a summer acceptance and i'm here to plan with you whatever you do, you do not watch my new show. seriously. why watch something that's so different. several opinions that he won't get anywhere else. welcome to please or do you have the state department c. i a weapons bankers, multi $1000000000.00 corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead. i changed and whatever you do, don't want my show state main street because i'm probably going to make you uncomfortable. my show is called stretching time, but again, you probably don't wanna watch it because it might just change the way you the the hello and welcome to cross hawk were all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle,

nato. it's a peculiar organization. it claims to be defensive military lines, but at the same time, claims it must constantly expand. add to this the alliance is quite to project stability. in reality, it projects instability and in security and made russia, its primary enemy, the processing, the upcoming nato summit. i'm joined by my guest nichol. i petro in kingston. he is a professor of political science at the university of rhode island in portland, we haven't been ripped. he is a freelance journalist and in london we cross over the income mackenzie. he is a visiting lecturer at the law school of the university of westminster. are a gentleman crossed off girls in effect, that means you can jump any time you want. and i always appreciate nichol. i let me go to you. first of, you know, there's been a lot of, uh, there was a lot of talk about the ukraine. so got counter offensive. and now there's a whole lot of talk about the upcoming summit and build this of the nato summit,

of course. and, but it's quite peculiar and yeah, and i'm going to use that word. there seems to be a lot of double talk and it's explaining what's going to happen there when nothing really much is going to happen. they're, they're going to throw a few bones the to the ukrainians and other than that, and there's no membership in the cards may be, and no membership ever in the future. what are your thoughts as somebody to is approaching right. i think the game is lowering expectations for ukraine. i think a senior polish official and just said not to expect too much. but on the other hand, sometimes it turns out the united states to manage is through the whole coersion and other on so on. pressure is to pull a rabbit out of the had it the last minute. this has happened before when it's been

able to sell its own objectives in a way that seems appealing to others and then uh, hide from them of their, their long term implications. so i'm, i'm still very wary about what this upcoming nato summit might lead to. well, yeah, they didn't let me go to you in london. i think nikolai, as usual, is spot on here and i'm, but what's interesting is i the rabbits. it'd be cool. it could be pulled out of a hat, wouldn't be really about your cream. it would be about russia, and this is what this is all about. go ahead and wanted. yes, that's absolutely correct. so then i agree with the last the comment that so that then you can call really expect more than the, the usual they will just simply be giving them a more promise of loans and have your nation wide in the meeting. so i'm the

ukrainian societies being the, you know, it's being disruptive and it's, it's, it's disruptive. it's a disruptive, a saying, as i think uh, there's no question of the ukraine become being a member because they simply do don't fulfill any of the criteria for the so whole map. so as you said, beads are, it is about so old about russia or even at the expense of the absence obliteration of the crate and as they should states and the, the, you know, the actual degradation of, um, uh, european society and, and, and european security too because that's not being addressed here, and we've actually create more in security because you will have a revisionist, so ukraine, i haven't, i mean, there's not a whole lot of logic involved in this here. those that want to push to give exceptions to ukraine to get into the alliance. well then there is

a pay in europe and more, i mean, who in their right mind wants that go ahead and portland i think that everybody kind of has to play a game where they all want to pretend that they wanted just for, for our purposes. but no, i don't think anyone actually particularly wants to start a war in europe. i mean if they wanted to do that, they've had ample opportunity and they haven't done it. so i could see. ready maybe even sending in some volunteers or something like that, but i don't think it's going to be any ukraine's definitely not going to join nato . no. been. and they've made that quite clear. okay, well let's go back to nikolai and in kingston. and then what is the long term implications here? because, you know, it is a nato consent talk all it wants about the future membership of ukraine. but that's the red line for russia. and that's why we have this conflict. and so, you know, it's almost kind of an echo chamber and it may tell land, okay,

because the no matter what comes out to build this, the russians have already made their position clear. and they're not going to budge from at least there's no evidence of it go ahead. nikolai, the whole lies, not in the current leadership, political leadership in nato countries, but in their successors. there are interesting movements of support, particularly in germany, with the rise of alternative parties to prominence that are very much skeptical of nato expansion. and the phrase is already been the use of forever wars that are going to be a burden specifically to german tax payers. and i think as germany goes, so if, if the conservative right wing in germany does come to power and sticks to its skeptical agenda of on,

