of the that's are up for now, but for the latest breaking news, head over to r t dot com. and stay tuned for worlds of part discussing the inevitable clash of civilizations. next, don't go far the, the welcome to world so far as being able to see the next step that others may have or will you fund to mentally different from your own was was considered

a benchmark of psychological maturity, which is evident, be lacking in contemporary for and affairs with the west and earlier assumptions that economic development would do. wave of your political differences now approval in the wrong is a class of great powers. inevitable will to discuss that. i'm now joined by you being a senior fellow at the russian studies center of the east china normal university and senior fellow or bishop hi, association of american studies. dr. you, it's great to talk to you. thank you very much for your time. thank you for having me here. now let me start with an issue that is very close to my heart on my home. this is a conflict in your brain. and uh, you are here in your article that these vast and b, or is of the russian chinese alliance, greatly exaggerated the beijing is taking a distinct, fully neutral position. but do you think the chinese of the americans define

neutrality in similar terms? uh well uh no, i think the west uh, sees as a sort of like a allies making, at least, you know, and so elements over there. but this has the my opinion. ready that this final russian strategically relationship is by large a normal relationship is normal because is the result of the 2 extreme relationship that the child has the day. so union and the roster has gone. so i've gone through from the the, the honeymoon allies of the 1950s to the estimates of 30 years. ready during the months of the cold war, so it's a russian, china, i've gone through that to extreme and, and the normalization you've done to me my was a turning point. the 2 large countries trying to normal relationship in which both

are independent, large powers and actually independent civilizations. what i like about your framing over an argument is that they are clearly show that this kind of a framework allows for genuine cooperation for finding areas of mutual benefit, but also least space with genuine disagreements. and for example, in the case of ukraine, china understands the rest of the security and sensibilities, but it clearly is not approving. all rushes shows and warm of action and rush, he's not asking for its approval if the rest, his own responsibility versus own decision. but again, i want to bring as uh, back to that to the americans, because uh they feature permanently in the ukrainian conflict and for them is either you are with us or your against us. and i wonder if uh, china is neutrality. the way of seen in china in the way,

who would describe it in your articles would be inevitably proceed as, as defined by the americans. yes, uh the, the united states and the west of particular the us policies. they do not accept anything in the middle. so as you frame it is a be with us, oregon as this as being less than policy towards international politics and major power policies ever since the end of the cold war. if you recall back to 20 some years ago, i actually visit the exact 20 years ago when the united states start taking bait about seeing baby rack on the pretext of weapons of mass destruction, which is the fate of the present boost policy, is to be with us ok so, but if the world to still remember or the west, still remember a large power twice, you paid a different approach the what, the french, the germans,

the russians and the chinese they disagree with the us and the british policy or the english speaking countries policy and they want to take a new interest and they were not convinced, but they were told to be with us or against us. so this is the continuation of the offer. i would say the u. s. policy to do with regard to the kinds of chinese metering position. i would say it's not kind of like goodness, like like a pure. ready front of the china does have its own view above the rights of law or would contribute to this. but chinese position is impartial, is try to uh, see how much the conflict can be stopped. uh, the escalated and the civilian cache with the b, but you know, avoid that as much as possible, which is good for both parties. of course is not just to stop fighting,

but chinese are looking for a loan last the stay a be in the continues, you know, security framework in your which is good for your, for the word too. but the books are you a, i'm sure you're with a grid with me that uh beyond this particular conflict between russian military forces and western a that uh, ukraine forces. there is the largest struggle going on. and it's a struggle for the future of the international system. for the future design of the international system and whether it continues to be so unipolar with the united states, calling all the shots are regardless of the possible consequences, or whether it's going to be more balanced or perhaps even more democratic. would you say that in that bigger struggle china is also a neutral to so i would not use the neutrality for that kind of i think a china of 2 large exchange a line. ready is oh,

do you agree with russia even before the. ready queen prizes that the work need to be. ready or the democratic, which is different from the democracy if only for such and domestic system in a way that good there, there is a trend towards more of a multi polar system. if people want to use it. well, some people like a rigid horse of us a, you know, cause a foreign relations, isn't the non clarity world of, but that is, is not necessary. agreed by some old, many in the united states. i think of the, this, the future work order is, uh, you know, unclear, actually even before the launch of the bosses special military operation, ukraine. there was a debate which last for several years about the weather, the so called to the doors international order is failing or has failed and whole

