line several key points which lead to shape nato is the last page of other well known statements. the 1st thing that comes to mind is the quite from a speech by may 31st century. general mode is made to set that data. it was created to keep the soviet union out, the americans and, and the germans down that is under control. and if today we replaced germany with the european union, we'll see that the purpose of nature, the way it was designed 75 years ago, is not changed to told the story that sort of the american hedge human 8 a tool of subjects in europe to american military and political interest to the sites. do you think this is one of the reasons why donald trump skies everyone's so much, especially if the american political lead i'll to he said many times that the us should lead me to. so i suppose my question here is, how do you rate good shots is all the united states putting out the block? and secondly, how viable is this ever expanding allowance incognito, is internal defensive? i'm talking specifically about the us and to key

a here to effect its future. look at the bottom of the way. well, we diplomats deal with reality. and the reality is that nato has been around. it is still that apparently in the foreseeable future, the launch is going to stay the way it is now and the way it develops. we know, however, that the us is working now and creating glitches. the 2 adults in the way of any presidential decisions regarding it may take memberships of. that's one thing. another thing is that the americans, and that's not only trumpeting but also the americans who insist that the european allies increase the military spending. using this threats of putting out of nato to force your pains to, as trump puts it, pay more for security. looking at things realistically though it's an absurd situation. as of today, military budgets of nathan member states taken together and see 52 percent of the world's title. we're looking at $1.00 trillion, at least the european allies contribution is $450000000000.00 is $450.00 bailey and

is $7.00 to $8.00 times more than the military budget of the russian federation. plus, let's not forget that the usa is global, military presence is very expensive to maintain. so the americans have some 602700 military facilities scattered across the globe. they think domination in all regions and all potential phases of operation. if we subtract the money that is spent on defending europe, it's going to be much less than the $800000000000.00 bodies, the total amount of american military appropriations use. if a militarist circles come to power in america, in sites increase the military budget to one for the and then of course the european shit will be much lower compared to that to say. so regulation is big. take that 20 percent of military spending must go towards procuring new alma, but as of now you are paying the nato met the states make about 80 percent of that procurements abroad. and i was 60 percent of it comes from the us site. so if we crunch the numbers, we get some 100 billions, what the weapons of the europeans will have to buy from the us say,

who's going to give up such a profit? that's why i think that off to another round of such threats from washington to europeans, a going to pull the line and immediately fulfilled any orders coming from the us. capital safety already talked about 2 percent, not big enough. and 3 percent thing they decide number is the sort of military psychosis. they will continue to drive, and that psychosis will be very favorable to the americans to continue that policy of subjugating europe. and europe affords such huge contracts right now. we're still waiting for, it would seem that continuing to spend such results is on insane goals like confrontation with russia would be political suicide in the current situation. the fact is, the russian threatening se, sending in the minds of americans of western europeans, specifically those who make confrontation with russia. the basis of the foreign policy debate, the experience of the cold war as tall as estimate hostile policies combined with very hostile and frankly, military planning is an explosive mixture that were brief of the confrontation

ultimately lead to an alms race. we had to make colossal efforts to prevent escalation at that time. and it was the time when the west side political leaders of the calibrate, needed to make decisions. that would reverse the alarming trend. there's a so the fact that sooner or later western at least we'll have to explain to the societies why and how this money was, but quite the bike tank explains in of it system in order to have had more or less credible to that constituencies they will say yes, we did that to prevent russian from attacking us. russia would certainly have attacked us if we hadn't done that. that's the power adult. so the current situation is also the power adults of this manufacture. trend of demonizing. russia is unfortunately necessary for the survival of native himself. nature cannot exist without an external adversary. so all those who cons, imagine that security without nature, if i the rest of the be instruction from washington and elsewhere, primarily from the capitals of the baltic states. and also declared that they all

front line states that the in the line of fire, that they will be the 1st victims of russian aggression if it's not resisted. so they're the ones in charge, and that's a reality that we have to reckon with you of, you mentioned the cold war era, just going back to that period. how would you describe nature's policy during the time of those the us to saw and also to to deny zation existed? and is it fair to say that most gave the alliance of leadership any quotes for tucson? yes, a good is. if we talked about russia's, or rather, the soviet union policy at the time, moscow did not give any costs for consent on the country. most goes, policy in the post 4 years was focused on shaping a common european security architecture. several potential treaties were drafted and one of them was literally called the treaty on common european security. russia propose of the schemes, arms control instruments to solve the measures. rush insisted on solutions to the german questions that with united europe rather than divided. unfortunately,

