anyone who for the russians is a hero, and eventually it's going to not at this moment, but perhaps in a few months, perhaps in a year. i won't be surprised if suddenly our leaders rest in b. this will suddenly be start saying that the nazi openly saying that, you know, the nazis were good guys because they were finding the russians because you know, the russians are, are evil. we must defeat them. but i know that sounds that the at this moment in time, you not tobar 3rd so who percentile stick with the crazy. but we've seen a lot of crazy things happen. i never thought in my life that my government would openly would provide so much military aid, so much money trip pro nazi regime. and i never thought that imaginable. so we have to expect that said, you know, the unimaginable from western regions. good, very good. that they're capable of anything at this point. uh well, the whole world is watching what's going on. thank you so much on barley for your insight into all of this is really interesting. right. we thank you very much for watching and about slight up of all stories and so far on this out,

get more details. i top of yeah, i a mike, what i see again the the hello welcome to worlds of part. there's an old legend victim soon as possible, part of bell them. if you want peace. prepare for war, which may be taken as a call to violence in some few minutes circles. but then it is also a plea for a ground. it responsible have link all 3. our team can be starting a war and is dynamics unable piece will discuss that. i'm now joined by young,

over of director of the people fund this transnational foundation for peace and future research. mr. o burke is great to talk to you again. thank you very much for your time. thank you very much. now, mr. over, we'll leave in a very interesting era when almost everybody has an opinion. and it's usually a very passionate one about the issues of war and peace. and it's usually that war is beyond comprehension. that is, it does not need to be comprehended. it only needs to be condemned and definitely needs to be started. it does not need to be understood for all the underlying reasons, and i wonder if these very passionately tactical, but perhaps not the very labor it stands is directly responsible for the preponderance of conflicts in the world. today. i think we make a distinction between violence and war on the one hand, on slicks, on the other media on people not to talk about, oh condemn, as you say,

warfare or, or the last to do last year or so with those 2 war sounds and cetera but what we do in the pieces of business is to look at the on the line conflicts, because that's where the key to solutions online. there's never a solution to a conflict on the b as in the battlefield, that has the door is on dynamics and at some point, you know, the poppies will be exhausted on one with we know whatever. but when we look at is and i get dr. diet most is what's on the line, the way we have a one year on there. and what are these, that, what is the issue that stands between the policy is and that's a fundamental important question because most people know the war and then they take it as an who is right. it was wrong. that's completely irrelevant thing to do . if you're a professional, you are,

what is the power of that sense at between the pod is want to use and they talk. so because violence comes when you call them, your complex is you're a tripping violence as essentially as a, as a product. as a consequence of the preexisting disagreements, but i think more and more we're seeing a violence or conflict being employed that's simply a means to achieving certain policy is not the ultimate result of the countries of size. exhausting all the possible methods. but simply as the 1st option of achieving what you want, don't just think that perhaps the paradigm of how nation space i using the war has changed in recent years. oh, absolutely. particularly in the last few years when the west is going down, relatively speaking, i'm getting more and more desperate. i'm not able to use the deep power, economic power, cultural talent, all the way. did they say in the 50s, sixties and seventies? what do you have left now the only thing the west of the united states has go to that is one that obese rather than anybody else. however,

that says they have lost all the war since we are now morally and in terms of international law and everything. but i think also what you see is a parasite like activity at all, what i call min max, the military, industrial media, academic complex, mean mac, where you have smalley, who have never been elected to do anything well, the right behind the screens behind the politicians beyond the limits i'm from the image is on the enemy is which later to make you know, more money for the military. so your mind where as international, no one that you encounter clearly say that violence should be the last resort. i'm article one stage. you shouldn't be stopping by peaceful means by law. that's what all countries a written, signed on, or on the you and drops the that totally by and i to get every one is my lighting

that today. and that's the. 1 system is that huge confirmation of change. now, speaking about the international system and i checked some fingers to view as i was preparing for this conversation. and according to the united nations of the out of 2022, for the 1st time in recorded history, the number of people forcibly displaced the reached 108000000 was over 35000000 refugees. and so we have a real just the ukranian conflict. we have unprecedented number of people suffering all around the world. you singled out a couple of factors that i think contributes to that. but more generally, what do you think is driving this? what's behind these ballooning number of both refugees and the internally displaced people, despite the fact that, you know, as he said, the west seems to have lost many wars. but if keeps pressing the same strategy forward,

you would see it this way that the world's priorities that would be totally perverse for the, the case is still getting worse. the, the, the, the resources available for, let's say, for peace, for development, for human rights. for when you, when i would call good an important objects to goal is to achieve including the un uh, sure thing. i'm gonna go and program, etc. i'm way smaller than what the well, this country's been on the mandatory if you take the united nations, i think it has something like $10000000000.00 for, for whatever it does a while you handle them to sound $1000000000.00 wasted on military if you could. and i could say, well, that is a valuable investment because the world is moving towards piece beyond living and with mitchell understanding fasting. beyond that is that was true. i would not say

