the, the conversation was very useful. we not only listened but also heard each other. and i have reason to believe that the american side has begun to better understand our position. russia and the us hold the 1st high level meeting in years, touching on everything from improving ties to the war when you break the diplomacy ultimately is based on tax based on commitments that are kept w. i've got a gauge and praises the talks as a high and the huge live forward say that the permanent peas is the only acceptable ends to the ukraine complex. and while key of itself was that they told a lot of these, the last key was on his own diplomatic to end this time, touching down and took here and attempting to drum up support the united states. as

discussing with russia the ultimatum that pollutants set at the beginning of the full scale war, i wonder if we didn't accept such ultimatums that the most difficult moment. why are we likely to do with now the now we're continuing our coverage of the latest trends shifting the world right now . this is all ready to national. i have michael question. not a lot. what longmont forks, 5 level delegations of russia and the united states of fug, down on the same table for the 1st time in more than 3 years. moscow stop by describe the mouth on for our session as a positive step forward. i'll go to deals at the beginning of our conversation. this is marco rubio particularly emphasized the fundamental importance of each country being guided by its national interest in international relations. and we

fully agreed with this was that these national interest of course, will not always coincide, understood, but when they do not coincide with it, it is very important to regulate these discrepancies. so that's not to let them slide, look at that and especially not to provoke a military or any other kind of confrontation will script you from the so much. so the conversation was very useful on thought. so we not only listened but also heard each other who, you know, and i have reason to believe that the american side has begun to better understand our position though the deal is speaking was a very long day here in saudi arabia. the talks lasted for 4 and a half hours and quite a lot came out of them. i have to say that the story, the story is it made quite an effort to prevent any a speculation or leaks from happening. have as of it talks to still went on. so then we were basically bombarded by all these various statements after the thoughts ended coming from both sides. but i think the most important thing that happened

today here in saudi arabia is that russia and the united states were able to make a very important 1st step toward so normalizing their relations. they've agreed to create mechanisms to normalize the work of their diplomatic commissions regarding the conflict in ukraine. they agreed to put together high level teams on each side, which will work together to look for diplomatic, sustainable solution which would be suitable to all sides. and they're also, i think it's a very important point that they're even now starting to look beyond the conflict in ukraine. because they're saying that they want to lay the foundation for future dream projects in investment and economy in all these projects which may emerge after the constitution. ukraine is done judging by what preferred today from representatives of both sides. it was a serious and optimistic conversation,

which the scene talk for 4 and a half hours. that's the one. yes. why not? and there was a very serious conversation on all the issues we wanted to touch upon to them. is this positive? be constructive. everybody, they are the to get to the right outcome solution based we, we discussed it afterwards. we couldn't have imagined a better result after this after the session. it was very, very solid. i just want to stress that it's just about a week ago. it was so hard to imagine something like this from happening, but then the phone conversation between president vladimir important and donald trump took place and now already were here in saudi arabia. we're looking at moscow in washington talking and most importantly, listening to each other like 4 minutes to elaborate said well, boss has also been way of tracing its position about the conflict for 3 years. i don't think we necessarily need to retire, but it's always been very clear about what those red line saw,

what it's not wanting to negotiate on. i'm so from washington suspect, if have we heard anything new from the trumpet, ministration about west some given take might be from said ministration approach to not only the conflict in ukraine, but i guess through the relationship with russia is quite different from the previous administration. i think it also, it goes with the rest of the board in foreign ministers, words about listening to each other. you're set the real estate mark. rubio said that this is about dialogue. this isn't about monologue. and he also said that any diplomatic success is possible only with concessions made by all sides. i think diplomacy ultimately is based on our actions based on commitments that are yes. so i think they came away today convinced that they are willing to begin to engage in a serious process to determine how and how quickly and to what mechanism can have and

be brought to this war. whether we can ultimately reach that outcome. well, obviously depend on every site in this conflicts. willingness to, to agree to certain things. so, um, i think it's important to have this meeting because we haven't really had much engagement with the russians for almost 3 years. and it's, that's the table for future conversations. how that turns out will be up to the parties and their willingness not just to make commitments, but to live by them. uh, that will be tested in the weeks to come. another important point to that was made by the russian delegation and this is according to foreign minister surgical level, is that moscow finally was able to deliver it concerns and to the general stance on any, theoretically deployments. also, any for and peacekeeping contingents in ukraine see a month the topic of the potential deployment of some kind of armed forces for peacekeeping contingency, allegedly after the conflict has already been resolved or an agreement has been reached, is of interest to the americans. so depending on which countries are prepared to

