social sciences, but as a superior is great to talk to you. thank you very much for your time. thank you. thank you very much. now i heard you say that the ease decision to support i, ukraine was emotional rather than rational. and i wonder what's underneath those emotions, is it ultimately and you quit about ukraine and what's best for you cream? or is it more about europe and its own issues? well i, when i wrote that it was an emotional decision i, i was focusing on to the fact that, of course, i'm very id of the war now in europe. i will that vries a lot of emotions. i was not critical on the say most should what i wrote also was the fact that the a see the motion would asked to be balanced by 2 strategic analysis of what was happening and that exactly what you didn't do

and he's still not doing it. we know, and we understand that this war is a war of attrition. miss. considerably human and material cost on both side end or so most important. see now, is 1st her to try to achieve a cease fire and to try to achieve it kind of resume, her blade gleaming between both sides. can i stop you here, because here you're talking on both sides, and i'm sure you know that this conflict is in, in russia, is not a war between moscow and kia, but rather as a conflict that involves many sides. and it's essentially from us that miss a proxy war between our russia and the west. so when you talk about reconciliation and peace talks, what, what powers that you're talking about in a conflict,

you have both of you have 2 side. oh, each side could be of course, divided into a different bots. bert, a conflict is basically something which japan between 2 sides and or insert ukrainian side. i am talking not just of ukraine, but also of countries which are supporting you crate. nevertheless, there is a problem of decision making, an easer ah ukraine as steel, its own decision making to decision to either agree on the cease fire or too often. a discussions with russia will be

a ukrainian decision or ukraine as no more. it's ability her to make a decision in xander, a decision east to be made by country which support ukraine. the problem is that these countries of seed at many, jo tie that the decision would be a ukrainian decision. so we're, it says series and you are right, a to point to the problem. nevertheless, i need a kind of decision making. and i think that by adopting a much more resume able thinking about as is conflict. say you need to united states, hulu as opened or more choice and more room to maneuver of

for the government of ukraine. now, professor spirit, let me come back to your point about the ease supporting your crane for emotional or other irrational reasons. i don't have any studies to support that, but into, to me, i think there is a strong correlation between the ears. all internal problems are beads, death issue or bureaucratic hurdles and its support for they ante russian or pro western pro e u a rotation. it's almost like ukraine's westward orientation is being used as a psycho prop to allay the ease own cell doubt or its own structural difficulties. and i've seen this trend all the way since the early to, to 1000 tans, but definitely saw in 20122013. do you think there's any truth to that? well, r as e, you, as such,

was probably not existent in 2014. you at countries part of the you, germany strong, great britain, nicer there, which was a part of the u. m. in these countries have different agendas now, or it is also a fact that some european bureaucrats not are, you know, as a council or of members, but some in europe and bureaucrats. i've seen in events happening in ukraine as my down and all these kind of uprising um they have seen something extremely important for the european ideas and they have bashed and of course it is well known and as ease bureaucrats came to the

my then demonstrations bed ah, the real decision making force in the you were still, i am the council of the head of the state, the prime minister president, until 4th, m. n. a z ross, no commitment. no real commitment of the issue in support of suit. quinn bird, quite general commitment that we all have little great service or, you know, responding to flattery. now, can i ask you something about russia because russia was never historically, at least, and in the recent times as well, was never antithetical to our europe. we also idolized in western europe for quite some time, not only after the cold warmer they went before that, probably when we were not as psycho frantic as the ukrainians. but there was a great degree of reverie and fascination with western europe resolve. you are a mineral reaches

a very cheap crisis. why do you think it was never reciprocated? and why do you think this amity towards russia is so strong because it's one thing to criticize rush or disagree with its policy, but to portrayed in terms as you know, the ultimate evil. and this is what we're hearing now from many european leaders. this is something very surprising to us, despite all this long history of wars between russia and european countries. as matter of fact, a relationship between russia and that you are ever been constantly or biased by relationship with russia and count trees of the you. this is not the same sing you had a french russia relationship. chairman of russia, a relationship, even a good britain, aggression. ok. the problem was that by 2040

of relevance of this bilateral relationship was certainly stronger than it was now. an awe. now you add the cause of this emotional reaction, a kind off m commitment of the e u as a wall on a distant policy. and of course, zis, policy is extremely and violently anti russia. that is of us. you can still hear in government of country member of the u, storm discarding voice. and so the real problem is the fact that nobody knows what is you. is it just an audience of entries and zahn, ah, you had to lead these countries decide. but of

a position before having an issue or easy is you a kind of fiddling rishon with all the countries being like state in the united states, you know, and it, when you are coping with the united states policy and what are what seeing as a governor of california, oh, or of new mexico? does it matter with all due respect to these voices of reason or the european union is supplying arms against my country and people of my country soldiers of my country being killed. and by the way, not only of russia, but also ukraine, this war is being prolong, thanks to the supply of weapons from across europe. and more than that, we're hearing official leaders of europe supporting the war against russia until the end, whatever that and mean and they're in defining is in very crusade like terms and

