the game revised immanuel got some photos, the leak is off, but i was looking at paying the way to waste oil by 5 o 8 your chills. i was little short handed for capital 2 children. i spoke with lucy shantell, blinking, assuming in the modem, which we think will oh, good is for mr. broad western word order and a b o you wish you would article that word order is now or you are seen in you create is the lost desk, but by d americans and a few wester light they have, but it's lead. try to leap in that order in some more detail in order that has no

relation with the id. ah ah. with hello and welcome to cross stock were all things are considered? i'm peter lavelle in the west. it's called a marriage of convenience, but for russia and china, their relationship is strategic. and an alternative to the west, so called rules based order with the west refuses to recognize the russians and the chinese practiced. and it's called multi ha laira thing with

cross fucking multiple charity, i'm joined by my guess. andy mach in beijing. he's a senior research fellow at the center for china and globalization. also in beijing . we have john gong. he is a professor at the university of international business and economics and in new york we cross a danny. hi phone. he is the host of left lens. a gentleman cross stock rose in effect. that means you can jump any time you want. and i would appreciate that andy, let me go to you in beijing. do you like the term marriage of convenience? because it sounds very arrogant to me because it means that the west is the proper suitor for other countries. it's. there's a built in bias. if you think about it, go ahead handy. no, there absolutely is. and i think, you know, i did a video for c, g t n a last month about how western media is subtly and invisibly poisoning its audiences with these in, you know, these insinuations. and these distortions robin, this phrase, marriage of convenience is exactly one of those. hello john. the same question to

you because they've been talking about this marriage of convenience for a long time. and all a while russia and china has reached out to each other. they've reached out to the entire world. um, you know, the, the, the marriage of convenience is more like the united states and its nato allies. i would say that's a shotgun marriage of convenience. okay. absolutely. i mean, you're, you're best how i destroys a pipeline of yours. what, what kind of marriage is that? okay? but how to more serious know, john, i mean, again, this is a very arrogant narrative about how the world should revolve around the west. but it's not so much anymore, and that's what really irritates them. go ahead john. i wouldn't characterize this as a marriage because otherwise most conscious would be accused of are they come? i guess the china maintains this kind of relationships with many countries. but i think what's unique here is that russia is currently yes,

we'll go it engage in a water ukraine. the entire west is fighting saturday. my views to find it now takes on you to the position on china. you maintains a, you know, fairly good relationship with most countries, and disco in this case, particularly was, was russia, i think, you know, it's a very special relationship in the past. and in the sense that washington accuse is china being of siding on the russian side, which is something that you categorically deny that we're going to have something called both countries. look at the comics relationship practical relationship post friday. so i think, you know, beverage, but i certainly, it's an example of mckinney, a gratian issue, a strategic relationship between great powers. you know, you miss conflict in this climb. i'm glad think john, you talk about the great powers because the west doesn't like that. okay,

that's what that smacks and spheres of influence and stuff like that. actually, you know, we're going back to traditional geo politics of great powers, and i think it's healthy because it breaks a gemini, when one country has a gemini, it is dangerous for the entire system. and this is what we're thing, danny. you know, the russia and china and other countries are challenging the west, but they're not only challenging the west. they're pretty presenting an alternative . and this is what the west doesn't tell their publics that there is an alternative way of doing geo politics, but it's more peaceful and absolutely more prosperous for, for all people in the world. and it's no wonder that russia and china appealed to the global south, or the global majority is i think it should be called go ahead, danny. well, that's exactly right. and what russia in china are doing is through their strategic partnership. they are actually leading by example in a way that is hitherto not existed prior. during the cold war, there was

a lot of confrontation in a lot of antagonism between the rising powers to the east, china and russia. and of course, the united states. now russia and china have turned in this direction of multi polarity and have made it very clear that they're not targeting any 3rd party in that they would if they could have relationships, real strong relationships with the collective west in with united states. but what they are actually doing is taking the high ground here, and that is driving the neo con, foreign policy establishment. absolutely mad. because what russia and china are actually doing through their strategic partnership is showing the world that the united states in the collective was, aren't actually needed at this time. that to rising powers, developing countries that are fast becoming leaders in the global south can actually chart a path forward internationally that doesn't include the problems and the consequences of unipolar gemini, that the united states has shown quite clearly, is a disaster for the planet. whether we look at ukraine or where they look at the rest

of the world and how it is staring under us domination, leading by example, you're absolutely right, andy, this is, this is what's really important here is that, you know what danny just told us. you know, not, not targeting a 3rd country, but the west, they want to have a relationship that it suits them and their interests only. and everyone else has to adapt now for a good for the post more environment. yes, that was, that happened quite a bit. but it's no longer happening anymore, and more and more people are rejecting this, this kind of arrangement on the global stage. when one country decides everything it is, there is no check on that one country. and that what, that's what makes it very dangerous for the international system. and i would even say for western publics as well. go ahead, andy. well, that's absolutely true peter. and i think the key phrase here or term is hypocrisy . and this is not just on the international stage, but domestically is well,