on german foreign policy and 6 to reverse that. then i think we will show more courage along the same lines displayed in france and italy, which is basically their right wing parties have, have caved to the nato agenda. correct? yeah, well you, i'm sorry, i'm going to have to throw your own words back at you. i mean, you as a lot of coercive power. i don't think it will allow that to happen. i think maybe i think with nato and has to worry about is colored revolutions instigated by washington. if they don't stay in line, me guys go back to our guest in, in london it's, it's very interesting the term forever war has already been brought up here. and that is, i think, really what's at play here. the mounted states doesn't want ukraine in nato, and of course it doesn't, because then it would take on obligations. but the, the status quote works for washington, just fine. they have no legal obligation, so security obligation, so to protect you, crane. but a good it'll,

it'll look like russia on the behalf of an update to, i mean, it's a perfect scenario for washington. go ahead and london. yes, it's a, it's a terrible situation and i sealed it. so obviously a brochure is holding fast to it. it's, it's always is and they can only get more line since the previous piece over the years have been um, thrown out to the window. uh, best of luck to be a product. and obviously, um, show the records of the signed agreements. and so if russia wakes, it's out and i think the ukraine is on, it's the dog which is being systematically tragically destroyed. and america is just going to find a way of a band. and you, great, it's done that before to the south, vietnamese. the stomach too, because of the guns. and that is also the unfortunate so afraid that the remains

for, for ukraine. yeah. but that as i, i agree with our previous guess of the logic here. but this complex has been turned into an ex essential conflict. okay. the u. s. last in afghanistan. last and the rack last of in libya, it'd be good and it had no real collateral damage. this is a very different thing. this is the do or, you know, i mean stilton berg. i've given it, extending his term here. is it said recently in the last week or so, but this is all about china now. okay. i mean, this is ex, essential, it's not just a proxy war halfway around the world in, in developing countries. go ahead and portland, well landed in this case. i mean, they've had this in planning for so long. you know, the, the profit asians against ukraine. go back all the way to the 1940s. it was when they, i believe it was the british you 1st made contact with the o. u in, in 1944 and they've supported the members sense. so i think this one's kind of a,

a bigger deal for them was 88 of waste like libya and syria. you can just kind of, you know, throw some things out there and if it doesn't work out, you just leave put ukraine. they've been so invested for so long. but i think it's hard for them to pull out if there's weight. well, i agree here, nikolai, i mean it's all about the rules based order. it's about a european values. it's about barrels garden, i mean, they've invested a lot in this. okay. and, and it was a craven choice. i mean, the ukraine has nothing to do with european security, certainly that american security, they have chosen to do this nikolai and that. but so let me say, 1st, 1st of all, that every war and that america america seeks to fight and sales to

its public is an existential war. as gattis, dad was a war also for all the same values. and i don't think, although we're trying very hard, we haven't quite reached the level of commitment, the resources that we, we spent, and they've got us down over more than 20 years. so these things, these, these uh bouts of uh, of imperialism which is a recurring thing in american foreign policy. continue and, and we'll recur, but uh, at the end of the tunnel i see the promise of realism, realism being simply a recognition of the facts on the ground. and when they click away, i find if i can interrupt you, do you think victorian, do you think victoria knew in things that way? and i think victoria newland is not a permanent component of the foreign policy establishment. everyone's time

is off at some point. and this particular bout with imperial expansion will have a lot of, i think a long i don't, i hope lasting. um, because a recuperation there will be sort of the hang over effect from this. i hope will be more dramatic than it has been for it again. well, nickel, i'm going to talk about that in the 2nd half of the program gentlemen, we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on the upcoming natal summit stays with r t the

a highly the let's see the with the temperature is pre degree higher already from the neighboring down woods. you know, right? because i big down ships having chucked up the trees back in tucker in the name of development. and he's our 1st to become a capital like a single we are all going to your organization just covering all the degrees we've gone. so when you distract nature,

it takes every range of the take a fresh look around. there's a life kaleidoscopic, isn't just a shifted reality distortion, by how of tired vision with no real opinions pictures designed to simplify will confuse really once a better wills, and is it just as a chosen few fractured images presented as 1st? can you see through their illusion going underground? can the welcome x across. ok, we're all things are considered. i'm peter in the mail to mind you were discussing the upcoming nato summit.

the okay, let's go back to our guests in england and they, inc, i, i'm sure you came across the article by john mearsheimer um, titled the darkness ahead where the ukraine wore is heading. and it's a fascinating piece, a piece of writing and, and, and, and it's a big picture which everybody really wants to understand. and he get his conclusions. i widely respect his work. but then he, there's one element here that i think could be we could have almost like an endless discussion about and is conclusion that this could end up in some kind of frozen conflict, which i find that really kind of fascinating people mentioned the, the co korean poet peninsula, as an example i, it doesn't work for me because all of the major powers bought into, or frozen complet ruskie is not going to do that. your thoughts go ahead in london?