very ontological terms. it's a battle against an ultimate evil. do you think the, you have the resources and the minds, the heart of the treasure and the soldier is the skills, the capacity to win that war against russia. because if history is anything to go by, you know, such efforts by various western countries didn't really and both was bode well for them in the past at least. well, um, if we looked into this issue clearly, so you as a not ability be it industrial or military on to wager war or to support as a kind of law which is which now in ukraine, that's absolutely clear. and as a stock of ammunition as being considerably depleted. are i saying that in germany it's less than 2 days a far?

probably the same in from all serbs, some mid it with our even thing. we would just have just one the of ammunition left . okay. bet are some main problem is that at no one is really admitting that the city's is a very, very important problem. and this is why i said, are at one time or another at some sees far and some agreement will have to be reach. and that it is lot result able to make a commitment on to a highly an ontological or position like to say on ukraine, ease. i am human hell for goodness. and as they have all the sovereignty, we know that it will not be the case. and actually we had an exam and historical

example, a war between finland and the soviet union boss in 9040. and in 9044 is a finland. these government acknowledged the fact that it's a cost of $4.00. so human coastal floor was much too high and decided to negotiate with soviet unit in accepting a some loss of to retrieve i frontier watching. i think your opponents will tell you that the new government of finland has since abandoned this kind of logic. but let's return to this very topic after a very short break. we will be back in just a few moments. stay tuned. ah oh

ah ah, i am rick sanchez and i am 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. look of it please. if you have the state department, the c, i a weapons makers, multi 1000000 dollar corporations, to your fax 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 way things

ah welcome back to one of the course with shark disappeared director of the school for advanced studies in the social sciences in paris. but has this appeared before the break, you were talking about the neutrality and the conscious deliberate calculated decision on the part of the post war authorities and finland the to choose what's best for its own country and to treat neutrality and security as you know, as actual matters of policy, but i think the problem with the european union is what some russian scientists call value. radicalization or even value fundamentalism, because no moral quote other than a european or western world code is accepted. and i think that's one of the reasons

why russia, china, and you know, everybody else who disagrees with the west are treated as, you know, ultimate axis of evil. what can possibly change that. and what do you see as the, in the root cause of this phenomenon? when, you know, i'm the only source of goodness and wisdom, and if you disagree with me down to your on my eternal enemy. well, i see that we have to retreat from 0 value. fundamentally, it's absolutely up through and i think that we will retreat just because we don't have the ability to support decree for very long in the war as it is found right now. and i think that, oh, so, so important turning point one b, or when ukraine weez launch is famed counter offensive. they're talking of that the 4 weeks even for mans. okay. just admit, said the,

it's our lodgings east count offensive. it fail. so then one, what are the you as nadia ability to support ukraine any more the united states as no more the ability to support ukraine. so more so if we are understanding exec, as you can pension of the united states are more and more attracted by china and by the problem of taiwan. so at one time or another, i think it will happen during the summer, at one time of another. ah, we have to retreat from value fundamentally and all in government in chief will have also to retreat and to tell the population. yes, we see that we will have a victory against russia. we coolant. we need to negotiate and began this

fancy term and strategic autonomy that french president the youth so proudly after his a visit to china. now he immediately after using it, i got some reprimand from across the ocean. and in general, i think the french leader has a reputation of her, you know, talking too much and doing, and not translating that exactly in policy terms. let's put a diplomatic limit. do you think that was sort of an expression of microns own ambition and inkling wasn't all about his personality? or do you see that as a potential within our french policy? can france be the one who will sort of, could it feed down and say that, you know, we are going to be a nation that stands for its own national interest and for europe's interests are independent of what our american allies want us to do?

well, ah, there is certainly a personal dimensions or even declaration made by president macro. and well, we have to lead that on to side because much could be said about as a person of the own personalities of macro. what is true is that there is still in france a strong feeling that or interest i'll not the same then once of the united states, even if they're not in conflict necessarily. but they're not asleep on that, even or interest on not necessarily to see that german interest and they're at one point or another. we need to, but full war or own national interest. after that, how could we do that? well, this is a discussion still going on as it is a discussion also,

still going in germany and indifferent other european countries because earn some people are in europe, have understood that us national interest and not the same that interest of european countries and even r o and the european union, so at one time, at one time, zis divergence of interest will appear clear early. okay, when it, when it happened, professor said here, what would you strategic? a tony, me mean in practical terms, given that you have several economic ties with russia. you are about to sever or minimize economic ties with china under the pressure from the united states. you have a mounting load of own internal economic political migration problems. can europe