provide the questions being addressed to the members of the european union, we explained during our talks today that we have noted very well that president trump and several of his speeches was the 1st western leader to say clearly that pulling ukraine into nato was one of the main reasons for what is happening that this is one of the biggest mistakes of joe biden and his administration, and that of trump for president at that time. he would not have allowed it to happen. so in this regard, we explained to our colleagues today, the president, putin has repeatedly emphasized that the expansion of nato, the absorption of ukraine by the north atlantic alliance is a direct threat to the interest of the russian federation, a direct threat to our sovereignty. so we have explained today that the appearance of armed forces from the same nato countries, but under a foreign flag, under the flag of the european union, or under whose national flags does not change anything in this regard. this is, is of course, isn't acceptable to us. so russia is talking about protecting its national interests. it's a security and i think it's very important it back to this opportunity,

gave moscow the ability to deliver these concerns. and again, makes this message for washington to be heard. what i think and washington definitely did say it because joseph allowed golf was measured, buttons are positive. so what's the us delegation? they described as a big step forward this made saying, i don't. is that any understanding of what could be, you know, in terms of concrete terms here for the future outcome of today's event regarding the conflict in ukraine. it's pretty clear that both russia and the united states are on the same page, that it can become a frozen conference concept. it can be something temporary, it has to be a permanent end to the war. there are some the, some underlying principles. this needs to be a permanent, into the war and not a temporary end, as we've seen in the past. we know just the practical reality is that there is

going to be some discussion of territory and there's going to be a discussion of security guarantees. those are just yet fundamental basics uh that will, that will undergird and underlie any type of discussion. some very important words there, and frankly, not many people expected to any sort of a diplomatic breakthroughs or for the concept in ukraine to, to and here on this day in saudi arabia. but it's the 1st steps which are very important. i think it's very, it's, it's vital for the 2 countries to begin that way forward towards normalizing relations and towards the end of the concert in ukraine and towards a future where the 2 could work together by let's cross now live to a ben swan investigative journalist and find out the truth and media bed is good to have you join me now. so these were the 1st direct talks in 3 years that ukraine

was obviously high on the agenda, but what other pressing issues are likely to have built up during this time? well, there are, there are a number of issues, right? and one of the things that makes this entire dialogue so important between the western russia is that they didn't talk only about ukraine, which is interesting because for the past 3 years, we've seen that the united states doesn't talk to russia at all. but when we talk about russia, it's a completely singular, we only talked about one issue, the war and ukraine. and so one of the things that we see in this discussion that was very important was an entire discussion about gaz problem and about energy. the fact that the united states is talking about working with russia and getting investment into a gas problem and working on energy projects with russia is not just stunning. the reporter. so there a minute ago, a week ago, a lot of people wouldn't believe that this conversation would be happening now a year ago, a lot of people thought might have thought this conversation would never happen

again. the idea that the us was talking about energy ideas with russia at a time when europe badly needs both russian energy and american energy and the united states is trying to really build out its energy profile. i think it's a pretty remarkable moment. so that's a very important moment. again, this discussion going far beyond just ukraine, but also talking about the bigger issues about russia in the united states. the united states saying they want to see americans being able to invest in russia and russian companies able to act in the united states. again, this is something that a year ago, 2 years ago wasn't even discussed. or i know what does it leave, could it could have find itself totally sideline here when it comes to discussing real issues from the economy to politics, to diplomacy and other things as well. so far, the answer to that is yes. i remember the president trump said something very interesting when he 1st had his conversation phone call with president putin and he came back and he said the after they had had their discussion, he says our team will inform president zelinski of our conversation informing is

very different than having a discussion with him as well. so i think he of has been sidelined at this point. one of the things that, that the trump administration and the russian government seem to be in agreement upon is the fact that there need to be elections held in ukraine so that the people of ukraine can select their leader. as we all know, it's been over a year since i bought them. here's the link. these term has expired. even though there is, there are rules, obviously in ukraine where they say, well, he's able to stay in this position. he doesn't have to be moved out because. ringback really present, including the president, trump, are in agreement that he should not be president right now. and there need to be election. so that is not just sideline to having this discussion. it is completely sideline zalinski himself and left him out of this discussion. all right, not that's obviously and a lot of coverage of this story between russia and the united states as above even compared it to the men's negotiations a decade ago. and then you see a part of those. yeah. i think this is much more important than even the michel