that they surpass thing, but the thing is we've never was never spent as much military on be as secure as it is now, and it's not ukraine is on a on all of the places you find is if you don't these on the stand the every single self, right in person in ukraine, you know, said because it is the taxes my heart, but it's a small company in that respect, compared with what the united states and nato comes as have done since $911.00. for instance, we're talking about millions of people being killed and that is something we have to talk about. why do we accept citizens that those priorities that each of our government suspended on limited sums it seems on the military that has never proved to make pays or make the whole well system better? because we all are doing all these things to start over. and i are very passionately agree with you and disagree with you at the same time because i don't

like these generalization. i think there are a number of countries, for example, even, you know, old rivals like saudi arabia and that iran, that i'm moving away from this happening, it's rivalry. and that's putting piece and development. it had all my, you know, i download, you go or religious disagreements, you know, there are other countries like, uh, lets say armenian turkey, also exploring ways all for doing it diplomatically settling the disagreement diplomatically. and i would argue that the russia for a number of years has tried to negotiate. it's a very essential disagreements when both nato and ukraine in both space has done that before the active phase of this conflict. and it says that there were several of the rounds of negotiations in yeah, we have the same dynamic here. it's as if every new more that the west launch is, is like it happens it without any previous context. it's as if people have

forgotten about the we be a, they forgotten about syria. they forgotten about vietnam, erupt, etc. what explains in your view, these collective? i'm an agent on the past on the part of the western public, because we are aware of all the conflicts that have been bought around the world. and we are aware of what is you know, of the suffering that's my country's causing to people in ukraine. i'm ready to accept that fully and i have relatives in your brain, but it seems that when it comes to the, whereas it always has like some sort of a blank slate when it comes to every new conflict, i think is a very much to do with the fact that you know, the west is kind of leader. i mean, if you're number one in the system, which i think united states still think that it is, then you teach, you don't mind this, this arrogance of power becomes worse and worse over time. that's one thing. the other thing, of course, is maybe that contribution to say,

but for me was been and just type of academic research on piece and conflict is used of the was owns most of my the boy and realized i must say, i don't think it's possible any more to understand western security defense policy with rational liberty co theory is concepts. it's is now moved into the re, all of the irrational emotional is calculus. the same thing. i mean, through everything nato stays on his homepage. there is no more. and now let's see, is that there is a past due which about your country about china being the new big slab on the boils down to. it's just that because it's different from us. so you invent, of course, a threat to you because if you don't have a threat psychologically you cannot argue that tax pay should keep on

throwing money into the militarist activities, such as well as a new weapon system. such a new one, you know, as more on that military, industrial media, academic complex, excuse, lots of countries, your kind of fee to china, to you, right. and saudi arabia that you mentioned, everybody was always driving forces outside the control of democratic decision making. that's exactly what an item, how is it? we have a military industrial complex that is beyond democratic control and it's dangerous . it will be all the american society and its resources and create a ticket. this is a very interesting course. there are lots of pos for a moment. we have to take a short break material returns about after a few seconds the station, the

the, [000:00:00;00] the welcome back to world support with john over the director of the people funded transnational foundation for peace and future research. mr. over and before the break you, you mentioned this issue of the arrogance of power, and i don't remember who said it but or one of the analysts. i are respect to the law. he says in the united states has indeed exceptional in being able to strike

with impunity anywhere around the world as having unparalleled secures advantage. because no other country used to be at least like that, no other country with striking directly. but as you mentioned, the military costs are rising up and they're rising up not only in the united states, but i think what distinguishes obvious aside is from america, is that of a society that actually investing into themselves. look at china and look at the russian look even at the ron and saudi arabia, they're actually pushing resources into building material life. uh, you know, public sector for, for the people. but i think of the united states all the advantages in terms of lifestyle. they've had, it is losing it quickly. when do you seeing these dynamic of the arrogance of power that is totally neglecting its own people while killing people overseas? when do you think it will catch up with the people within the west collectively?

