russia's main enemy report from the scene story of a noisy divorce how relations with nato developed materials of our program allowed to ban the new storm in american politics , the relationship of weapons to the right to abortion. fly the petal through the west to the east through the north through the south return made in a circle, a magic spell from the fairy tale by valentin kataev, the seven-color flourish, perfectly illustrates the way the north atlantic treaty was organized after the cold war, at the summit in madrid, a new strategic concept was adopted, which names russia the direct and most important threat, painful wandering around the world, in search of the mission is over returned having made the circle during the

existence of the north atlantic alliance, its ideologists distinguish three main stages, the first lasted from the formation of the bloc until the collapse of the soviet union during this time four strategic concepts of the nato function were adopted deterrence of aggression was considered, and the forces of the bloc were supposed to be used if deterrence did not work and an attack was made after the start of the war in korea , the strategic concept focused on to ensure the defense of the territory of the alliance member states in the event of an attack, nato was supposed to start with air strikes, and then move on to land and sea operations as necessary, it was emphasized that all types of weapons, including nuclear weapons, would be used in air strikes, even then the united states sought to move the line defense. as far east as possible, closer to the iron curtain. this task was solved in may 1955

, when it became a member of nato. how the collapse of the ussr was defined by nato ideologists as the beginning of a new stage, it lasted 10 years until the september 11 attacks during this period, two more concepts of deterrence were adopted. the concept of cooperation and security was added to the defense, the russia nato council was created at the same time the expansion of the alliance to the east began, the third stage came after the september 11 attacks. nato announced that the main resources of the organization would be directed to the fight against terrorism, and for the first time the alliance's villages operated outside the euro-atlantic region. the events of this year brought out the accumulated mutual hostility and allowed, finally, nato needs to consolidate the confrontation with russia to the final level. yes, and among us who believed in a sincere partnership with the north atlantic alliance, even in dietary times, the chased wording of the

aggressive nato bloc still rebounds from the teeth of most fellow citizens. why be surprised the alliance was created to confront the ussr and played a pivotal role throughout the cold war to the origins by the end of the forties clung at our request brilliant historian vladimir olegovich pechatnov the strategy of the west in this cold war it was just the expulsion of the soviet union from this sphere of influence, not the return to its borders. uh, 41 is better than 39. but this was supposed to be done without a big war by the soviet union by all means except war. in this sense, how would the ussr decide the fruits of the victory and in the second world balance of power, the intentions of both sides were, in my opinion, as follows, but in the west, stalin and in the west, intelligence diplomacy agreed that the soviet

union would not be able to. even if he wants to unleash a big war in europe within 10-15 in the coming years, he has neither the resources nor the will to do this, nor the readiness to fight on his part, it was also not believed that the country was threatened with an immediate military attack. from the west, from the side of the newly created over the very reaction to the creation of nato was quite calm. i would say it was a statement. mida made a statement by the soviet government, which said that this was an aggressive bloc, that all this was somewhere a violation of the un charter, and so on, but the soviet leadership did not take any retaliatory measures, especially of a military nature. although, on the whole, the balance of power, if we take its military dimension, was not in favor of the soviet union, therefore, the threat, in general, of such an attack, it could not be written off, especially since

the united states themselves were introduced from debate and even open, but necessity launching a pre- emptive atomic strike on the soviet union , especially after testing the first soviet atomic device in august 1949, when the united states seemed to have a small window of opportunity before the soviet union acquired the means of delivery and received sufficient the number of atomic warheads was tempted to preempt this preemptive strike on the soviet union, which, of course, aggravated the situation and created just such a situation of military military danger in this light. right now, the soviet military foreign policy was sent, as it were , to solve this main problem. how to weaken this threat from its creation, of course, the military in the form of nato, and here are two main directions of soviet

foreign policy. the first is naturally creating a counterweight. its military-political a bloc that would be at least comparable would be better than nato in terms of its resources, and in this respect, e, work begins immediately after the creation of nato at the end of 49, the cmea is created, as we know, economic integration begins , already known in the fifty-first year stalin's meeting with representatives of the socialist countries, at which he sets the task of intensifying the forced militarization of these countries of the universe of readiness, the next 2 years, hoping that by that time the united states will be bogged down by the war in korea and europe new opportunities are created, in the presence of such a military military superiority, however, in addition to building up our own capabilities. the soviet union did not stop diplomatic efforts, the second direction was. naturally, the weakening of the