i think this is what the u. s. and the handful but dwindling handful of countries that stand with it are, are so afraid. and i think angered by in that when we look at the exploitation domestically, that most americans are really, are in a state of debt peonage. and that this is replicated on the global stage as well. ah, that what china and russia and other countries are showing is, there is another way that works just as well, if not better than the quote unquote american way. and if enough americans see this, i think this is gonna create real problems for the sustainability of, of the american power structure. we're seeing this change as president see mentioned these changes unseen in a 100 years. yeah. wow. that could also spar a reappraisal domestically in the u. s. as well. and i think this is what is so

threatening. yeah, well you know, it's threatening john is that in a very short amount of time on china broker to do between iran and saudi arabia presented the world with a piece of plan for ukraine. oh, my goodness. why in the chinese doing this, how dare they get involved in these they, this is what is so astounding. watching american cable news their hair is on fire is that we're supposed to do this. yeah, you've been doing it for like 70 years and you've screwed up the world pretty badly . maybe you should pass the baton to somebody else for a change. i think that will resonate with, with the american and public if they were explained in, in a very truthful manner. what's going on? of course, they're not go ahead, john go, i can come most of what you said, but i let that be a little bit on a scares that the on saudi arabia and iran, happy engaged, a sort of behind don't go sions what i had a while actually are just by themselves and i think, but what's significant here is that finally they, they did cut the ribbon,

they shake hands in b, g. i think that is the most significant event. and i think this is little from where we're at so far it's, it's mostly off the saudi arabia's choosing actually, and i think and although the prince over there are people go to man b. s. did this, the deliberate he did, he made this thing happening. pages to make a point to washington that the house is another all broker here in the middle east . in all honesty, i don't think china wants to play a sort of a substitution or role of beans of you washing that. i think innovation maintains gratian ships was practically every party, every player in a bit of age. i mean you talking about pose yellowstone, the jewish, the, the arrow, sir, the turks are in a charming taste good relations with each one of them. and there is a major trade hon. they've not the largest trading partner with each one of these countries. so i think, you know, china's engagement miller is, is mostly from a commercial point of view, is also from a sort of a, you know,

a good diplomatic relationship. what have you. nevertheless, i think again, i want to emphasize that a disadvantage is significant. the sense that the emacs, the andy of an arrow narrow america, you know, totally dominating the landscape of the middle east on now. oh, as a new player into hell, i'm glad you brought up. not getting that point there. danny. i mean, i'll be more specific in my question to you, but basically the same theme is that, you know, a chinese not replacing the united states. it's not what it's trying to do. but china is a great power in involved with the saudis and iranians. they're not choosing side. see the u. s. always choose aside. ok. and generates a comp when the chinese are saying now you guys can shake hands and you could do it in our capital, but it's up to you to move it forward. and i think that's the message that beijing with sending in beijing is not picking aside in the conflict. that's very wise for over a great power. go ahead, danny. yeah. and in what china is doing to,

is there demonstrating what exactly is important in international relations? what exactly is the most important factor in developing stable international relations in that is economic cooperation. and so a china has done all around the world through its various mechanisms like the baltimore initiative is mirror the stability that it is experiencing right now internally. so all of what is being laid diplomatically for china, all of its ascendancy in the diplomatic sphere and in a leadership sphere economically. and politically is all made possible by its domestic stability. and that's one aspect of this that doesn't get much conversation here, but china doesn't take sides because it understands in order to have stability internationally. there has to be cooperation at a very broad in a very deep level. that doesn't mean that china doesn't take position that has taken

a position on the ukraine crisis. it has made clear that it takes all the security interests of all parties concerned. it also has taken positions on issues like sanctions and has opposed them in it. you know, poses any kind of unilateral aggression, so china has taken positions world wide, but has understood that in order to have stable international relations in order to develop in a peaceful manner. and in order to ensure that all the interests as, as fully as possible, are mary wells, artes. danny, did i not have, i had to jump in, we had to go to a hard break. and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion on multiple charity stay with archy ah ah ah, ah,

needs to come to the russian state local narrative as tight as on the most landscape. div jimenez, english. i'll send them up for me. it within the $55.00 when. okay, so mine is 2000 speedy. one else with we will van in the european union, the kremlin. ca, yep, machine. the state on russia for date and split our t spoke neck. even our video agency, roughly all band on youtube with me sometimes i'm rick sanchez and i'm here to play with you. whatever you do,