oh, there's no doubt in my mind that you don't have to be a moral philosopher to know that the more power you have, the more capital and i'm believe it should be. now if you don't have that moral spiritual, whatever that mention to the fact that you have military where you can only go political and cultural power, it will go wrong. and that's a typical in decatur on. when empires go down, they get to be, they get impossible to manage or extended as you say, they know legitimacy in the eyes of others. they militarized themselves to death, and they don't adapt to the changing world around them. they think they can bully like that. that's always the old man who's on his best, but can believe the rest of the world. and i'm trying to is a wonderful example of the way of thinking defensive thinking. apart from the nuclear weapons defensive thinking in the sense that we have a right to rise on how a system that is not the same as the west. and that is,

of course, in contrast to russia, a much larger if you will, challenge to the western world or the us dominated impaired of the system. that this somebody who has invested in social economic development list is over a 100000000 people like you revaluate product during watching. i mean, this is just to make the case of the things are going on and i'm saying it all those mining because it's so obvious what was happening. i predicted these 40 years ago. i said when the soviet union falls, its brother in the west will fall unless it does something else such as closing down a top and creating homeland security. ready in your i wrote that in 1981, and i don't understand why people can't see that those changes in the big world is now for us to adapt to try instead of trying to control. because the wasted not only wasn't the 60 the well, they won't have to be too philosophical and. 8 and but the old, the great powers,

the thrush, or trying to have that period of great humiliation trying to have a center of simulation. we, the russian goals or they are tumbled by a very bitter one. and back in the early 9. tonight is a, maybe it's time for the united states to, to do the same. but the thing that concerns me is the, again, the militarization uh, aspect of it. because it seems that the united states is not going to go without the applied and is prepared to set up the claims all over the world to do what? because i mean, as you mentioned the, the system is running out of steam, its not sustainable. not only is moral terms, but in practical terms, nobody wants to be within that system anymore. even the american closest allies. what do you think this people are actually trying to achieve the decision makers in washington? what are they after? because no matter how you look at that, it's not possible in practical terms,

nothing ethical ones, but in practical ones, i think it's very much a matter of. ready seeing inside the books, they don't understand the world anymore. and of course i don't think it is about spelling on impressions, views, etc. that can challenge those. you have yourself. and then of course, as, as you are going to get, can get it very dangerous at some point because the goal of decision makers and they to around washington, browser, washington are of the very least that we cannot make mistakes. and we have made no mistakes on your right, but more and more of the rest of the world is turning away from the west. the best everybody in the world can do is to walk on 2 legs. and if you asked me the befriend the relationship with the us, but keep it up but they don't internalize it. don't attack it. don't do things to help it go down with grace on this work with all the others. i mean,

if you call shape or form policy in your, which won't come to lex a i, m b, u, nature, u. s. leg and the rest of the leg is intellect. truly not deciding to survive as a system in my view. but what i, what i argue with these days is that we live in the khaki stock receive. it's only kind of his doctors, he means a government by the least stable and the least good people that seem to be moved on re books. people don't have a license, people do not ask for any consultancy from people will disagree with them so they will learn something new. that's why you associated with the west. well, that's why people like i said, totally marginalized, never used by the way media we just was twinges of years ago. so this is, there's only one that ritual. so on that so most dangerous thing. not only for the world that could lead to a new plan weapons way to be used. we know that, but it's very dangerous for the west itself. everything the united states and might be the same. it was atlas because i've never been an american. it is self

destructive that the united states is getting weak and you just look at, you know, the re, 9000 budget and the white telephone, the america, so that they can prove it. china from a convention or something new in the field. and now they surpassed the united states and they do this at the time. and again, yeah, everybody in this industry, on the supply that has the right to be themselves, including nations. if you're defined, if you see the threat to your existence, if you characterize it as somebody or somebody else is right to development, then it's, it's a lost cause because it's a, he is actually also a very, to tell the tire in claim a if you ask me, you know, can we ship gears a little bit because e, right? there's something very interesting that i want to argue with. you suggested that it was must do away with the concept of re, i'll pull a tick. uh, because in your view it's anything but a realistic and it's a,

it's an interesting proposition. to me please, because i think when we have in your brain is the class between a manufacturing perception advanced by the west. we talked about that and a battle hardened re out. she pursued by russia. and it would seem to me that if uh more countries were to adopt re, i'll pull it take approach like russia does, for example, the world would be a safer place. don't you think like that, of course, the whole thing as you, when i, when define reality, i do it in a more, let's say. so you're basically like in a way it is seeing the world as nation states as a national security, over a common security regional security. mobile security is maximizing one's own interest in some cases, to the detriment of others is

a warranty to military means when things get tough, you know, those kinds of things in mind. you and that's how i define adoption without long explanations. it's something that has to go in reality, it has brought us to where we are now. and that is the most dangerous situations at 1940 high. that's the way. so it's main gate, for instance, you know, you have western and i would say russian and chinese leaders was on a, do not think necessarily in the terms 1st on non violent, concrete resolution and column security. well, the, because, as you know, when the soviet union collapsed to russia and china had over, i think, 8000 territorial disputes. and these 2 countries painstaking me negotiated all of them to the point. very sure, we now have the longest border with china and we can afford to be shipped from the border and ship richard the west when we are dealing with ukraine because there is a trust this relationship,