enemy. that is, weakening over, as then expressed by the soviet documents of internal benefit. it was necessary to shake loose or break up this bloc. attempts were made, not without success, to limit the military presence of nato in some areas close to the soviet borders. such as norway denmark who were offended not to place nuclear weapons and us military bases, the second task was to prevent rheas. the militarization of germany in west germany and its entry into nato, because in moscow, as well as in washington, london was well aware that without the german military machine without the german military economic power. it will be ineffective there. well, well-known things here - this is the fifty-second year, even under stalin, the famous proposal to create on the withdrawal of germany on a neutral basis. here's how the method repeats prevention

integration of west germany into nato this plan did not pass, but there were interesting proposals. in the same spirit, in the same spirit, in the fifty- fourth year, already after stalin, at a regular meeting in connection with the council of ministers, a foreign affairs meeting and in connection with a meeting of the top in geneva, soviet diplomacy prepared a whole package of then agreements of proposals, which would, as in to some extent weakened this threat from nato, well, firstly, it was proposed, in essence, to create a system of collective security for europe this time with the participation of the united states. in addition, it was proposed to conclude between the warsaw pact and nato there were proposals for the withdrawal of foreign troops of foreign bases from the territory of european states to the

disengagement of forces in the center of europe. soviet diplomacy supported the plan of opadsky, not unknown of that time , little of these proposals worked out, but she herself the idea of ​​creating, yes, a collection of a collective security system in europe, if not in exchange for nato, then at least as such a shock absorber for this bloc confrontation. this idea has been preserved and will be restored lice in the sixties and will lead. in general, to create. e of this security system based on the osce. do you know, when ukraine first applied for nato membership in 1954, being the ukrainian ussr, then the soviet leadership came up with a move, sent a note to the usa, great britain and france, the ussr is ready to join the bloc and create a joint ukrainian and belarusian security system, the ssr of which , in the present of moscow, is still in the forty-fifth year

they accepted won as sovereign states instructed also request membership settlement win-win will be accepted. we will separate from the inside will not be accepted. ah, here. you didn’t accept what we created then and created the warsaw pact, then a lot more happened nikita sergeevich khrushchev was all bar-keeper at the famous plenum of the central committee who dismissed khrushchev from the post of first secretary. companions , among other sins, accused him that under him the country was three times, without serious reasons, on the brink of war. the united states and nato meant the suez berlin and caribbean crisis, but more on that another time. now let's remember the history of less remote amazing times when nato and i were considered strategic partners. the fact that nato broke its promise not to expand after the cold war is constantly remembered. but the disputes of the

mid-nineties. diplomats forgot how to respond to expansion, they believed that it was necessary to at least reduce the effect by agreeing on restrictions hence the idea of ​​​​a founding act, russia nato, but there was an opposite point of view, any joint document legitimizes expansion, then it cannot be stopped, the council on foreign affairs spoke with it defense policy under the leadership of sergei karaganov. as a result, the act was signed. since then, the number of members of the alliance has grown by 2.5 times. the founding act of nato russia was signed in may 1997 in paris, then the side announced that they did not consider each other as adversaries, a joint russia nato council was established whose task was to form a higher level of trust in order to increase the security of each other and all countries in the euro-tactical region . the act

stated that nuclear weapons would not be be located on the territory of potential new members. alliance, the military potentials of the parties must be at a level that is necessary for security, taking into account international obligations, including the treaty on conventional armed forces. in europe in the document. it was also stipulated that additional combat forces would not be permanently stationed on the territory of the new members. the alliance was confirmed by both sides. that it is the un security council that has the primary responsibility for maintaining the international community? peace and security, which means nato can only act under a security council mandate, where russia has the right to vetom the first crisis occurred in 1999, due to the bombing of yugoslavia, and in 2003, without sanctions from the un security council, the invasion of the united states and its allies into iraq began; nevertheless, russian nato consultations continued, but relations sharply

