and, and so as you say, you know, your typical european laptops became the cheerleaders for what was then the us administration, but now the mazda has changed. and some of the saying that laptops don't know who to, why that tails for any more. meantime, it looks like trump is all but done with ukraine. he's looking for peace. he's looking to make a quick buck on the mineral resources as you are. looks pleased to try and continue with the will of jeffrey. can you just help me get my head around that please? a. well, it's hard to get one's head around because europe cannot continue the war ukraine. you cannot continue the war. i in the bottom line that what happened during the last 30 years, i've been a part of because this is a 30 year us project. is that the united states said were you in a polar, we do what we want. we expand militarily, where we want, we expand our influence, where we want i, in 2008 the us said, now we move made over to ukraine to georgia. i and a, this is a replay,

by the way of the pry me and war of 185321856, almost at the blueprint. and russia said, no, i, that's not going to happen. i. the point is, europe got into line with it. the u. s. a strategies, so if i could call them added. so it's a exaggeration in my view, but the us strategist said will win because we're all powerful. one can do, do what kind of russia do nothing. and they thought up until the end, and i know what they thought because i talked with them i heard from them. i watched the what they were saying. they thought in 2021 that i did in the and the rush or well resist in 2022. well, a production does resist our push into ukraine. our sanctions will bring the russian autonomy to its knees. well up,

the sanctions don't work. our high admirers and our attack them, so we'll do so all with that doesn't work. russia well mobilized to continue the fight. in other words, this was a group in, in essence, playing a game. i would say i'm the american side, which is we can do what we want, right? that isn't the case. they, they lost that damage. the ukrainians, proud strictly followed that line, i call the ukrainians. of course, everyone knows kissinger's famous line that to be anatomy of america is dangerous to be a friend of america is fatal. i explain that to them. you're going to be like afghanistan . well, here we are. yeah, they followed the us. europe followed the us. now they don't know quite what to do . yeah, but you know, so i'm still coming to washington in this kind of pathetic way to sign over in get almost a meaningless document. the middle or half the mineral rights. this is just sad,

desperate, confused behavior. this is not strategy, this is not national policy, this is not continuing award. this is not, not big. i was just going to say what reckless policy, whether you go back to the, by the administration or the freed assessor obama and so on and so forth. what a reckless policy to pick a fight with the world's biggest nuclear power you called. i mean, i con, you know what you said, how do we get our heads around this foreign policy that's being enacted over the past decade? and as you say, even so if he is now you mentioned a moment ago about expanding influence we all, we all know united states. so maybe we don't all know, but it's been meddling and was 70 or 80 elections in the past century. it is the number one full most med lot of when it comes to thinking its teeth and sticking his fingers into other countries. democratic processes. meantime, we're essentially watching a washington dismantling the old god and real time usa, i. d being the funded,

it's covert. i'm used to overthrow governments around the world as being chopped off. jeffrey, i don't want to be uh, an irrational optimist here. but is it possible we're going to see a new era of, of america perhaps, respecting other countries in the political processes. it's possible. this is far from a short believe me, it's far from the short american still behaved. so the with, with a lot of, into unity. i, frankly, even though this so shaped down to minerals, which i don't think will come to anything, by the way, i don't, i don't think this is more than a piece of paper on the adjuster on a photo op, but that means nothing. that's my own view. i may be wrong, but that's my own view that this is meaningless, but it still is a kinder shake down. and that is a absolutely strange. uh president trump, but he talks about canada city for state. he talks about panama talks about breeland. we're kind of the end of a prop occasions and so one by any means,

but what i would say, and i mean is with the deepest seriousness, the major powers, the great powers, the united states, russia, china, india, if europe got attacked together, should stop putting their noses right up against the other side, and stop the prob, occasions that could lead us to open war. this is the most important point going to ukraine was such a complication and blunder of the united states. similarly, be the way b u. s. x needs to be tie one is the same thing that's bad if i could say is the ukraine a beast, asia, you know, don't provoke between the nuclear super powers. for heaven's sake. this is the most basic point for our survival. meantime, we've seen essentially the g 7 economies almost entirely being swapped out by the bricks economies. when you look at the top 10 economies nowadays, you know,

you mentioned china and india and, and russia, but some of the traditional european economies at the bottom. now, all the top 10 list, when you mentioned publications a moment ago, let's just bring it back to us idea for a 2nd. i mean, this whole scandal, it continues to shock the world. i mean, who would have thought jeffrey honestly, who would have folded usa id was financing all kinds of terror groups like isis folk ahead. um, i'll tie the h t as in syria, this is the country of the world. the tell us all of us. it's fighting terrorism, jeffrey, the usa. i, the very, sadly combined a 2 completely different things. one was actually saving lives, i actually finding malaria, actually fighting tuberculosis, doing important things. and then it got it. of course, it was used as a tool of u. s. foreign policy and not saving lives, not doing, developing,