agreements and those minutes and negotiations. and the reason for that is because again, minutes was focused on one singular issue. how does the united states intervene after helping to overthrow the democratically elected government of your brain? how do we now intervene in order to control. busy what the russian response will be, whether it's the referendum in crimea or these, these regions along the eastern border. but it was very singularly focused and the singular focus was, let's focus on, let's talk about ukraine and russia, if there was no discussion of the broader issues between these 2 countries. so the fact that these discussions are happening now, i think it demonstrates that the, the president trump's administration and president trump himself are interested in a much wider gamut of issues. and the fact that russia is the world 4th largest economy. the fact that they are saying, let's normalize relations again, far beyond this issue. let's get past this issue as quickly as possible. i think we've set this way beyond where even those minutes discussions were. all right,

now the european commission president has been reminding people that the you actually did a lot to help you. great. let's, let's make a listen here financially. and militarily, europe has brought more to the table than anyone else. and we will step up. we want to partner with the us to deliver a just and lasting peace for ukraine. now is a critical moment. now why this is field just to remind everyone of that now and why is she talking about money spend don't care? well, let me just say that that statement is completely wrong. it is not true. she says that the europeans have brought more than any one will. certainly of, we're talking about money. that's not true. the united states has been over 250000000000 president trump, since it's of highest 350000000000 on ukraine. europe is only spend about a 100000000000, so we vastly out spent europe in terms of weapons. we've supplied farm or weapons

to your brains in europe as so i'm not exactly sure what she's talking about. maybe she's talking about moral support. but in terms of what you're actually provided, almost nothing. i do find it fascinating that she says that she wants to work alongside the us to create this last thing people, what are, what are the us is position so far? europe doesn't like us is position so far. the position is there will not be us troops on the ground in ukraine. it appears and any kind of peacekeeping mission going forward, there will be no nato membership on the table for your brain moving forward. there may even be a revolting of the invitation to, at some point, join nato. so the fact that she's saying that indicates that are you, if you're going along with the us position here, you're essentially saying this thing is over. it sounds like there's a lot of conflicting messages coming out of europe because i think what president trump is trying to do here and it sounds like a strategy is, is to say, listen, we're going to normalize relations with russia. we're going to drop sanctions

against russia. we're going to come to an agreement with russia. if europe doesn't want to do that, then you will cover the cost of this war going forward. but the fact is, europe can't cover the costs of this. we're going forward. zelinski knows that european leaders know that. and so even though they're trying to kind of puff their chest at this moment and sound like they're going to do something, there's not much that they can do without the us holding their hand. it's how this war is dragged out for over 3 years now. now it's obvious that you're paying close attention to the meeting, but what do the talks mean for other regions such as the middle east, africa, or a or even the asia pacific? a? well, i think it means it means a lot for everyone, right, because what they see is polarized position, but the u. s. position on russia was so polarizing for the last 3 years. and really, if we go all the way back to 2014, it's been this way for over 10 years now, a very polarized position that was in direct opposition. the desire to see nato continued to in circle around russia and to isolate russia. that's,

that's what we've been hearing now from our leaders in the united states for at least 3 years now, over and over we keep hearing how a rush it must be isolated financially and must be isolated from other global markets that needs to be removed from power we've had lawmakers who have made these wild statements. the reality is, is that if there is any country in the world that is more polarized, in terms of the way the us use and the russian, i wish someone would point to it on a masters part of the reason this was significant for, for folks at agent or in africa or in latin america, is because if russia, in a matter of weeks after trump becomes president, can normalize relations with the united states, it throws the doors opened, disabled. what else is possible? this is clearly not the same regime in terms of the united states power that's been in power. it's not just not only the same administration and the different president, but as you all know, just because the change presidents in this country does not mean administrations and the bureaucracy changes their point of view. and so you get this foreign policy

. but last for decades, that's exactly the same, no matter who's in power or what has shifted in this moment. if you're looking at it from the outside, is all of a sudden. well, if, if we can normalize relations with russia in a matter of weeks, anything is possible, it is not the same playbook being run through washington right now. me ask lucidly, spots on the not trump has opened the spoken out against briggs and call the debt at some point and even threaten to those 100 percent tires. if member states tried to dis the dollar. now, how likely is it that moscow in washington will find common grounds when they have such a, posing a positions on this issue? so this is a, here's the difficult part of that. so trump is very anti bricks. obviously he's, he is america 1st and that's how he won the election. he's going to make america great again, and he's gonna focus on america 1st. policy will bricks, obviously stands in direct opposition to an american 1st policy as it shouldn't. because obviously brazil shouldn't put american 1st notion china,