worsened in august 2008 after the shelling of tskhinvali and the subsequent forcing of georgia to peace in 2014 after the coup d'état in ukraine and the annexation of crimea to russia, the nato russia council ceased its work. about the atmosphere of that time we talked with the direct participant viktor mikhailovich zavarzin. the brave military leader became in the ninety-seventh year, the first chief military representative of russia to nato, now he is a deputy of the state duma, mikhalych, uh, you stood at the origins of our relations with nato, when we ceased to be adversaries, now somehow already remember this. even as a mirage, some, as it was then. well, it was like this, firstly, our country was weak, so to speak, mildly and militarily in economic terms. and, certainly. nato understood all this. of course, they may

not be complete. i’m already saying this from experience, then my analysis was not carried out to the end, as in that film, they said they were pissing, but they understood that let’s go for rapprochement. we are in prm, then we were in the ninety-fourth year - this is prm. partner. yes , the partnership of the world, there are many states, including russia now, here is a big lepton. yevgeny maksimovich primakov is very big. by the way, i was present, he brought it together and worked. here on the last lines of this foundational act, when it kind of half-hugs her and says, well guys and i'm leaving for the night with her for the last fencing or questions. if we live in mind, then we will drink. here is an amazing person. he is an idol for me. i'll tell you the truth, diplomacy will remain the same. and so we signed, so it was, so, uh, signed in paris, uh, it means that everything in me called me, they said that they survived for a conversation here the day before and 77 deeds they offered this position

of chief representative. i didn't really understand what it was. it's really all new everything is new, that's for sure. to be honest, it was such a small confusion, but then it was all there. and that means that in may the bootmaker of rights javier solana, uh, came to this yeltsin in paris and all the states of 16 states signed this fact, which is envisaged by the act. now he says that the act represents my personal impressions of recollection, of course. this positive document came to the positive again the role of yevgeny maksimovich. it 's obvious here just uh, the positive thing is that we stop becoming enemies to each other. leaving for some kind of partnership goes into a discussion really into a colloquial discussion. eh, we take into account all positions, the role of the osce is definitely given in peacekeeping, conflict

resolution, and so on and so forth, it is emphasized in this basic, fundamental act. the main role of both is security advice. it's all with his permission and so on and so forth. it is clearly spelled out in the act on the non-deployment of nuclear weapons of states that enter into an asset, it is not written in the act itself that they give taboo about entry. well, we agreed in the agreement that maksimych. so i agreed that, uh, hmm, they would not deploy significant forces in those states that are entering on, and so we leveled it all, and then we realized that this was an empty conversation. but at what point did you understand, we understood, uh, that means almost 2 years later, when three states entered the last ninety-ninth year. this is hungary czechoslovakia and poland czech republic uh, so czech republic right? they entered, they were

going, it was immediately obvious, at first, they were there at first they sent some representatives, especially the pole was such an amazing beautiful nature. i was surprised, general. even we spoke in good terms literally a week later he was removed, because the americans harshly told everyone through the cia to check everyone to remove any ties that there was nothing with the former warsaw pact soviet union. they quickly exchanged all in russian, they said something. yes , he spoke russian very well, of course, there was a stumbling block. this is uh, yugoslavia i am this participation in number one here in these matters, and we really did pay tribute to sergei ivanovich here . with alana the most severe negotiations. all the same. well, you are good. you know, the elite was different, no matter how they told me. here the elite was european different. there can be there were professionals when i

went to and throw gloves we gave ginger. am i more often than i was called? i called moscow, i say before i go to moscow i want to throw a glove in his face and he blushed when his in the literal sense, well i'm not in the literal sense of words verbal verbally, well, somehow an officer of an officer general. well, in short, he became victor. he even there on crucian carp. i say, it means, well, i thrashed him for what, that they prepared an analysis very poorly, what could happen, it seems that for the political leadership, it’s only for this decision to pour this water that the leadership accepts, that even for the elite to say that we must give credit to sergey ivanovich of the salon i called, i don’t remember what time it was at three or what time in the morning and said, seryoga, nothing happened for a short time, they made a decision luxembourg somewhere against there we will bomb. at least in this regard, do you understand that now is a different matter? i'm going