a win win relationship. and the recognition by both countries that in the longer term, it's far more beneficial for them to, you know, have that container over relationship that argue over many school things. one do think stands in the way of the united states or the west adopting the same approach . that sure are you with your interest 1st, but at least you can have before side understanding that if you put your adversary down, then if you will come back to her to i'm sure what i mean to say is that civilian concrete, resolution mediation, the reconciliation forgives nest un order peace keeping strong un compared with national organizations and military all week, or that's why i say we all apologies not, not the right way to go. if you ask me what we need to do in this world, and i read an issue,

johns and go about the future peace system of the world in chinese. china investments are the only ones who are interested in global piece thinking today really the journey is that we reduce violence everywhere, violence against nature of violence, against each other, violence. the games cultures. man's violence against women on the bottom is between actors addressed. as i said in the beginning, what stands between us because they will always be complex and then is, be the marriage is a work place. any conflicts are lovely, we should, we should accept and celebrate our differences because that makes the world reach on that what you find down from the trees and know how to use toolboxes, whether there's something else but a hammer in it. you see what i mean? it's, it's, it's this whole thing that, that makes me believe that reality is dangerous for us all. and i don't know a country that has a ministry. oh, pete's. i don't know. anybody who tries to come out to know what piece and comment

was allusion is, but we have tons of military expertise. we have legal expertise, our political addition to what more weapons than less, whether you can take the whole palm and they loggins', we old apologies, least to minute from left to right offshore. i mean, you know, this is a real college exemption that i think most go nobody talks about finding a negotiated solution on, on the, by the way, not you grind it, russia, complaint, but the nature of russia that plays up and you prime because that's what it is i think that the goal for all humanity to survive is to read you files, content violence and do something else. and the only possible i tell you as a huge box for that, the institutes around the world which deals with a design limit. and similarly in civilized concrete resolution, these data beating each other absolutely. can i ask him or something about the cost like so you spoke with her passionately about it and i happened to study psychology

on the side and including a couple of counseling and the indeed within a couple come counseling is consider the calls like these is the only way of developing, you know, you address your disagreements, your voice, your disagreements. honestly, you are trying to address them by bringing them to the cost of the store, negotiating table. but there is one very important clause in a to our calls like this, that both sides consider themselves to be equal. that means that you have your twos . i have my truth and we are not seeing each other as you know, like a shining speed. you on a human, this parting we're wisdom to, you know, the rest of the people living somewhere down there valley. do you think the west will ever, on a moral ethical, psychological, philosophical level, except that it's on par with everybody else that everybody else russians, chinese, lot in americans, africans, whatever. we are old people on. we are entitled to own vision of the world in peace and humanity just as much as the people in the west are wonderful question again.

thank you. yes, i believe that's possible. i think the west, if you mean the u. s. natal system will have to go, it will go when the empire has crumbled or decline to become less important and they will be, we think the width is good enough for intelligence model and culture it enough to really say its own policies. but at the moment you have somebody to run say, to say, don't say just go do. and as long as you have those leaders, there is not much help. but in my view, that's not necessarily going to take a few more years. what do you and i don't know sitting here talking about it is where the western m r u. s. m. i. and they told me to go down with them. but what i think is possible that there's one reason that i would side with us skepticism that is christianity as a, as a co allow you know, that's part of your country and oh god present. oh we have, we have to west of this. don't go back with, you know, the wisdom system in china. we just completed the room at these 2 brothers,

if you will, mocks and adam smith, extra caricature a little bit is, is a built on the idea on mission. the thing we want to make somebody else a little bit, my gosh, or if they don't do it, you know, with the bible, we come with a sword that's not in the bodies and what confusion is all the other isn't. so if we could learn from others, like they have learned from us, human, a humanity dialogue about how to create unit teen diversity. i'm song conflict with much less violence. make made, you know, a real nobel peace prize. the more for those who built down the wrong is so something like inviting the, the, the, the confidence building mission. i take a little step and invite you to take a little bit down, was also from the, from the high levels of weapons. and of course, we can do

a why we don't spend 50 years of my life on this. i think these things i do believe is possible. is it possible? whereas what we do now is not possible in the long run. well, mr. over at our time is up. thank you very much for being with us today. my right. thanks a lot. and thank you for watching hope to syria again. and was a part of the, the, the, [000:00:00;00]

the, [000:00:00;00] the, the outrage spills over from my hazy, an activist in human rights defenders who say un resolution to send the us back to k, me a lady to national many to can take interest the will bring nothing but pain and visionary to people we create in president metamucil lensky publicly on those yet another not see a lie. while western media attempts to wipe, watch the reputation of the people to flags loyalty to adulthood. at the jazz

ministry anita say the will examine and all jerry and mediation that has locals to