nor should russia in, nor should south africa or india. the reality is this though, i think trump is aware enough to know that the, the long standing analogy of the stick in the carrot right of the us, foreign policy has been the stick policy for a long time. you go around the world and you and you hit with you, use your stick to hit everybody who doesn't do what you want them to do. that is causes the formation of breaks that has caused the growth of brakes in the last few years. and the showing up in the ditching of the us dollar. the v us policy towards russia in the last 3 years has done more damage to the us dollar than anything in the previous 100 years. and so what i think trump recognizes is he can talk big and threaten countries if they don't do what he wants them to do. but in reality there's something else that has to happen here, which is that he's got to use the carrier approach. you can just threaten countries, he has to go to them and say, if we do this, how can we make life better for you better for your economy helping you worked with

the united states. so the fact that he's even approaching this with a carrot in hand, again, a vast departure from us foreign policy in the past. i've been swan investigative journalist and fond row truth and media. thank you so much for your insight here. thank you. now an attack on one of the largest oil pumping stations in russia on sunday was to clear a 10 by ukraine to do real, to talks in riyadh. and that's the position of a deputy ross and from minnesota on the go i live 7, drones attack the car parkins, kyle oil pumping station in a short period of time. as a result of the attack, the energy equipment in the gas turbine plant were damaged. a lot of work remains to be done to restore this facility, as it also used energy equipment from western countries. the drone attack is a direct response from ukraine to the us regarding the talks and saudi arabia, s q of the bulk of the oil, which flows through the attacks pipeline belongs to kaz,

looks down along the company that runs the operations belongs to a number of western firms at a cost beyond pipeline, the consortium branded the striker needs facility and active tara training, the key of deliberately targeted personnel. and i've allowed them to put in has said that the western companies should be the ones forced to pick up the cost of it best if they themselves are interested in restoring the facilities operations. let them organize this, apply all the necessary equipment, despite all the sanctions, it is for their own good. all right, so these right now we are breaking what the weight of our program now i'm heading to washington where president trump is speaking right now. a european peacekeeping troops and you can as part of this piece deal if they want to do that. that's great . i'm, i'm all forward if they want to do that. i think that's, that'd be fine. i mean,

i know francis mentioned it. others have mentioned that you k as mentioned it, but yes, well, if we have a piece deal, i think having groups over there for, from the standpoint of europe, we won't have to put any over there because, you know, we're very far away. but having troops out with that would be fine. i would not object to it at all. we're talking about this now piece. we have either a ceasefire a piece itself and we're looking to do both would start off with a ceasefire. and if they want to do that, i know france was willing to do that and i thought that was a beautiful gesture. yeah, please. a message for ukrainians, who after 3 years of fighting, might feel betrayed or disappointed and not having a seat at these initial thoughts and saudi arabia. well, i think i'm really disappointed in what's happened. i've been watching this for 3 years as a word that would've never happened to vice president. and i've been watching these, these, you know, people being killed at levels that you've rarely see, not,

not even close since the 2nd world war. and i'm very disappointed. i hear that, you know, there's upset about not having a seat. well, they've had a seat for 3 years. and a long time before that this could have been settled very easily. just a half, a half baked negotiator to settle this years ago without isaac, without the loss of much land, very little land without the loss of any lives in well without the loss of cities that are just laying on their side. you have those magnificent golden domes that are shattered will never be replaced. you can replace them 1000 year old domes that are so beautiful. they can replace that whole civilization has changed because of what. so when they're worried about not being in stages, do you mean somebody that should have gone in and made a deal a long time ago? you could have made a deal. this is one that could have made a deal. there was no talk of this doing the trump administration put in order never

ever done it. and by the way we wouldn't have had october 7th. you know, that we wouldn't have had october 7th, either in israel. and we wouldn't have that messages going on over there. it's like a with we have great fire people here we're, we're putting out fires all over the world. we're putting out fires. so that wouldn't have happened. and you know, what else wouldn't have happened inflation? because it was cause really by the cost of energy going through the rope because of that bad energy policies and, and also they're spending that terrible spending wasteful spending on the green new scam to scan to whole big scan. yeah, please. it's just a little closer to home. what would it take for you to reconsider the restrictions on the associated press? and secondly, some of your advisors are concerned with the associated presses style guide using language and given guidance to not use words like illegal immigrant or to use phrases like gender of ferment care. and they're concerned about that being an encroachment of liberalism,