cost it so. so to the west of the academia and the policy circles at the base. it's for several years about the, the decline of the west. i think the, the war you will create actually was a major development was something new at the but we are, you aren't charged to the war 1st right now before we go deeper. uh, in discussing historical and political matters, i want to ask you, and i'm not sure it's been a political question because, you know, there has well been an assumption in the united states, the particular about china. but not only about china, the china develops the if it becomes stronger economically, it would be more like the united states. and what i think the americans meant by that is that they would be subservient to, to the united states. that they would accept the american way of live, the american rules, the americans still cope leadership. what have you, i'm trying to is not the only country that have gone through that. look at church,

you look at the rational looking for a single that many northwestern countries have gone through some sort of western eyes ation, without changing the intrinsic, political, social, and cultural nature. and i wonder how do you explain to yourself and to your audience this, mary, to believe that simply because the countries will get richer for some reason they will change the national south, would you to be in the age of the americans? this is very a fun question. ready i think good there's, there's a totally different take of the rice of china uh, between uh, you know, the western general and the us, particularly, i think is a growing friends in the united states to see trying us rise as a threat. but that the trying to survive has never gone ever since the, in the cold war peoplesoft argue with the rice of china. and sure is to be there

are 2 schools of thought. one is trying to come this argument to try know, according to some of these are not the many, oh will the class like to find most of the unit because it's not a good system. and the other argument, or the other extreme, is if the china, china is read in the cost of the child does not collapse, china must read others. so these are 2 extreme views of china, which has been going on for several decades. but the problem is, in the real world, there are seldom, you know. i mean, there are things that black and white in nature, but the western approach to anything internal, personal, interpersonal, or interstate relationship is one of the black and white realities. there are many, many states of, of different colors, different states,

and other chinese to also be approach to the issue is the, you know, if we're different we can work together. this is the confucius notion that the unity of the differences. ready harmony of the differences, the west approaches of the same is because we are the same. you are like us, you are bundling your cultural, social, and religious economics heritage in order to be like us and you know, why should i ask, what is it so attractive about the american way of life? i mean, look at the visit to race. look at this suicide race looking to raise something for incarceration. i mean, the american society is not would have used to be, why do we even have to aspire to be like that? um, i mean, there's nothing appealing picture. oh, i see. i see you pointed to another side of the, the debate that is what it costs all those problems inside the west, the in general, like the advice of populism even before the russian hill. so for us this time and,

and the rice of dun. ready trump. ready the far right extreme list forces and the sort of things to what extent as it relates to the rice of china. you can blame lots of things on others, but there are limits how far you can solve your own problem is i think one of the major problem is the for international older which actually promotes the legal capital. this legalize capitalism to look for the markets of cheap labor and profitability, but the end of the book depriving western american in. ready a real jobs, so this is the, the, the, the capitalism in the world. so there's real problem lies the, the how to redistribute the wealth, busy per capita is actually received from this globalization. so the internal re, distribution mechanism has a lot to do with occurrence

a problem in the united states. you mentioned the capital a system which uh, you know, it's almost an anathema in the west to criticize it, but it's still intrinsically unfair. and this, even, i mean, anyone who can look at your fingers, it's impossible to deny that it's uh, in, in the crunch shape or form. it's highly detrimental to the american themselves. now i know you have an expertise in american studies. how do you explain to yourself the mary comes on know, demanding more from their system that they are eager. it's you or the fad? this the victrola about thruster, about china, about the wrong, about all the nations that yeah. how there actually is a we will, but uh they do not actually look and ask more from the leaders. is very, very good. the question and the thank you that you don't mind by personal opinion days. i think of china actually until. ready a certain extent, russell to,

you know, both russia and china became useful to you. you became the friends of the west at the end of the cold works, even before the end of the soviet union of the world actually calling to present roman region. and george w bush was a new international older, already several years before the end of the soviet union, which is the large b a i believe it's a personal, some southern access will be a soviet leaders. so the, at the end of the cold were the international, the actually you heads up occupied a very vintage position and both russian time, i'll actually try to, to certain degree of emulates adoptive certain aspects of what's. but what happens later was, was totally different. i mean, present actually it was let them use were pro west and he tried to use the drawing natal. uh, trying to, uh try to, i mean like,