not doing humanitarian things, but as a tool of u. s. manipulation. and they put the tone statements together, which is so sad, because we actually meet the 1st and the 2nd was disgusting, provocative, causing more. uh, you mentioned that the, the interference in elections, i would say more generally the us interferes west parts. democracies down democracies, the u. s. foreign policy for the post war period. and by doub more, i mean world war 2 was that if you don't like the other side, you try to change the regime. most countries have a different foreign policy, which is if you don't like the other side, you negotiate with companies to try to find a modus vivendi. but the united states was nu metal. you interfere you over throw you destabilize, you cause a cool. this house for stop. there had been dozens and dozens and dozens of these

regime change operations and they, and very, very badly. yeah, indeed. well, i mean, you know, you look at this are russo phobic agenda and the agenda against russia. and of course, they've been trying to get rid of food in for such a long time, trying to foment discontent and using the, the propaganda on the west. immediate, a sale, all these narratives know these catchphrases. he's a dictator, he's this, he's that and yeah, do you know jeffery, on a personal level, i lived in america many, many years. i grew up in the u. k. i've been here in russia now nearly 20 years. i've never experi and such a level of freedoms in my life. i spent a number of years working for a major american news network. i wouldn't mention that name is 3 letters, i wouldn't mention it, but there, i couldn't say certain things here in russia. i can actually say what needs to be set on you by the way, you should be here with all the international on a problem. one of those is jeffrey, because you are brave enough to push back on these mainstream legacy media now, which is, i guess, you know, some people say you're making friends everywhere. you go tongue in cheek,

mr. sacks. well, let, let me just say, since you are, you started a, your life, i guess in, in britain i, i feel the united states. i'm sorry to say, i hope you won't take offense, but we learned everything we learned from britain. and one of the fascinating points of our modern history is how it relates. as i said, to the 19th century, the crimean war was award led by britain to try to push russia out of the black sea region. this was the purpose of lord palmerston. he got the napoleon the 3rd to join him, and that was the outcome. but again, after the fall of the sub stobel, a dead for about 17 years, i think it was i, i, russia's play was out of the black sea. that's what they're trying to do. again, yes, and one of the fascinating thing and it's, it's not going to work, but it,

it is a, an echo of this 19th century. and one of the fascinating things with the roots of phobia is, is british russo phobia which the star me or terry still today to the white house. and where does that roots and phobia come from? there's a marvelous study from more than 50 years ago by a great historian who asked the question, where did british bruce phobia arrives? because after all, you, the napoleonic wars, britain and russia were allies. that was in 181-5518. 40 britain regarded russia as an enemy. and this is the story and asked the question, why in 25 years did that change. and when he started, there was no reason for the change from other than russia was a big, powerful country. and britain resented that. as the british empire,

britain simply resented russia. it concocted all sorts of tables that russia was going to would bade india through the khyber pass and all the rest. but this is the new west situation as well. both of these it'd be russia, which i hope is now past, but also china, which is hate the other one simply for being big and successful. that's not a reason for russo phobia or sign up for be a. it's actually a reason for respect for dialogue for diplomacy, not for hatred, but we get the hatred started up and it's not hard to store a paid for it. yeah, you know, there, there are some people who go back even further than 50 years, a go back to the great game is that like to coordinate going back, i went over a 100 years. some people saying it's queen victoria being alive around the time of world war one world war one. she wouldn't allow that to happen because of the bloodlines between the role and office and the british role timely. they will all essentially related at the end of the day is fascinating. you said to me that the person is still going for odessa. still going for the black sea. is that why london

keeps talking about this 100 year contract with ukraine? yeah, it's interesting or i'm sorry to say, i don't mean to insult anybody, but the british position is on believably weird. because brandon talks like it is the 19th century ruler of the world and the word pox bartolic car and that they're going to call the shots. it's all or please stop. come down to take, take a break. we don't need this non stop more. we don't need to stem are flying around the world to say we continue the war no matter what the united states does. he said in the white house, we'll put boots on the ground. come on on down, please. yeah, it's amazing. you don't need this. yeah. you don't need this? yeah. yeah, this guy kissed um and he will. he was dressed in the white house. he got no love from chum just now. and then of course,

and now your macro. and he was there about 24 hours prior. he got no love from drum either. i was going to turn it to watch it just for the entertainment value, frankly, but i wanted to bring it bring you up to speed now that the latest totes in assemble . following the discussions in riyadh between the russian and american officials, we are witnessing, as you said, moments ago, a reproach monkey. do you really think there's a chance that a true piece can be arranged between bruton and trump, regardless all the noisy chihuahuas in your? well, 1st of all, a true peace can be arranged for a fundamental reason. there is no fundamental conflict between the united states and russia, so there is no fundamental reason for conflict. if the us had not asserted unit polarity after 1991, there would be no conflict if in december 19, 2021 is i beg to divide white house to negotiate with