you do not watch my your show seriously. why watch something that's so different. my little opinions that you won't get anywhere else. work 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 change and whatever you do. don't watch my show, stay main street because i'm probably gonna make you uncomfortable. my show is called direct impact, but again, you probably don't want to watch it because it might just changing the wayne thing the welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle to me and you were discussing multiple arity in me. okay, let's go back to andy and beijing. andy, i'm a child of the cold war i make. i don't really hide my age. ok. i was brought up

during the cold war. i remember the rhetoric. i remember some of the crisis as well . and it would seem to me that, you know, when, when i was being brought up, you know, it was the communist bloc, the ideology and merciless miss, and the greatness and all it was really evil. it was really pitts that way. but you know, now with the end of the cold towards the west, it's become intensely ideological and intensely bias. i mean, again, i work in the news business. i'm a media person and i watch a lot of media. and just the, the how vapid western media is when it comes to countries like china and in china is the least idea. logical on the world stage of, of the great powers. go ahead, andy. well, i think you're absolutely right. and you know, i think one of the big differences is the u. s. during the cold war and today really demonizes and seeks to divide. where's the chinese approach is

based on 2 foundational principles that are related. the 1st is benevolence and the 2nd is maturity. and i think this is very, very different. we see this reflected in china's foreign policy approach. and i want to go back to john's point about saudi arabia, that this was highly symbolic. and i think what so important here is that it also may mark the unraveling of american hegemony, which is based on the petro dollar. so we go back in history. ah, that nixon by abandoning the gold pegging the dollar to golden, making it a feel currency, essentially worthless piece of paper that the only way of the u. s. could keep the game going, was by a strong arming the saudis into taking dollars for oil and that was allowed the dollar to to continue. and now we may see the end of that as the saudis are

symbolically a showing a greater independence and practically accepting the un. ah, for oil that we may be on the cusp again, of these changes unseen in a 100 years. well, in get to that point, john, i mean, this is that, you know, again, have i said it also already in this program is that, you know, the, the west turns it into a confrontation. but so many countries like russia and china are saying, when i don't know, we don't want confrontation with you, we're just going to do things in a different way. and alternative way. you can join us if you want. but if he don't want to join us, a lot of people are going to follow us. i'm, you know, i'm thinking of the bricks and things like this where they are, there's a world beyond the west is a very long literature about this, actually. and so, you know, avoiding confrontation and looking for a more hum, harmonious way of moving forward. and again, you know, the last 70 years or, or been so turbulent. it's time to change your way of looking at the world. had gemini, is dangerous. multiple arity is the way forward. i think this is what the great

powers of china rusher saying go ahead, john. that's it. you're absolutely right. you know, that's exactly what's happening here. but you know, this is a scenario. so let's have a washington like it and, and is trying to, at least in the, in the global media was trying to show it as, as, as, as a, something else in a essentially, you know, this confrontation in the ukraine is somehow a frame as a adult between the democracy whoa and also a terry a woke up interest in a and i did a bit of speech just recently actually of moscow a few weeks ago about a holler i'm at my argument is that look and i look at all the countries, it's talk about middle east here, all the punches, who thought, you know, take a position on this, won't take up with you regarding the, the sanction thought is war unanimously. been there. the countries in the middle

east has taken a sanction approach towards russia. and these countries range from full democracy us as, for example, israel to monarchies such as the saudi arabia, farm, you know, how to religious countries, the secular countries, from washington's arch enemies, to walk his crows, his allies. and from all kinds of political spectrum, i think, you know, this, this, the right you, this the red chip or fog democracy against author returning to the zone is totally not since you my, well, you know, danny. i mean, you can think of the january 6 prisoners or hostages if you want to call them in the united states, not very democratic there. i mean, democracy is challenged within the united states alone exporting it to other countries. danny, what is the, the term rules based order mean to you? because i, i've been hearing this now for the entire biden ministration, and i can't get a straight answer. what does it mean? because when i listen to president, she i listen, are president potent, i understand what they want to do. non interference of other in other countries,

sovereignty respect, respect, collaborative, other countries. but then they thought when the rules based order, what is it mean to you? well, rose bass order is essentially code for u. s. lead order u. s. dominated world order. that's really all it is because the united states has trampled all over international law for more than 70 years since the end of world war 2. and the united states, even at this moment, is so open and blatantly u huber stickly, a arrogant about issues like the ukraine crisis, for example. where on the one hand, they say they respect ukraine sovereignty and on the other say they could never allow ukraine to a, to check on to or agree to a chinese lead proposal for peace. so really all the u. s. a is talking about when it talks about a rural space order is a u. s. dominate order. one, where the u. s. makes the rules in the u. s. and forces its own rules,