the west was not willing when we talk about the beginning of the computation era decided exactly with the formation of the native block which divided europe into 2 camps. but as for the most hole packed, which the west blames with cement and the structure of confrontation that led to the cold war, the story was very different to us as all was long, reluctant to form alliances with these east european partners. again, we were proposing different ways of transforming your europe, composed of 2 opposing groups of states into a place of peace, corporation and prosperity. and again, the west would not have any dorsal pranks came into being when nature rejected us as of bid to join the law. and say, 1950 call. at the same time nature decide to accept the federal republic of germany as a member. in 1955 also packed was signed and the organization was board members for the interesting thing is that according to one of the final articles was or treat, the organization was created. i me folded, period of confrontation,

and also packed was to be terminated. as soon as a common european security architecture was in place, by the way, the protocol on the termination of the both of pack the so called prompt protocol, signed by the heads of the warsaw pact, states in 1991 explicitly said as the error of confrontation is ended, we, the heads of state have decided to terminate the most will pack. this piece in europe will now be established on the basis of common european approaches. you referenced the 1954 when the us saw showed some desire to join nato and recent history vitamin fusion, set the roster at some point have thoughts of joining the organization. why is it that the west was an interested in you? well, they showed no interest, of course, because the especially movie the us, as all, all the russian federation of nato was simply change the nature of this organization . and it would essentially become upon the european organization. it is the

instrument of collective security in europe. for this reason, by the way, it was actually directly written in the reply notes in the united states fronts in england, the soviet union was not accepted into this organization. there was some other things that might, we can be un to solve it. you need to know the, i'm to the club of democratic states cetera. but the main point was that it would change the nature of this ministry blog. so in that sense, nothing has changed. and if we talk about the full side of things, of course, russia, it's a new russia did not submit any actual bids, but the exports results of reason, the president vladimir foods and publicly shared with all of us, his memories of how this issue was discussed in talks with bill clinton and will be honest, it was in fact so i can say that there was such conversations in the community and the confidential talks between diplomats to the issue was present in one way or another. but 1st of all, it was clear from the reaction from the signals that we received from the capitals, the, the west would not go for it. and the 2nd thing to play the role was that it was

also said that even if russia had applied that would be no exemptions in terms of the admission procedures. this would mean following the membership action plan in the don't take controversial needs or standards. but the picture we say with some european countries joining the european unit is the same. they've been waiting in line for decades. the aims of being twisted different chapters being open and close . and it's clear that this approach would be absolutely unacceptable to russia. therefore, by from a formal and important point of view, as well as from a conceptual point of view. the issue could not be can say that if we threw back a little one history to 1991. we know that both of us impacts i'm the us, a saw seized to exist in not yet. but as you said, anya nate to needs an external enemy. it's simply once divide without it. right, so do you think that's the reason western countries didn't dissolve naturebox then in 91 to move the data,

it wasn't just old primarily because of the united states stocks. it's a foreign policy tool. they weren't ready to give out. that's the 1st reason. second, mate is true that often the most, all packed was dissolved, nato ended up being like a fish out of was that without as an opponent. and if nato had stopped expanding, eastwood's at that point, as was promised to be count. gorbachev, who would it defend itself against who would be its opponents? now that was germany would have to defend against potent hungry on the baltic states where it is obvious that nature's role would have been reduced to 0. in that case, with all the ensuing consequences for the year american airlines that i mentioned earlier, you to proposal to us here just continuing this topic of expansion. you absolutely correct to notice that there are countries that are waiting, standing in line to join the european union. but the same property comp you set about nature kind of because as we know in the 19 ninety's on to thousands, the built in actively moved eastwood in several ways. what was the goal of that?