yeah, i think uh for sure that this is the only, so that's a name. so has all the windows be considered a strategic to feed for nato? nato has a really big ego. i mean, when it comes to russia, oh, they have a superior already complex here. can they compromise it? this is something that nichol i was trying to bring up. keep going in london. well, the big, big, big, big cat in a sense and they will try and sell it because of victory. i mean, we haven't had much about syria, which was an example of, of frozen conflict. but the us is still occupying a part of syria and it's imposing a terrible sanctions on it. so i would tend to agree with the, the point of view, let's russia will not find a frozen conflict, the acceptable that in goals and elements of, of the agreements and russia and has led through be to experience. so one broken promise to another, you know, going back to the probably so not,

not one mortgage east was for late. so up to the recent uh, mexico. busy busy the it'd be a frustrating to the agreement we've visit. so let's be a government last year. so that fortunately, i don't see it as being the goal shades of the set, but i don't see certain members of bait. so even want seeing that the site is fine with that, you know, unfortunately the, the present leadership they've been told and apparently english. so roland was the mon skis portion of that. so they just come trimming, should not to hate russia more than they love products. and so i think russia is going to talk to times as see, that's terms on the go straight to with some sort of remnants of our, of our you, craig, in a really well robin's in the box also is the evidence. i mean it's our even mentioned the minutes cuz process which was

a fraud on the western side. the major players have been admitted. it's okay. um, so i mean, if we're gonna talk about some kind of frozen conflict, i mean, that's nonsensical because then they'll just take that time to build up capacity and start the war over again. i mean, i don't, i didn't understand the logic. i wish i could talk to mirror so i'm really like, don't understand that part of this piece is go ahead and, and yeah, i mean, and we're convinced it was they didn't even try there. there wasn't ever really any real desire to implement that. the ridiculous thing is, if you look back at it, how willing russia has actually been to make a deal on all this had they have made the deal that the order is johnson kill diabetes brochure was actually willing to give up. wait a lot in that deal of what they have that we did. and so as the war goes on, their position is only going to get worse and worse and worse and worse. because

obviously the ukrainians can actually dislodge the russian army from where they're at. and so the longer the way the worst cities negotiations are going to get nikolai, it's very interesting if we look at what the, what was negotiated in this stem bull. it's fascinating. zalinski was asked to give up what he didn't have. i mean, it's remarkable. he didn't have the don bass, he didn't have the crime in. he was asked to give up what he didn't have. and now we're looking at, we are nicholas as well. the bottom line for me is that the outcome of the negotiations will be set by the scituate, the military situation on the ground. and right now everyone is still jockeying for position as this has been going on for a long time. you're beginning to read things about how in, in american newspapers,

how zalinski is, is recognizing that he may not be able to achieve victory. and all these accounts, these narratives are setting up the various constituencies in the west to make concessions, whether they want to or not. because once the counter offensive, assuming it, it runs its course and is ultimately unsuccessful. at that point, all the cards are in russia's hands and the decision will have to be taken on rush aside to advance or just stop. and at that point it becomes an imperative for the west. you negotiate this, go back to our guest and one to do by that. because the way i look at it is here is that we and it's already been mentioned on our program here is, has been a lot, but a lot of lies and deceit here. the russians, i think, well,

unilaterally decide when it's over your thoughts. well that's, that's my minus thinking there as well. i think um, they have no problem, so to speak, to the go shake with. and they are surrounded by um, trying to intransigence. it seems to me that's um they have to go on out to um, re claim um uh, whatever is left of the declare, the independent down best regions. they might give us pause or data and they will have to then be confronted if need. so then besides to uh, sending the police troops officially, which would be a disaster for everybody, but so i don't see uh this, um, as i see, does it say any point, you know, you know, going back to a previous point that, that, that, that was made but at some point, this is one of these last that too much for the west. the amount of money being

hauled into ukraine, the expense of the defeat will no longer be able to be uh, to be covered up. and that is when courageous people in politics and academia monitor population will need to come forward and really get rid of it's not just about me to renew it. and it's about people who shared the same ideology as a really need to be a focus on, in the public disclose in the united states. and they really need to be gotten rid of. yeah, i, i've been, i the people that, um i dance guy was i talking about. they don't exist. okay. they've been marginalized, they've been cancelled, and they're all potent puppets. okay. i wish we could wish that was a track, but i don't see it because so much hubris is on the line right now. again, this is, you know, they, they did this to themselves. they ratio themselves into this. go ahead in portland . yeah, i mean, and if you look at the history of the people that are involved here it's, it's,