learn from the west. maybe trying to become with them to good students, the west and become such a i would say a staples successful or model. so the rice of time, low cost to hunter's psychological of really issues. ready for the west to handle quote, to explain because you cannot explain to, to, to, to the west and the nurse that the rice of china, which is a lesson around west and even white. none of the barrel. okay. can be successful. so a must be a no savings things from us. so this is the kind of a property between, but it's a very symmetrical perception between united states and china. i think the, you speaking by based imagery, we have to take a very short break right now. but we will be back, i promise, we will get back to this conversation in just a few moments back in the

so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy even foundation, let it be an arms race is often very dramatic. only personally, i'm going to resist, i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very unclear to get a time time to sit down and talk the the

the welcome back to all the parts with you being a senior fellow at the russian study center of the east china normal university and senior fellow edition high association of american studies. just to you just before i called you all before the break. you were talking about the fact that this, the necessity to make something dangerous out of china. and perhaps, to some extent out, the russian, all the countries rises up uh from the fact that china has been able to, you know, diligently learn the american lesson and to apply the best way to quit,

to its own soil. and at least millions people are of people out of poverty. richard continues to do not only in china, but also and many other countries. what would argue that the united states could do the same thing? i mean, like they're still the most powerful country in the world. and rather than trying to fight against history and sort of, you know, holding to this uh, escaping uh, uni polarity, they could, you know, use that and then they just position the, you know, go along with the slow. why do you think they're trying to buy a history rather than trying to harness that? it's um, it's a big issue. i think good. the conception of history is very different in the united states. and there are lots of good scholars, scholars like good, you know, oh, slash politicians,

the strategist like george canon replacing it or, or even uh, you know, i mean your summer of. ready chicago, uh they, they, they do scholars, they see that this is a historical trend, i would say, realist. and they treated the international politics so very different from the current. so unfortunately, the realist or most of the marginalized. uh, let me give you one kind of like a example uh back to uh, the clinton times, not, i believe, 1997 when natal expenses started. george came and published article in new york time and saying that because the west is a fatal mistake of the faithful mistake to let me quote, expending rachel. would it be the most fateful error of american policy in the entire post cold war era?

or george ken, this view was even more because you leave the twins that the mr. you believe even joins, you know, prosperity and doing clarity and, and profit i mean is. so this is the kind of like a long term view of history. was even more and also to get back to you a question about the issue of the street. i talked about at the end of the cold war, both russia and china with friends of the west ending nice stays. even after the september, eli was called president bush 1st, immediately after the a september attack. it was present this number to, to call you to provide support. it was trying his present, jones. i mean, even i got to point 20 you nice. you start to re focus on major power politics, which was george

a george bush strategy is campaign rhetoric. but september 11th. you real with that? but it was rush. it was trying to try to help you guys by the way, but the, the one because i think it's actually a fundamental issue because i think both russian china and a bolster reading about it. there's 2 countries that have managed to develop a kind of relationship that doesn't confine each other a 1000 and put the, you know, strict preconditions on that relationship. you're either with me or you're against me and you know, trying to get it can have its own views on uh, rushes action and ukraine pressure can have its own use on china's actions or whatever. but they can respect each other enough on the human and national level not to preach and not to give each other lectures through united states is different, it sees no, uh here. i mean, no, no other country or the, you know, worthy of the same respect as the united states. and the question,

my question to you would be here. i know you believe in principal neutrality, but the americans having picks up a fight with russia. i think i'm now picking up the fight with china as well, and the pressure on china accelerates not only in terms of uh, discuss functions, but also how military health, what type one would have, you know, that many provocation do you think that kind of principles, neutrality would serve china well in the face of ever more, not just the storage of but ever more rest if united states can you actually deter a bully by being principled in such a way? um, these are 2 from trying these perspectives, the ukraine conflict and the plywood issue are different issues. your client is one of the at least between to see radically independent states which means the sovereignty issue. but it was nice as being regarded by not only