more. i'm on me if you know the clack, well, that 's all there. his command and when i wrote some notes, i agree with the first point, victor does not agree, and then writes the fourth point. i agree, but i'm under the political line victor i ca n't make this decision. so, now some major general is snotty. sorry, he says in mons or where you need to bomb russia, so the elite, you understand, everything brought down it was completely different from that. i am obviously i say there were other leaders. eh, powerful germany there, france, all of these, all the same, the influence could be something, let's say modestly. it was possible to agree on something, all the same through a serious sentence. and now there is no yugoslavia, they started bombing. we flew, yes, negotiations gave us a corridor to epilosevic. i personally like this, as i saw you, with my own eyes, i cannot but say. and he is like that again, in my memory he remained a strong man, when the tsar gave him documents,

he sawed off his wine. so reads, but english language reads reads reads everything read there takes it tears and throws. it was something. it is necessary to tell the truth, this is all this is all. we are witnesses, that's all. and so it went, then we led. here is a very important point. of course, they started another break. all uh, kosovo- throw straw, and that's all there were underground negotiations. we almost agreed that it would be separate, our russian peacekeeping sector separately. we literally got ahead of ourselves. there, for 40 minutes, two battalions, having unloaded macedonia, two battalions marched. uh, british courts. to the airfield see, you mean this throw. and we are already there, and when we chained everything up, you still don’t understand what? and here, as an eyewitness participant, many then, in my opinion, i remember very well many people said so, that this, of course, is very famously very bravo

but senseless strategic. they spoke absolutely wrong. i will now explain why. for the first time they returned, the chic hospital is the most chic, they treated everyone, we control all situations, the airfield was in our hands, something else. i want to say this too . i still speak today. i am for what was possible leave our group. there was our general head of the airport, our gerda, any plane that was landing when they were already accepting the paratroopers and placing them in these, as sectors of our shpakovsky paratroopers . this is jackson who contacted me. he says victor i we can't pare us. everywhere your plane lands with people. and our empty sits down. this is how they sat down. it is empty, it is empty, well, there was a report. and if there were intensified negotiations, of course, one could leave. yes there were times the world

changed beyond recognition. well, for example, 25 years back, when the founding act was signed, russia nato did anyone discuss in the nato context, china where is the euro-atlantic, and where is the prc. but in the new concept, china is called the source of systemic competition, undermining the order, based on the rules, almost an adversary. we asked our longtime friend jailbo, a retired military man and now a researcher at tsinghua university, how china perceived the nato summit. by chance, for china , the most remarkable thing is the presence of the prime minister at the summit itself. japan for the first time in history asked what is the purpose of the us secretary of defense catches austin recently at the shangala conference said that there are no plans to create asian backgammon? yes, and then what about the topic of ukraine, the russian threat to solidarity is understandable, but we are most

interested in. why did the heads of japan and south korea come there? the fact that china is mentioned as a serious challenge means, in your opinion, that europe , european countries, will now extend their military activity to the pacific ocean. they may demonstrate some symbolic gestures to send immediately to another pair of ships to remind them that they have legitimate interests there. one of the problems. distance, as some call tyranny nato's geography is simply too far from china, the second obstacle nato as an alliance is one, but if you look at individual countries, they have different views on china, there are enough european states that have friendly relations with china, especially economic americans decided to consider china as a strategic competitor and want to adapt nato to this task, but discard their interests in favor of the intention of the united states in the asia-pacific region. why is it in europe with the unification of the united states of

great britain maybe formed as an anti-chinese alliance? yes, the aucus is a purely military organization. and the united states will do everything to strengthen it. will other countries want australia or, say, south korea to engage in a military buildup? if i were them, i would think hard, south korea, for example, is very dependent on china in terms of peace and stability on the korean peninsula. so she can't ignore chinese reaction when the south koreans hosted american anti-missile systems, they received a very powerful response from china that they did not count on, if they decide to join the auction, then let their imaginations run wild to present chinese responses. another event of the last summit was the official invitation of finland to sweden to join the alliance, turkish president erdon masterfully paused and at the

last moment agreed not to block the expansion in exchange for promises. helsinki stockholm to fight kurdish extremism. soon the number of nato countries will reach an impressive 32, but does quantity always turn into quality? we asked vladimir printed how much the ussr at one time relied on the allies under the warsaw pact on paper. everything looked good for the czechs, which means it changed in the case, yes, it was an offensive operation and in response to the nato attack, of course, retaliatory, but offensive, which means that the czechs planned to invade the territory of the frg, so the poles should have easily captured denmark there and so next, within there a week another already come out klonzh, that is, on paper. everything seemed to be good. and reliable, but reality in reality means, of course, there was no complete trust, and this was one of the vulnerable features, and i think the atc command structure compared to nato is still