in the way in which the press rights about things to share those concerns. well, i do think that the, some of the phrases that they want to use are ridiculous, and i think frankly they become obsolete. it's especially of the last 3 weeks because many things have happened in the last 3 weeks and i didn't know about that . but i would say that if they want to use certain phrases like that, and i guess summer, okay, but many aren't. but the associated press just refuses to go with what the law is and what is taking place. it's called the gulf of america. now it's not called the gulf of mexico and the longer i have the right to do it, just like we have the right to do mount mckinley and nobody's even challenging that . but only the assertion, essentially, it's primarily the associated press and i don't know what they're doing, but i just say that we're going to keep them out until such time as they agree, that it's the gulf of america. we're very proud of this country and we want it to be the gulf of america. now this is so shared and pressed, as you know, has been very, very wrong on the election on trump and the treatment of trump and other things

having to do with trump and republicans and conservatives. and they're doing as no favors. and i guess i'm not doing them any favors. that's the way life works. but you know, thank you for the question. who are you with? very good question. thank you. yes. i'm. we're hearing that russia wants to force ukraine to hold new elections in order to sign any kind of a peace deal. is that something that us, whatever support? well, we have in a situation where we haven't had elections in ukraine, where we have martial law essentially marshall lower and ukraine. where the leader in ukraine. i mean, i hate to say it, but he's down at 4 percent approval rating. and we're, a country has been blown to smithereens. you've got most of the cities are laying on the sides of buildings or collab. so it looks like a massive demolition site. the whole, i mean so many of the shit is,

i mean they haven't done it in care of because i guess they don't want to issue too many rockets in that they've done it 20 percent, but they haven't done it a 100 percent if they wanted to do it a 100 percent, it would probably happen very quickly, but you have cities that are absolutely decimated and yeah, i would say that, you know, when they want to see that the table, you can say that people have to when the people of ukraine have to say like, you know, it's been a long time since we've had an election, but it's not a russia thing. that's something coming from me and coming from many other countries also. uh, you know, ukraine as being just just wiped out. look at what's happening to the cities that there are cities, it's not even a building standing. it's a massive. if you talk about guys, i mean it's, it's literally the cities look like gaza. actually many have percentage wise. more buildings knocked down then and guys are so, you know, people are tired of it. people want to see something happen. and, you know,

the other thing that its been bothering me for a long time because i did, i solve the problem with data. they paid hundreds of millions of dollars into the funds of data. when i said you got to pay because the united states was paying for europe and countries, and then they take advantage of us on trade. but i've seen it look, we have to, they have to pay it, they have to find out where is the money going to? we have, i believe the president zalinski said last week that he has a know what half of the money is that we gave him. well, we gave them, i believe, $350000000000.00. but let's say is something less than that, but it's a, it's a lot. and we have to equalize with europe because europe is given us a, given a very much smaller percentage of that. i think europe has given a 100000000. and we've given, let's say $300.00 plus and it's more important for them than it is for us. we have an ocean in between. and they don't. but where is all the money that's been given?

where is it going and nobody, i've never seen an accounting of it. we give hundreds of billions of dollars. i have i, i don't see any accounting. so i want to see facebook. you know why i want, because i don't want all these people killed anymore. i'm looking at people that have been killed and the russian and ukrainian people, but the people doesn't matter where they're from on the, on the whole planet. and i think i have the power to end this war. and i think it's going very well. but today i heard, oh, we weren't invited. well, you've been there for 3 years. you should have ended it 3 years. you should have never started it. you could have made a deal. i could have made a deal for ukraine that would have given them almost all of the land every day, almost all of the land and no people would have been killed and no city would have been demolished and not one dome would have been knocked down. but they chose not to do it that way and president by and in all fairness, he doesn't have a clue what he he was so bad for this. it was so bad, so pathetic,

so sad. but with all of that being said, look, we, it is what it is. when i left, there was no chance that this could have happened. but it happened because we had incompetent leadership in many different levels. but when you see what's taking place in ukraine with millions of people killed, including the cells, as many as a people kill a big percentage of their cities knocked down to the ground. i don't know how anybody even lives there. you know, when they say they took a ball, angel, excuse it, 4 percent who's living there? you know, i mean, people are, it's hard to believe that people live there. their cities are being knocked down. and this is something that would have never happened. and by the way, for 4 years it didn't happen was never going to happen. good question. how would you counter the perception? because russians pushing for this, obviously they don't really hold true elections. that, that would be a capitulation of some sort. how would you guard against potentially russia, installing a puppet government? and then finally, how would that new election have an impact on getting zelinski to sign.