the chinese but also. ready the united states to as an issue of trying one china issues, there's only one kind of the us official policy despite a much as to being a scale back these days. so so the trying these things to display these are different, but the china sees that the, you know, the, the, the pipelines will become far more challenging. the conflict, the prospect full country is, is, is rising. and this very difficulties is made to give him more difficult now to scale back to step back. so i think the danger is, is rising, but i think i, it looks like both sides do not. you know, the us side try to reinterpret title one issue one way or another. but the question is. ready how much time it can maintain this, you would follow to you, let's use the word neutrality. i would say, this is precisely that the issue,

the rising tension from united states to force china to choose sides and precise of this moment. chinese believe it is time when you and the birth rate of the your conflict to promote peace, to propose the chinese version of the piece. uh, you know, a solution. and of course the chinese have been talking about many of those points in the past year. multiple times, and this is a very comprehensive prose, and it's not just about your pre conflict. it's about the european security system and above the world system. so it has time and china is in the vintage position or different position or unique position. unlike those who directly or indirectly participated and to to, you know, find a different approach as close. the alternative is not to pop out to have peace arrangement, to continue to fight. what's the point. so the times really,

once we reinforce this, a position offer, you know, a principle that neutrality, regardless of tie, what you don't say you, i am sorry about that. and that has been centuries long chinese position. you know, this contemplative, distancing the principle of non extra weight. we all know about that and to be appreciated briefly. and i thing in this world where you know, uh, rush action, how has cost the many midway himself, uh, desks and refugees. this is a high, highly valuable and very balancing approach. again, i'm having said that, i know the chinese bully ease. uh that time is on your side, but i you should have been married cuz will allow you to avail of that time because the very thing, bill, the authorized military a for ukraine, you know, that authorized military age would tie one as well. i'm showing you can a, i know that there are legal differences between the 2 cases,

but the main participant, there is still the same, the united states that wants to cause trouble and open the own back yard, but rather i don't is your insured as diction on our borders, so again, my question is the same, do you think the americans will allow china to keep that position of this does the trial, which is my own point. so you know, this is just my personal view is i think a certain institution. so individuals there in terms of similar transition into an ice, these are driving the situation towards more conflict. you or even the show down with a china, which is essentially try to squeeze the strategic space off of china and russia to . but the reason why the chinese do push for the piece piece of resolution is not just i do listed it as practical purposes. let me give you

a couple of quick reasons. if you think russian relation with the west in, in your, what, what was kind of is a conflict. but if you look at how russia and china and settled their older problem, there secured a problem at a more or less the same time when they will start to expand in the west. it was released as with the eastern partners, including china, all the, those central agents, they've actually been totally different, a mode of confidence building negotiations by last so high uh, you know, publish organizations. these are the same issue of the post. so with the space how to handle that, there are 2 radically different examples. the chinese peaceful, no push for peace resolution actually has its own examples and evolving russia. so if you say russia is the, the blame for everything. but russian has settled this religion with china in the

east, and this is something that the world seem to even though i and the chinese rush has developed the framework mechanism for both sides of the just their national interest in, on the pragmatics of bases. so this is the example of china want to drive to, let's close. uh, the time this proposal is largely you can reject or you can or by the nice, but it's not reject by, by a complaint by your crane by a bustle and even to your pins to someone must start with this. again, your problem to pop is not to talk and why people die and respected to the front of life. this is very much like 19616. this is really the term i coined the, the 1960 moment in the recent article. and i think this is a, a turning point and trying to actually is not the wrong. many other countries, i probably believe the india would have come up with something outside the inductor . don't tell you, we have to leave it there because our time is up. thank you very much for being

with us today. thank you very much. and thank you for watching you hope to hear again when it was a part of the the the,

the, the russian capital once again comes under a ukrainian drone attack. hitting the same building in moscow city international business center, which was struck 2 days ago. as the ukranian president claim to western support for caps, more efforts are never enough. the us senate blocks and investigation into how ukraine is actually spending billions of dollars of american taxpayer money and malia and burkina faso announced any intervention against new jersey, new leadership amounts to a declaration of war that does the economic community of west african states imposes sanctions against the country, the.