real coordination and consultations, including on military plans and nuclear there was no such nuclear planning group in the internal affairs department. what is this is you nato and those military plans that were in moscow, they, in general, were not brought to the attention of the allies. bringer tactical plans within the framework of the military exercises of the command and staff military, which were carried out here, but he had big strategic plans, they remained secret for the allies for the allies, besides, they were very worried about the fact that the majority. these exercises did not leave the fact that the main military operations would take place on the territory of the central, i.e. western central and east. without touching, especially the territory of the soviet union, that is, they were under attack. not being fully informed about how to behave. uh, the soviet union in this situation is interesting, while

being informed by the soviet leadership thanks to intelligence. what was being done in nato and about nato's plans was, as it is now becoming clear, very high, but there were agents from among the gdrovites who worked in the very. uh, brussels itself is pretty close to making decisions. so in moscow they knew about nato's plans, if not about everything, of course, then the main points were clear. notavtsy were also something. what are they informed about? especially. through as we know poland this leak took place through the representatives of poland, uh, to the command in the department of internal affairs, the famous ukrainian colonel was a source of important information. although it seems to me that, nevertheless, we are better informed about what is happening in nato than nato's son spoke about the ats. of course, there must be a degree of consistency of support,

no mutual mutual trust there. between the members of this organization in the police department, the sati command style prevailed; the main decisions were all made without much effort; they were made in moscow; this, of course, made these relations less reliable, especially at critical moments. i think there is complete confidence in moscow that in the event of a big war. the same poles, well, in relation to the germans. i think there were no particular doubts about their discipline, diligence, and so on. here the poles could behave differently.

but viktor zavarzin was always sure that russia definitely needed to strengthen its alliance. at that time, i was already raising the role of the csto. then frankly. now i'm standing in front of any camera, i want to say that the work that will last on the propaganda of the dgb. she's weak, work and let's honestly admit. it's them who come. these guys. i won’t list them all in an accident and they’re all sitting in the bushes or not voting, or even against us, i didn’t care about all the corridors, it wasn’t quite the experience i already had and talked to all of them. it won't work that way guys. and now if we return to our time. we are these sco dkd, we must revive these organizations. as a political scientist, you understand what we understand exactly. therefore, while the g- 7 and nato were doing the walmal and nato, the russian leadership

was intensively communicating with interlocutors from brix and caspian five. maybe not all allies. but all the very necessary partners are worth the time spent, spain by the way, where was the summit celebrating the fortieth anniversary of participation in nato how is the mood in madrid, reporting by daria kustova? after 25 years, madrid reopened its doors to host donations. it is no coincidence that this year marks 40 years since the country joined the organization. and it took time for this to happen, as leopold calva, satella prime minister after 40 years, was the right initiator of joining the alliance. -summer dictatorships. franco, he was replaced by philip gonzalez , who, even during his election campaign , openly declared that he was an opponent of nato. however, at that moment, spain was in the process of modernization, so he was forced to ensure the country's security and solve internal problems such as the gibraltar issue on march 12

1986. in spain, a historic referendum was held on the further stay of spain in nato, the country became the sixteenth member of the alliance another eight second, but abstained from participation in the military structure of the bloc, according to the results of the referendum, the majority of spaniards gave a positive answer, but at the same time 40% were against, which demonstrated a deep split in society. the question of the definitive command structure of the alliance madrid joined only in the ninety- sixth year. after nato was headed by the former minister of foreign affairs of spain, by the way, a former opponent of joining the union. javier salavata left the american but our cooperation with the us has always been very close even during the war in iraq. i think that in in the current conflict, spain will stand up for ukraine, which it is already doing. by accepting refugees and providing financial assistance in the country, we should not forget that we have a very important geographical position. we can actively help with the logistics for the summit in the capital the ministry of

foreign affairs took security measures and deployed more than 10,000 police fire doctors volunteers a few days before the start of the fourth level of anti -terrorist threat was introduced in the country closed airspace over madrid, the central street was also blocked for the passage of delegations, which created a number of inconveniences for ordinary spaniards. now okay, she, well, time blocked some of the roads, both in the capital itself and outside it , the mayor of madrid advised all residents to transfer to public transport, to avoid traffic jams and, if possible, work many attractions without leaving home. such as the prada museum and the royal palace were closed to ordinary citizens for tourists - this, of course, caused a lot of inconvenience. for a few days before thousands of people themselves took part in the demonstration. under the slogan. no nato in particular the representatives of the ultra left party destroyed, members of the government coalition, the participants