president pulled in on the draft us russian security arrangement that he table on december 15th 2021. negotiate there would be no war. there is no direct reason for conflict. there is reason for trade. there is reason out, they'll be competition and other things. but conflict, of course, not the same is true with europe. if europe would open its eyes, it's hard with europe is 27 independent countries. they can't think clearly as a major power in a unified way. but if they could, they would have just a direct counterpart relationship with russia. and ukraine would be so much safer as the neutral state that it was that would have protected ukraine. because neutrality is not a danger. neutrality is

a protection asked we in finland, austria, during the decades that it had neutrality, not the nato period of the last year. this is ridiculous, they were safe with neutrality. oscar is safe with neutrality, but they chose the block approach that's on the safe me anything commenter. i that jeffrey told to me, if you will, we've had these that we've had these negotiations up central piece towards happening in assemble now, 6 and a half hours of talks jeffrey before that of course re add. well, what was interesting to me was, you know, um who, shackleford, what it was, shut off, who was the presidential envoy of those who know he's an old friend of not him a boot ends and he was down there with. so get off or off and re add and he had had a few pages of list so so called economic initiatives. and it almost gave the impression that off to these years of being the most sanction country in the world . the russo for back out of to the trying to pummel the ruble. it almost seemed like it's now time to get back to business. you want to start making some money

again. let's do joint ventures in the arctic. there's a whole list of economic initiatives. how do you read into that jeffrey or? well, i am an economist, so i believe in trade and investment, and hopefully you think that this is mutually beneficial, actually, or a beacon. omics is the idea that when you trade with other countries, it's mutual gain. it's not one wins and one loses. so this is the right approach. it happens that western europe and russia are really complimentary economies and an important weight. they share some things. russia has a very sophisticated technological class, so leading engineers, leading mathematicians. but russia also has vast natural resources, vast territory, and so forth. and that's why the economic links between germany and russia are very strong at a natural level. and by the way,

one of the projects of the united states was to make sure that germany and russia wouldn't get too close to each other economically. the u. s. heated the north stream pipeline in my view and blew it up. yeah. but in any event, it hated it, ended hated it, because that was the linking in germany and russia, by the way, the rhetoric we see that the us says, is it made germany dependent on russia, though it may, germany benefit and russia benefit that's called mutual benefit that's what trade does. that's not dependency. that's crazy. yeah. and that that should be re established. yeah, i mean, you think about it. and as you will know, jeffrey, you know, as being cheap russian energy, but for so many decades has as created the, the energy backbone of europe. they created the industrial backbone with germany, of course. so the cheap russian energy it's, it's, it's now gone. there are hoops, perhaps north stream could be turned back on, but when you talk about the,

the sabotage of north stream and, you know, and clearly, i mean, obviously is going on with being, you know, the us intelligence services with that guy is involved in this. but, but uh, i just, um, who's throwing who on the bus. the north stream wasn't just a russian pipeline is a multi european russian consortium. a lot of european countries and companies involve that by destroying the north stream. it almost seems like america was throwing europe under the bus. you know, i, i think that it, it was part of the americas, you know, polar strategy. i that are also part of it is commercials driving cheap, let's say i because the american liquefied natural gas company scrambled to sell l . n g to the western europe at the roughly 6 times the price that europe was paying for. russia's low cost a pipeline, a gas, so there were some commercial interest, but there was

a long standing opposition in the united states to north stream. partly because there was a long standing view that russia and germany should not get too close to each other in a, in an american flag world. but more fundamentally, in the american led world, the main target was not europe. the main target was russia, and i, and a, this was stated repeatedly to the us goal was to surround russia with nato. the us goal was to make sure that russia was the 2nd rate or 3rd rate power it all invidious. we had a remarkable rand corporation paper in 2019, which had find one of the most disgusting works, a coming out of a i would of a us official them. and that said, you know, basically, how do we extend rush, how do we annoy russia? how do we undermine russia? that's a, a national goal. how about, how do we cooperate with russian?

how do we make peace with rush? how do we find security arrangements if, if rand was working on that, it would be good. yeah. but that paper in 2019 is literally a list of ways to annoy aggravate and weak and russia. that's yeah, hassles for us policy i'm, i'm sorry to say, and these are supposed to be the adults in the room. you know, it's, it's just astonishing. it is just be so depressing watching this for too many years . now jeffrey, just quickly that there was a link to pull published in the west of mastery media suggesting that trump, when it comes to talking to russia, trump might be willing to pull american troops out of nato basic as an eastern europe. did you hear about that? did you read it? your thoughts on it? well, as i read it, i, i think what is key is the europe really needs a security arrangement. and it was heading towards one with the organization of security and cooperation in europe with o. s. c, e o. s. c is very different from nato. a. nato is your security comes through