it's hard because you will get to bite. and i mean, he has had a long career in american politics at this point. and at this point, he has been pro war every time he's been pro war with every what he was pro vietnam. he was pro and you can swaby a i rack in afghanistan, where as much as creation is anybody else is i still remember him sitting at the table next to george w bush saying that saddam had weapons of mass destruction 45 minutes away from being launched and so how do you negotiate with this man? how do i need to go say any, but how do you negotiate with this mentality of this world view, this ideology, that's the problem. you, nikolai, we're rapidly running out of time. but you always have a word of optimism. mean you've already kind of touched upon it. i mean, you talked about realism here. i wish we could have realism here,

because you know what, europe and russia are neighbors and they're going to be neighbors for a very long time to come, go ahead, nickel. i'm there will. there is an establishment. there is a deep state, but there is also, there are also alternatives to them that keep springing up and those will not go away either. i'm not, i don't know when or if they will try them. but certainly their voices are becoming more and more heard. a bye bye all i think, and that's a that is a reason for optimism in the long run. okay, well, i mean, what is the long run here? because, i mean, can you do say, what do you see the west accepting russian security interest? i mean, that's what this is all about. i mean, the russians, it's all black and white. it was on december 17th. the, you know, the months before the complex, i mean, everybody knows what russia wants, can they, can they accepted, denying it all the way they will effectively accept it. okay. okay,

let's go to one. did you buy that? do you think that they could? i mean this is eating so much cro. okay. this is not at a site. it's not a rock. it's not libya, it's different. go ahead in london. i think they'll, they'll, they'll, they'll try and sell it. so as a fig tree, whatever happens um, but uh, i kind of see rush a bunch in the deal columns like streamline tries agenda along with the american exceptionally since the military industry still pop tried for made something with china, another dangerous adventure, but they will try and divert attention from your brain ultimate. okay, so what looks to be a certainty for you. okay, ever. we have one. we have one minute left. so this i, i have the solution for the neo cons and the victoria new ones of the worm. how to get out of this and it goes something like it's, well, it least the russians didn't make their paris. we won. that's what they're going to

do. go ahead and portland. yeah, i mean, i'm sure that they'll come up with some sort of a scenario that the americans are very good at that they still like to say that they want in vietnam to you know, we killed so many more of them. that means we won the war, but, you know, they'll, they'll just come up with something. i'm sure either that or they'll just started another war similar else. that's what they usually do. well, it, it's very interesting because these are leads that you are easily entertainment into intangible to in the west. the may seem to be more apt to creating problems and solving any problems over the last 50 years or so gentlemen. that's all the time we have a want to thank my guest in portland kingsley and in london. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at our to see you next time. remember across cycles the,

the which i thought there were some openings to us, the slow that are sounds good right now. let you and they thought clearing the spotlight to push the little thing until the, if the is that i, that's a get a minute come other students need, which is easy to so in the community is us as a central material, which is the monument. i'm willing id like to lock up the again, this is all about which will screw well in the middle of something in the widget presidents and not limited results between you and they will just deal with a solution for sure. and i'm comfortable to that much which, which insidiously september, they process the

in the, in the year of 1954, the united states of america engaged in warfare against the people of vietnam. the white house supported the corrupt public governments of southern vietnam. 1965 americans began their invasion following the aim to defeat the forces of vietnamese patriots. defend the gun was confident that the victory would be on the american

side, due to its military superiority. however, the vietnamese, during this war into total hail for the occupants. unable to cope with a guerrillas, the american army started blanket bombing alongside using chemical weapons and naples, which burnt all alive. the village of my lay, where he 1969 american soldiers killed 504 civilians, including 210 children, became a tragic symbol of this war. all and all. during the whole period of this conflict, the usa dropped on vietnam more than $6000000.00 tons of bonds, which is 2 and a half times as much as on germany during the 2nd world war. in 1973, the american army under the pressure of the rebels, withdrew from vietnam, and only 2 years later did the pop and regime. and so i got involved. however,

the vietnamese paid a high price for their freedom. more than 1000000 in vietnamese people became the victims of america in the dressers the, the, the, the headlights on off the international testified. whitehouse is points to dispatch deadly flesh still forms to ukraine, munitions that germany is against sending foul nato maintains a neutral stock. radioactive water is set to be pumped off the coast of japan as to china cups down on sea food in boats. all those details are outside the company. we are not in the manner in which a lot of other countries are they have already model economic objectives. india is

foreign minister is on a full day.