opposed the increase in the kingdom 's defense spending, according to the spanish prime minister. pedro sanchez, spain wants to double its military spending in the next few years. it is not surprising that many spaniards doubt the necessity of the existence of this organization. i believe that this summit is held only to maintain the image organizations. it's just marketing first russian-ukrainian. everything that the newspapers report, radio and television, is one continuous propaganda in many western countries censorship has been introduced, but if in france and germany there is still some kind of freedom in the press, then in spain 99% of the media submit the same information, which is the local population, however, and here there are people who read and have not forgotten what should have been done in yugoslavia, libya and other countries. they question the true goals of the alliance until spain lost the option and could change the course of the country, however, the protracted political crisis and other pressing issues like rising

electricity prices, gasoline and food products are a challenge. at present, the current spanish government has big plans for further cooperation with the alliance. however, the gradual decline in the prestige of the organization and its recent actions makes many spaniards think about the need for its existence, and the country's membership in nato continues to be the subject of fierce disputes and contradictions daria kustova miguel gonzalez especially for international review madrid spain rides around europe at his house horror what 's going on just the same judicial lawlessness about this after advertising.

in the summer it will be exciting to be an exciting example like this.

the summer will not be boring movies series documentaries cartoons no, nothing is impossible comedies of the ancient greek playwright aristophanes organized athenian women to go on strike not to fulfill their marital duty until their husbands stop the endless wars participants in mass

protests in new york demand the same, but for a different reason, abstention if the us supreme court does not restore the right to abortion to americans. the supreme court in america loves abbreviations and this body goes under the code abbreviation scotus ruled to reconsider the landmark decision of the seventy- third year in the case of roy v. wide, in doing so, the highest court overturned the universal right to terminate a pregnancy, which had previously been a federal prerogative returned to the state. 69th norm mccurvey noticed that she became pregnant with a woman and so had problems with drugs, alcohol and two children. whose upbringing. she hardly worked out. she decided to terminate the pregnancy and claimed she was raped under texas law. it was the only legal way to have an abortion

to prove the rape. she failed and attempted to have an illegal abortion, but the doctor was arrested by the police while lawyers linda coffee and sarah wintington were looking for a plaintiff on behalf of whom they could file a lawsuit against the state of texas. did this in the seventieth year on behalf of jane roe this is, in fact, the female analogue of the designation of a party in a lawsuit, borrowed from roman law and a proper name for designation is unknown. let's say, if you were talking about a place, and not about a person, then you would call it a city. the defendant was the district attorney general. oh, the court ruled in favor of the woman, but did not cancel the existing laws, the case came to the supreme court, the validity of the consideration was not obvious. after all , the supreme court decides only real disputes woman by this time, she had given birth to a girl. they gave it up for adoption. this means that the conflict was settled

to speak on behalf of all women, the norm could not, but based on the social importance of the matter. this is not the first time the court has made an exception. in history. after all, the situation could be repeated, the result in the trial was the decision that the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy is guaranteed by the us constitution, she can have an abortion until the fetus is not capable of life, that is, the gestational age does not exceed 28 weeks before this decision of the supreme court issue the legality of abortion. decided at the state level. thirty states banned abortion entirely, and sixteen were severely restricted. and only four are freely allowed. the resonance is gigantic in the usa throughout the western world, why will we talk about this to the wonderful specialists victoria zhuravleva, head of the center for north american studies and momo victoria hello, tell me

why? actually, the topic of abortion is clear that it is important for society, but it literally blew everything up and the main thing became. here is such a watershed into two as would be groups of people. in general, this topic. e difficult for american society for many long decades and the decision of the supreme court. as if periodically expected, that is, with every change, the increase in the conservatism of the supreme court in society all the time surfaced. here is the expectation. now they will cancel it now they will cancel it, and it seems to me that this decision is like a mirror. here it reflects all the specifics of the american state of american society, it also reflects how political decisions in the united states, that is, how high the role