and what effect at this expansion have on russia's interest when we have the future? well, as i said, the key goal was to keep nato as such. otherwise he had no chances of survival. by the way, this is what the president had been said. it'd be 1990 so they would know objective reasons to keep that as they would know these threats. this is why they needed that expansion to retain nato as the west instrument, the maintaining influence dominance, both in europe and globally. besides, they also are and ask themselves when is in the cold world, although this is not the case by any means. so the uni pulled out the cold war. that's why it ended, but they proclaimed themselves when is in the cold war. and the winter is always right. i remember speech by and just by rasmussen, for my date a secretary general already outside of that position, either speaking of the conference known as the brussels for him. about what is good about nature. first is the soul. so political legitimacy, why it said, because it's a club of somebody's democratic states and europe and the one all see if this is why nobody can question without the decisions they make and the actions that they

take. because democracy is always all about good things. and it goes over bad things. now the thing that makes nature better than other organizations is the fact that in any circumstances it is the lines that can outcome anybody else. so anyone who dislikes the 1st of the above statements will have to face the 2nd one, the results of that, the catastrophic interventions and all to well, the most important thing though, is this native way of thinking. they are allowed everything. what others are allowed, nothing. but even highlight to be significant interventions. what sort of international, legal and indeed, electrical judgments can be made regarding nature's operations in the 19 ninety's and to thousands. i'm talking specifically the endeavors and the former. you can solve the iraq dubious chemist on most of the many descriptions can be provided aggression, flagrant violations of international law. catastrophe,

humanitarian catastrophe. because if we look at the historical legacy of the lines, it concerns dismembered or devastated states. about the emergence of vol space is like a rock, libya, syria boss spaces, without any state control, which would become a refuge for extreme is a terrorism, where poverty destitution lack of everything a means of existence, prevails is millions of migrants and is millions of lost lives. and of course, the glazes example in this series is afghanistan. they stayed there for 14 years based on a year in security council resolution state disgrace when he left without being held accountable to view and security council leaving afghanistan. and they basically said that's it. we bought our hands with going, and now they continued as a bus is activities using afghanistan to create tension around the russian federation. you know, something under valley. i guess. speaking of nate to russia relations, what's your assessment of most goes in get age when with the 9th and the 9th

ninety's thousands was it as a constructive will start always the sense that the other side was how bring hostility, that there was some kind of hidden agenda that no more for what is coming up as an affair. yeah. but one could talk about the hidden agenda. i would like to point out something else. of course, the russian leadership at that time was faced with a difficult choice choice of how to organize its relations with nascent. by the way, the story i told you about the us as a applying for membership and fighting to keep your from being divided into blogs. that story. is there any way similar to the period you're asking about now? the ninety's, it was a very clear choice. we could either ignore de type, we could accept the fact that they exist. the european union exist along with a geopolitical military and political realities that come with it should not prevent us from trying to build a common european architecture. but as we build this coming europe in architecture, which is designed to minimize the important little tree blocks, it would hardly be reasonable to ignore them altogether. then we decided 1st of all,

to establish official relations. secondly, considering that the cold war was over and there was no longer any danger of confrontation between the blocks, but new threats and challenges were looming on the horizon. first of all, those relates to international terrorism and rush. it had to come the main victim of these international terrorism. we decided to look for ways to use the existing ministry potential and the possibilities. so from the to the dialogue that we talked about, the work of the nature of russia, permanent joint counsel. and then the nato, russia council, they what 3 main parts. first say it was the costs and monitoring of the security horizon by maintaining a political dialogue, discussing the problems and challenges that arise. second, there was the search but common ground and ways to join efforts. need times of coordinating some steps, but also in terms of implementing concrete projects, even conducting joint operations. the food i would say was the residual tasks, such as continuing to dismantle the legacy of the cold war building. understand in between the military's sharing military development plans,

holding joint exercises and so on and so forth. and what to a sudden extent, corporation, on the new threats and challenges was not very expensive, but it did not overlap with all working of the international organizations and provided added value in terms of security counter terrorism cooperation is one example of maritime, the search and rescue is another we created modules to rescue crews of submarines in distress. the anti terrorist component included the range of projects, the greatest strength and security, including by drawing on the lessons of september the 11th russian nato. as a bait and system was established. it was designed to share real time information about ad crompley, including commercial blades that did not follow ground commode, meaning that they may have been hijacked by terrace, and to compel them to lat george exercise. they were conducted over the black sea on the baltic sea together with part of the enter key of all these things works. uninstalled was a major focus since i've gotten some players, the threat to both national and social security. the primary challenge being drugs,

the largest project to trade anti narcotics, personal napkins complex stop and central asian countries was implemented within the framework. the russian nature cancel. a total of $4000.00 offices were trained full and context. all sort of the material and combat the capabilities of the after a national army, what reinforced, enabling it to independently control the situation in afghanistan. and there were a number of other projects including come back and i received your let me tell you about the last thing we did from this positive agenda. we developed a project and came pretty close to implementing it for the 1st day of a joint operation in the history. the russian and agent council is goal was to ensure safe destruction of the chemical weapons for move from syria. syria then joined the chemical weapons convention. they were transported to both the us the vessel k, right, which i contain to ship. that was to be anchored family in this specific area of the mediterranean sea and could not be moved during the disposal period. everyone understood that it was a very attractive target for terrorist organizations that needed to be protected.