stand on its own? can continue to exist without some powerful nation to lean on be the united states or somebody else. yes, there is some willingness to achieve these strategic autonomy. some politicians are understanding that this strategy autonomy is necessary if we ward, zed european countries and the european union will survive that ho. woolsey is blue, missouri as this is also something we still don't know. i will also edible, by publish sizing too much says positions. i put it on my call as probably under mine. it is a very idy because i, you know, as a lady general the girl as an an expiration and said, well, ah,

it is not shouting you rob your rob, you rob. ah, ally. goods are on her on a table that you will make sink to advance quite frequently on this very important, but also very difficult issue of strategic autonomy. it's better to quit, to keep quiet, end to make some decisions. the problem is that even if there is a kind of general agreement that some kind of strategic autonomy is needed for her europe, the re steel or launch a difference and may be conflict between countries like fraud, germany, italy, spain. so we will have 1st a to find a kind of agreement on these conflicts before we call hack. n z says,

you know, it's a critical point on a to z, european union decision making. that said he, if we need 1st to have these kind of discussion between us before it being able to move forward on a so world and until now i'm so i of course, all decision making will be slow, painful. ah, not exactly clear for other countries and you know, it is not just, it's a problem, a fresher, it also is a problem of china and may be also the problem of united states. can i ask you one last question because our time is running out, but it's a fascinating one to me because a few years ago, you were lecturing a lot about the strengths of institutions and the importance of fascination, institutions within the m, as in a successful economic as system,

the capitalist system, that is, and the assumption was that the western europe has great institutions. russia has also institutions. but if we look at the way russia has been able to pull itself together in both in the face of sanctions and in the face of this military operation with its huge financial logistical military are supply demands. do you think that was actually an accurate assumption? because a, it seems to me in the rush as long more efficient in facing this difficult times than europe has ever been in the recent history well on russia as quite of usually effective institutions may be not, ah, effective open or formal institutions may be avi, sometimes or institutions be heinz occurs to the still zeal

z or institutions and ers, a problem. now in europe insert, we have blurred institutions because, or understanding even of europeans, an institution is not a same. ah, spanish government is not giving the same between nations of arm. europe an institution sent a german government or the french government. this is also part of the problem, but i seeing that informal institutions in russia, i've been particularly strong. so it's probably you're highlighting it a very important difference between our russians and reconsider sells to be europeans. and let's say wasn't euro, because for, for you, it's all about definitions. you're arguing about asset concepts. and for as the most important thing is worth worth, what works in reality, man, much war reality. mays, yes, but

a informal institution called were and frequently called work, or in the short earth into short term, better than formal institution, burtons or log it important to formalize what as been shaped in formal and this is where pretty easily were, ah, russian economy also, russian society as a problem because it has a very, very long traditions. you know, i'm a booming to sit salaries to. busy or a situation, but even under soviet union, you head this divergence between official institutions. and it is the good been behind the curtain. and we knows that institution behind the curtain was frequently more important than formal a institutions. it is more less the same situation. of course, a rush is,

is no more, is it a soviet union? it's a totally different situation. but in this, you know, m in zayus are situation of formal and informal institutions. yes, i think that russia is still very embedded into zayus or id that informal institutions are working more effectively up seeing more efficiently working for us. i agree with you. we are on there and different on the 2 very different sides of the spectrum because you're putting all the value on formality and look where it led to your own union. i mean and destroy it. something that the, the european union is falling apart because of a very formalized attitude to itself, but preferences appear, we're out of time. it's been a fascinating conversation. thank you very much for that. thank you very much. and

thank you for watching hope to hear again on the well the part with . mm ah, look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such order that conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. the point obviously, is to create trust rather than fear a various job with artificial intelligence. real summoning

with a robot most protective phone existence with name man wasn't sure which for me. so you know this, it's via credit card. no blessed sauce that we shouldn't be the should use a groom this, but i'm not. that was on the left in the one on the desktop or joseph. this alex is launching and i was unable to be almost in my human center to remove that you're going to continue listening to the airport. so it's just purely serious and it's supposed to be

for us dollars a day on i box, which i put in a sickly in a little boys. even lynch 6 going out of the 6. get me to assist the images as i say on the reason i ask you is, i'm sure political man, i said a lot to us on the saw the english and medicare. not so much so much. nathan saw to see about should be, is a, you know, the run up the year after they were, there is a note on a promise she's planning on running away and help me the the

ah, by thing intensifies in so done as cold for a sci fi are ignored on the evacuation of foreign citizens from the country gather space. also this our model is in disarray as to how to launch attacks using car bombs, killing at 10 and entering bills and in the state. police are detained. a seek separatist organization leader after more than a month long months with this sunday, and that means it's the weekly hill, not international. my name is peter scott here with some of the top stories from the week just on thanks for joining us. we begin this.