultimately comes down to the sides. 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 these cultural difference is you and how deep the psychological difference is ultimately in terms of the collective psychology of the leadership of the 2 sites. right? indeed. so this is the idea that came to me probably as a result of my chin for a number of years at 2 religious institutions alternately,

race to small universe this year in edmonton, both of which are protestant foundations as a beginning. and this, this is something that may make me, made me look, look into, into this 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 they're at b, the 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 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. busy above all, those who look for differences for clarity, for unique qualities of historical entities, right? the other that confront each other. it is probably the task of the political scientists and the social is just still to focus on the similarity is not the universal reproducible trans, right? but once again, i would above all, the, emphasize this, this, this, this difference. and yes, you know, as much as the where periods, when the 2 sides treated each other on moral as equal terms. my argument would be that these were rather exceptional in the, in the long, the history of their relations. let me see on that towards exception. exceptional, because it's 1st and foremost associated with the american exceptional man. you

argued that the united states is exceptional in 2 major ways. it's jo graphy or rather geography granted, security being buffer and by 2 oceans and 2 wicker and neighbors. 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, the european balance of power. the european grew 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 of the state of 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. while an 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, the policymakers, 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 territory 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, the inter and 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 me the cold war, which as i would argue for a very long time was still an s and metric co confrontation. gillan shield the grade discrepancy in the resources of the 2 sites as well as in the level of security that they enjoy. but still, i would say that the most significant achievement as well of the soviet union was

to close the gap in terms of the, again, relative security that the 2 sites enjoy. and in that sense, of course, i would say that the, so it's unions compromised show will say, then better 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 afforded to intervene directly in the neighborhood, which are the only exception of the cuban missile crisis, but it was also sparked by the turk case case. and many of them are going to the united states move to change data approach recently by

pushing ever closer to rational borders and by militarize and ukraine. you agree with this? this is, 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 would actually question the, the magnitude of that change. because as you mentioned, the cold war was above all conflicts characterized by proxy wars between the 2 superpowers that were taking place in africa, southeast asia, other places, right. but which never turns into our actual war. and i think that this is part of the broader trend 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, the worst 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 real 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 solid, i would say approach of the soviet military strategist, so that consistent 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, and anyone who is only for, for russia or the soviet union, or i think it's on attainable for the united states as well. i think that 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 easier to deny secure. you have all of them to secure absolute comfort for your for, for you, for yourself as it where 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 off terra speaking. that's also an attempt on the part of russia to take that concept of the balance of power and 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 it says why they say that a mad on national destruction was a kind of recreational reproduction 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 were trying to continue that approach in

international relations. they had success, but it's important to members of this, this concept of the overall interaction between the united states and the soviet union in terms of de taunting terms of the, you know, it says you arms limitation talks, the anti ballistic missile treaty of the early 19 seventies, that was, i would argue, rather exceptional periods, right? of parity in the context of the cold war from which ultimately the united states of, you know, diverged or a parted by the late 19 seventies. right? so i would once again emphasize the exceptionality of these parity based approach in the domain of security. and that only means that russia or any other power has to make extra efforts to, you know, bring it about. now, speaking about the exception, there's absolutely no exception to the rule that we have. take

a break in the middle of our conversation. so stay tuned to it. we will be back in just a few moments. ah ha. china has performed a master stroke of diplomacy. it is broker in agreement that we'll see a ran and saudi arabia again reestablish diplomatic relations. this could be a step not only to reorder the middle east, but also usher in an era of stability in the region. today. washington is the odd man out with

the me. i welcome back to the world the smith and victor. i talked with 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 that 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 because menace ideas of dividing people into

perhaps nation 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 a, in a 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, france of 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, right? it definitely bears of the influence of the byzantine, a political culture in which exceptionalities was confirmed as it whereby exceptionally great challenges, hardships, sufferings of the nation went through because of course, god love, god makes suffer those from hill off. but i may be wrong care,

but i think at least in the, in the russian conception of this idea does not presume that you know, this exceptionality denies everybody else de exceptionality. there is no sort of aspiration. she be the only arbiter of world affairs. yeah. well then that's because, in addition to heading, that's kind of busy on time legacy. once again that we could see in the 17th century, russia was of the same time jo, graphically objectively a peripheral power, a peripheral nation, which very early on on the level of its political elites, recognized its peripheral situation and began to make efforts to overcome it. right, so as a result of these players, exception is this really, really just providential is became dilute, diluted with a very healthy attitudes of disciples of europe and of the more advanced