which generally means dominating other countries. these stabilizing entire regions and economically and politically. benefiting from these imperialistic ventures. you know, andy, i'm it, we listen to our salt and broke the head of nato. he's on the way out, but he has great ambitions for the, for the alliance going into the pacific now. but i thought nato was a defensive alliance. why does it need to go to on the other side of the world? what is it defending there? okay. i mean there's a double speak that keeps coming out of western cap. no, no, no, no, we're just offensive. we're defensive. you're well that, why are they have a string of bases around china in the south china sea? oh, it's called the south china sea because it's next a china right. go ahead, andy. i think there's a couple of interesting things going on with this peter. so 1st of all, we have to recognize that nato is really not as independent as it might want to

portray itself that the u. s. plays a very decisive role and the u. s. recognizes that just as it cannot compete with china fairly economically, that it has to resort to these kind of underhanded tactics to try to slow down china's development rather than improving itself. it also recognizes that it cannot engage in these military efforts to contain china on its own and has to marshal what resources it can. i think this is where we see nato coming into play here. but the other thing we have to recognize to, to come back to this idea of changes unseen in a century is that the original logic for nato was to keep germany down russia in the u. s. in. and i think there's a growing awareness in europe and in germany that should germany be kept down

forever. and that is it time for germany to take a greater role. and in fact, a reproach. mom with russia makes a lot of sense. and i know many german business people that it's very impolitic to say these things, but you know, they recognize the reality of we may be again witnessing and unraveling in a realignment here. ah, of, you know, that may see the end of nato. well, you know, john absolutely would. and he just said here, i mean that, that, and this is the whole point of this, this conflict in ukraine that was provoked by nato expansion after the illegal aku in a cabin 2014. i'm and then you have the suddenly, you know, the pipelines blow up here. well, everybody knows what, why that was done. and it was exactly for the reason that, and you decided is to break any kind of a strong relationship between germany and russia. well, they succeeded. okay. and the future of germany's economic base is in question

right now. without cheap energy, it's not going to be the power house of europe. ok. but, you know, when you see a hedge, a mom that is declining, we can see that it gets quite dangerous of being provoking a war and ukraine blowing up pipelines back in the international criminal court where they're not even a member of it. i mean, this is really reckless. i would be worried if i were you in beijing? well, notion that the nato is a defense organization is already one of the biggest jokes. obviously is not long. and when stano both talking a bow, i thought, well, when he was talking about, you know, a natal botanist were for in the asia pacific region. oh it's, it's about a war some to, oh, so every time you know, talking about security architecture. so called a security architecture that we secured, if i'm home yet to ask this question,

secret of them well, so immediately stood up a little bit and talking to antagonistic relationship with somebody. and that's my reward. so i think that we, we have to be as ancient here and i, i, i'm a firm believer that you know me. the angel matters from a judge of nato has no business in the, in the pacific region is no business in indiana, which has no business in the pacific ocean. so love, you know, this whole notion of, of, you know, security architecture, you know, they told us here in this region, it doesn't make sense at all. there was a last, in a, apparently, this is a direction that i think that net is gonna take on. and doesn't very bode well for the peace and prosperity of this region. that's very wars. so danny, we have 40 seconds left. he can finish it up for his i agree with what andy and john just said here were very, very dangerous times right now. 4540 seconds to you, danny shore. well,

the united states and collect the west are backing themselves further and further into a corner, the more aggressive they become toward russian, china's partnership, the more actually they bring them closer together. and furthermore, it's not as if russian china don't have strategic interests of their own, which necessitate cooperation and actually leave the united states and collect the west on the sidelines. and that's exactly why there's such a problem with this partnership from the united states. decide. that's right, because they don't have to be a suitor. they think that they're indispensable, are indispensable, that they are, and so necessary. no, they're not. and that's what we're finding out. they're not necessary. the west is not necessary for the world to move forward, and that has a very, very bitter pill for the west to swallow. gentlemen, that's all the time we have want to thank my guests in beijing and in new york, and want to thank our viewers for watching us here at our t. c, an exam. remember crosstalk rules ah ah,

ah ah, ah aah. in 1834 france invaded algeria, and straight away the french started inhabiting it to strengthen their position. the colonists known as p a. no ours took the best land from day one. the local population was put into an unequal position and was brutally exploited. this gauze

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

the french colonists are responsible for the deaths of one and a half 1000000 algerians. ah sanchez, i've been to a news for 30 years in 2 languages around the world. and here in the united states, i'm interviewed for president, founded a $1000000000.00 business. i believe it should be honest, direct and impactful. this is direct impact. ah, we sent this newscast with a name, seymour hersh. the reporter who wrote the very detailed story of how the caea, under the direction of the, by the administration blew up the nord stream pipelines. he has a new article out. it's called the cover up and to.