the u. s. military alliance. o. s. c, e is your security, comes through collective security that we can't be safe if the other side is on the safe. so let's work together on assurances on the militarization on a neutral spaces on other ways to protect everybody's security. we are at a stage now where europe and russia really need to sit down in a serious way because there are serious issues on security, on both sides. and they need to be discussed by serious people on both sides. and it wasn't the work just a couple of months ago, a few months ago cuz on the beautiful cultural city of cuz on had the enormous bricks summit, many people call in and get like literally the most important brick stomach to date . when the western political, the media establishment shows russian was being isolated on the world stage

pollutants got no friends. here we had this amazing show of unity in cars on covered members of bricks, hotness, states joining and so many waiting in the wings. trump says bricks is dead, trusting and almost tyrus for countries who want to veer away from the dollar and trade or might potentially hurt the dollar. but jeffrey, we are witnessing this multi polar world for its place on the global stage today. is it possible that the g 7 countries or should i say the european countries of america and canada, all they too late to get on this train? they always going to be left on the platform or will they perhaps get this sense it together and try and cooperate with a new multi potable i think the main point you just said is right. the world's actually multi polar. it's been multi polar for quite a while. i'm an economist, so i look at the production capacity. i look at g d p. i look at the trade, i looked at the industrial capacity in various sectors. we've been multi polar for

quite a while. in fact, the advanced technologies are everywhere. the idea that i well advance technology is only in silicon valley, is he'd be comfortable for people in silicon valley or washington, but it's just not right. because if you go to india, if you go to russia to go to china in advance technologies, or are part of a global scene right now. and so this is the reality. the mindset in the united states up until a few weeks ago was no i, this is a us led world that was the vitamin ministration mindset, obviously wrong and, and rather dangerous. because it says we can push around anyone that we want to push around. obviously, if we just have enough, will, the british mindset remains, not only is it unipolar, it seems that the mindset is, it's british, i don't know if it's, i think, you know, it's a, it's a, it's

a little weird. you know, the us is a friendly hand of the british empire. i'm not sure what the mindset is, but it still doesn't get it quite right. but as you say, well, the, the brooks had 36 countries in cars on the countries were about half the world population. the membership of the bricks today is around 40 percent of g. d. p, measured in purchasing power parity. i've in china's industrial pilot and capacity like it or not. this is bigger than a mirror coast. china is g d p of course, is bigger than america's if measured at the purchasing power. adjusted prices were in a multi polar world. and we need 1st to be peaceful in that world, avoid confrontation between the great powers that could take us to, to nuclear armageddon. and we need to keep an, an open trading system. it's not going to be a us dollar dominated system. it's going to be a multi currency system alongside

a multi polar system. my hope is that we stayed within international law, very fragile. but i'm a believer in the un charter. and i want to make it work in a multi polar world. and a multi lateral legal system at the global level is what we need for our safety, security, and prosperity. if you could have a face to face, sit down with donald trump. what would you tell him about russia bricks and the multi poto? well, what would your advice be? you know, my advice is keep on the track with making peace with russia. make peace in the middle east based on 2 states because peace could come to the middle east. the same way with the 2 states, a state of palestine established alongside the state of israel, made peace with china just as you've done with russia. and then we have the chance

truly for a golden age because we're in an age of phenomenal technological advance. and our biggest threat is that continuing conflicts, the the, the right now or one fun is neglected. there's a need not to abandon the understand because my fear is that it was good in the bottom. dotted lines one find o when i was son, was neglected, and 911 happened the

the the stuff they to sort some a ship for the fixture, such as you're done with the machine called the should the vehicle, is it the economic model have new s d c, for this experiment you've used us and figured testify this thing in the next 2 weeks. ok, even though is then you must sort of deal with a company in some village, developing bio chemical weapons inside,

you know, wasn't cheap, but i'd love to send it to the customer. i think what he's because of the segment just because the the right now or one fun is neglected. there's a need not to abandon the other stuff because my fear is that it was good in the bottom. dotted lines one find old when i was son, was neglected,

and 911 happened the look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given it by human beings, except we're so short or is it conflict with the 1st law? show your identification. we should be very careful about our personal intelligence . and the point obviously is to create a trust rather than fit the various jobs. i mean with the artificial intelligence, we have somebody in the team and the robot must protect this phone. existence was on the the

physician by check, the deer in no position didn't dictate what we're going to fail. after a curio show down in the oval office. a lot of these, the last key sent packing from the white house and that's off at the top accuses him of gambling with global security. you don't have to cards right now with us. you still have no car and car right now. you're somebody's breath, you the use of the pulsing, you gambling with world war 3, gambling with world war 3. now with a towards a brought to a non abrupt and the signing of a controversial view of what you praise natural resources as taking off the table to.