technological, advanced nation. i think also tested by reality because he make an argument that every major european power also aspire to be a gentleman, but it's in the morning. ambitions have all, always 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, well that was the case of stain the suffered major defeat in the something says that it was the case of from the suffered a number of defeats of the consent early 900 century. and the board being a major while right. and that was even the case of great britain, right? that was 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 termed, 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 hard realities, right? or at least confronted with them in, in a very significant way. and, you know, the, the state 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 space is funding to do that of an island. that is the size of the continent. right, and that's something that makes them so secure i one day, so also manifest and solve domestically because if you look into 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 lacked? and the referent brain also manifests itself in domestic with perhaps in the

current or is ation in the united states of the south. yes, certainly liberal progress. 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 it is pure pre signed form. this religious consciousness of radical calvinists was present the bubble in the 17th century at 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 going independence, we can see significant stickler ization of that, of that, of that trends that turns into 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 bubble. now, why can't, i think i understand why the americans would be so infatuated with their own orange

and missed. but i think many countries have a similar mis, but again, claiming that your own mis supersedes all others. isn't that ultimately as well wishing as it may appear? isn't that ultimately an attempt to deny all odd 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, the situations that 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 narrow 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 spouton moment, but you know, it's a still beautiful moment and essentially to stop the flow of history and

revenge others from leaving their own version of what the americans have lived 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 isn't 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, a certainly much of the success story was the product of very advantages economic 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 piece, be the united states. unlike the united states, europe has never been insulated from the interesting conflict. and it gave rise to this very specific diplomatic and political culture which we have already discuss the european content 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, this way of coexisting was destroyed during the day. and the 1st 2 world wars. 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 fault. it should be everybody's hope that the research

a possibility, right. and indeed, an ideal situation would be something like the reemergence of the european call search of bigger players on a, on an international scale, right? obviously including mobile only the united states and russia, but then also china, india, brazil. and so perhaps other other, other brick nations, right. of course there is, there is one problem simple say with great power equality concept that was characteristic off of the call search of the night century. and that was the fact that the great powers sometimes cheated their other cavalierly in those nations that are smaller than that. right? so why has that they have to reinvent these of these idea of a global comsearch of powers in ways that would be accommodating li, esther asians, 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 a developmental boost without becoming lag down, or rather down becoming subservient to them. and that applies not only russia, but also to turn key to china. and perhaps there are many other countries reducing and just the russian who cannot find keys to have been merican version of the world as lead only by them. no, i think that russia, you shouldn't use the 1st mod west the nation to on the go westernization without losing its job goals, solar energy as well. right. but it's not the only one, right? because one can replace autumn and 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 different, different because of course there was of all the century of. busy almost like,

well, they colonial situation in which in which china china was right in the late 19th and early 20th century. but definitely we are dealing here with the fundamentally similar entities, right, that are distinguished, not only by the ministry important by their comic size, but that also by psychology, collective psychology of their lead. so that seek to integrate certain measured amounts of westernization western influences with the job political sovereignty. one could also replace the iran in the same category. there is, likewise, a country that has a long history of westernization, but then also enter 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 i mentioned of the daytime of the late night and fixtures in early seventy's when the significant form. but it defeats brought him all about for a moment of these, this pre valence of essential european style. diplomatic culture embodied by henry kissinger writes the presidential adviser to richard nixon. and later space is by the way on the european culture 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 of os. i'm mistaken 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 combine certain degree of westernization with the attachment to an independence and job political mixture. it's been a fascinating conversation. thank you very much for that. thank you. me a pleasure for me to thank you and thank you for watching. i hope to hear again was a part ah we ah

mobile is this the best bulk should buy for the mobile one using annual g d. p per capita is about $4000.00 euros. last does that. we've got drug calling in a mold, a what you personally probably our primary cost is still a quite a sunni chip, totally near prisoner. you crucial for him on the line to come out. see nature little a thought there missing would have thought of unemployment is off the chance. moldova territorial integrity in sovereignty. we respect of the country which enjoys financial support from the u. s. n. b, you is constantly roth by political and corruption scandals. wow. but all that didn't stop moldova obtaining you candidate status in 2022

a year with hello and welcome to cross stock were all things are considered? i'm peter lavelle. china has performed a master stroke of diplomacy. it is brokered in agreement that we'll see a ran and saudi arabia again re establish diplomatic relations. this could be a step not only to reorder the middle east, but also usher in an air of stability in the region. today, washington is the odd man out.