so at the initiative of the leaders of nato countries on russia, we began planning this operation. we were in the midst of the planning process, planning of forces and rules of engagement. when you're in my dynamic state to happen to get nato abruptly castle and vege, the old cooperation with us. and this corporation like so many others, was left by the wayside of history, published by what's your view on the joining of sweden and finland, the latest nato additions is also to ensure nature's future and how like this impact the international situation over the summer. they say, well this has the most negative impact. firstly, speaking about the regional situation and all of the european and the politics. the region in terms of ministry, security, stability for among the most peaceful in europe. is that what are the phrase and complex no whole complex, no acute territorial disputes? well, not everything was for the result of situation well stable from

a military standpoint that we know issues administrator relations with the russian federation. when the bolting countries gained independence, i mean, when the baltic states with grunted independence by the us is all there was an issue with cleaning grad transit for military purposes. but it was result. there was no more military disputes. yes, we have serious problems in all bilateral relations with these countries. these problems were not military in nature, and they primarily concerned these situations, the russians and russian speaking people in the baltic states, the note citizenship phenomena is a disgrace to bottom democracy. the fact that such countries easily accepted into the european union and nato speaks volumes about the popularity of these 2 organizations. in reality, 2 political reasons, prevailed to neutral countries which enjoyed unquestionable authority in europe, sweden and finland admits a felon will always be associated with the helsinki final act. defendant had always been and at the full front,

nobody splits to create time europe and structures. they, along with sweet and then other than on the line, countries played a prominent role, the establishment, administrate transparency instruments. they served as a bridge between 2 blocks, allowing them to continue to come together to solve common problems. so they've turned away from this price. reason findings are rapidly increasing the administrate expenditures, purchasing american weapon rate. i mean time machinery is in motion, does all of this? so if you are paying interest was simply the interest of peace and security in this region. set the north, but it serves american interests and that's what matters most. and that's a, it's sweden and finland. they submitted the application on monday. they basically signed the agreement the very next day on tuesday. ukraine, on the other hand, has been waiting for almost 2 years and we still don't know to be accepted, it will be time bhutto. so i'd like to ask you relating to that. i mean, we know that a nature delegation visited ukraine on the 21st of march,

and was actually the 1st visit since the beginning of the conflict back in 2022. what does this long absence mean in your opinion? does nato still believe in the viability of the key of government? the ukraine is an instruments and they started to put it bluntly and straightforwardly. they took countries of waging a hybrid war against russia. a hybrid war consists of many elements. it includes 1st and foremost, informational and audiological aspects, demonizing russia and attributing also a militias plans to us. the latest spin has been that if the west surface any setbacks and you crate and brush it will definitely evade part of it and the baltic states. and then there's all the hysteria about the swanky gap claiming restroom bella roost will close it off to get a connection to come in and grab, invite the baltic states. and this will be the end of may 2nd, because nathan must always have the all behind it any situation and dictate it's times everyone. that's number one. number 2 is what's happening in the economic space. $15000.00 sanctions and the same is happening in all other areas. political

and military. ukraine is just a favorable where the proxy wars unfolding directly on the battlefield. it didn't start today. i remembered vividly the time when the might on was just beginning of that time nato countries might end the statement that you had a copy of it should never use for it to the own forces should remain in the barracks as soon as the victorious government came to pound key, if they was an onto a native language ton 190 degrees. they started talking about how each country has the right to use this on forces to defend against separatists, the web of the woods, separate as was to drop from their rhetoric. because that would mean nato acknowledge that the company to new crate was internal. they needed to position the conflict as you craze. roy gains, russia with russia thing labeled and aggressive country. unfortunately, that's what data is military policy and you crate looked like. so you cream was deliberately turned into an empty rush at projects, activity supporting pets. it's a long story. it's hard to say just how far they will go into support,

and it's clear that no one is planning to accept the crate or whatever remains of it. any way, however, the support provided by not only native but also the you countries as a long term horizon. for example, you funds allocated for you create support including the purchasing weapons and forming coalition to supply altered rate. i munition shelves, mon, protected vehicles. and so i won't have a plan to rise until 2027 civil plans exist within native frameworks. we thinking ways to continue training the ukraine, of course, as personnel. they will continue come from here to and target designation, recognizance communications and so on. and that's reality, but we know that they are already huge numbers of most reason. ukraine is one of us bonuses and offices, and whether all of them will be gradually and systematically eliminated as our forces advances strike ukrainian territory and brushes special military operation efforts. it is, you just pose this question about how fall will go in supporting ukraine. we know

that kia fritz pod is increasingly looking to drive native deeper and deeper into this conflict. i mean, only recently, we had the crating and forum going to stop pulling on nato to return to the practice of conducting training exercises in ukraine on deploying the pub basis. that wants to know, in your opinion, do you think that nato will feed his coons? and if so, what reaction can we expect from russia? very will continue to both of those, those bases will, but there was already a, a mandatory based when nature troops frames and that's a vessel. they say it's a completely legitimate target smokey's search. see, looking a bit broad uh, now beyond ukraine's food is, i mean, we're currently witnessing increased need to activity in the south. poke. so what's the main goal of the alliance in this region? and does watch so already have an understanding of what specific methods the

lights will try to use to achieve this goal for any money up front of me? absolutely, there is understanding, look at nature strategically, documents which the dates defined brush as it directs an immediate threat to the lines they've decided. russia is a direct and immediate threat to the lights. this idea was born in their minds. secondly, by some military construction and no nato activities, wherever they have a agent containing russia. and this time central asia and the south coast is also regions where russia needs to be contained. pressure can be contained primarily through the destruction of historical ties between russia and dog places. bottom is this containment is not any about ne, sorry, i told you about the us, the european union. another act is involved in this. they can tell you, brush it by preventing the strengthening of the ration economic unions preventing the strengthening of the collective security treaty organization. and preventing the strengthening of the shanghai cooperation organization arrive

a is about preventing you raise your news them. they don't want the ration region to be shaped as a region of peace, security and harmonies, and this is a nightmare for our opponents of the west. this is the trends that will likely prevail in the coming years. not because of our desire, but because the world is becoming multi problems and economic drivers, as one of the drivers of political influence is shifting as up to date tools. agent, particularly the your agent region, when trying to rush on a deer are present. the overarching task is to find a new fed balance of relations that would allow firstly to maintain peace and security and stability, and as well and to solve problems through political made. certainly it would create conditions for traits, ignore the interaction and prosperity for all the people sharing this off your ration regents. therefore, the global task lies precisely and preventing the formation of this. you ration unity to drive wages between russia and china to drive wages between russia in india as a drive, which is of course, between russia and these partners in the south coast is major. we've also seen,

you said that they see peace as some kind of nightmare, but how can not be, as they say over and over again, nato is the defense of alliance. so how does that fits in with these planes of being of a purely defensive nature sorta. unfortunately, the history of nato is the history of a port in a china shop to put it mildly because the things they have done in 1999, they bombed to states in the centre of europe that'd been attacked by international terrace. they bumped it for $78.00 days. they caused the tragedy in the rock and the tragedy in libya. the almost destroyed series and many of us like afghanistan, that's the history. so i don't know what they mean when they say it has to be successful. the 1st phase of the alliance as a source of confrontation, hostem division, they tow, as it is now, does not serve the goal of coleman. he repeated security, or even the interest sivitz. i remember the take

a fresh look around his life. kaleidoscopic isn't just a shifted reality distortion by power to do vision with no real opinions. pictures, design to simplify will confuse really once a better world. and is it just as a chosen few fractured images presented to this, but can you see through their illusion going underground can the,

[000:00:00;00] the liking in these mountains is certainly rewarding, but it takes a lot of energy and man, and my hungry. luckily, i'm in north a city where food is almost a 4th of religion were. recipes are handed down for generations without changes.

and this qualifies for being part of the unit sco world heritage intangible list. but again, the, the ukraine has become an outright terrorist states for 10 years. it has been terrorizing civilians, both within its own country and beyond its borders. russia is a top different about right. they're ripping into ukraine and it's west and sponsors, claiming they've all been too ready to turn a blind eye. the key abs atrocities of the data is chief insisting the pumping ukraine with more military aid as an investor and into the last. so the future and the security must goes full by invited to the alliance. that's key of simply being used as a tool in a proxy war against the russian federation. because i am a no, not the, as for the crane is an instrument. so now you start to put it bluntly and