of the judiciary is in them, then, and how divorced the state is from society, because if we look at social polls, then 74% of society does not support the decisions of the supreme court 74%, and 61% of americans believe that abortion should be legal. there are all sorts of nuances. from what month and so on, but in principle, 61 percent of american society believes that a woman should have the right to an abortion, including republicans, and accordingly the question arises. and why for whom this decision was made and here is another point that this decision reflects is the huge politicization of the entire social agenda in american society in the seventy-third year, when the decision was made to legalize abortion, it was made in response to social demand, but was in many ways advanced medical community,

because the percentage of female mortality was very high in the century of criminalization of abortion, it really was just a monstrous situation and the supreme court made the decision that was needed society. and now the supreme court has made a decision that political lita needs, the conservative wing of the republican party, this is what revolts society. why such and such a resonance and something that generally reflects the essence of what is happening today in the united states . this is the idea that with this decision not only begin, but then, so to speak, cancel everything that the progressives considered the achievement of the last few decades there, well, up to e legalization of one marriage. well, i think that the legalization of same-sex marriage is next in line, it is the very first thing that could be, because it was

generally hardly accepted. and if you look, in principle, society has an ambiguous attitude to this far, not in all states this is accepted. that is, this is just such a completely new change in the agenda, which can be affected, but hmm it seems to me that they started from the very loudest and the most destructive, there are two points of view. i got one, what is it? well, in general, such a collapse of the model or the model is moving these costs of balances is moving towards rahu, and the other, on the contrary, that this is just a very painful, but such a necessary reorganization that will give rise to a new, healthier society. what do you think, who is more right polarization is paradoxical, but is it something that keeps political? the system from too abrupt changes, that is, here we say, well, today's pro-situation is often criticized for radicalization, but in

fact. uh, look. here's an example of a trump who came up with the decision to break everything and change everything. he cannot do this, and in the conditions tough opposition to the other part of society. the same comes with biden with a huge social agenda, which for the liberal side of society is exactly what they want, but 48% of american society does not believe that they are ready for such a major change. and here it is. ah, the polarity of opinions and, accordingly, the polarity of political parties. it seems to be blocking, here, and the drastic changes that it can bring to the president. now the authorities are much more polarized and radicalized than the society. this is the liberal-conservative dichotomy. she is obviously in the parties, but it is more imposed on

society than it is in society in society. in fact, there is a very large variety between the extreme rules and the extreme left and the middle. there they are more ready to agree and understand each other. although, indeed, the extreme poles speak different languages. and in general they are on different planets in different countries, if you look at the congress, then the largest faction is the right-wing republican, following it are the left-wing democrats. they speak in different languages. they do not allow to carry out what one side does not allow the other to carry out its agenda, and in society there is a middle ground. in general, society is set up for dialogue, we live in a completely different legal culture. we don’t really understand that america is sometimes well, they say that america is a country with weights. and that, in general, the judiciary is the main one there, what does this mean for the political system. this is a plus or minus in terms of this stability. this means that the separation of powers that we often know about

as america is a symbol of the separation of powers. implies not only a division into the executive legislative, but also an extremely large role for the judiciary. the supreme court of the united states is the highest court of appeal and can accept any case from a lower court. at the same time, the supreme court has the right to make not only legal, but also political decisions, for example, to decide whether the normative and legal acts of the us congress or the federal government comply with the us constitution, the court itself selects issues that will often be considered related to the most pressing social topics. usually, about 100 cases a year go through hearings out of eighty thousand requests, the decision is binding and cannot be challenged, and they can greatly change the lives of americans, for example, racial segregation in schools was abolished by the supreme court in 1954. each of the nine

judges is appointed by the president of the united states for life after approval by the senate. a vacancy appears only when the judge dies or serves himself. the stand of a judge is conditionally divided into conservatives and liberals, that is, nominees from republican or democratic presidents under trump, judging by the republicans became more than the democrats. six to three before that, the ratio was five to four, but sometimes the chairman of the court, republican john roberts , voted with the liberals and the case was decided not in favor of conditional conservatives, for example, it was decided to ban dismissal from work for non-traditional sexual orientation. very often, the vector of social development of society is changed by decisions of the supreme court. and this, of course, a moment that

the executive legislature is also forced to take into account , it is paradoxical that at the time of the president and congress the supreme court never intervenes, but these are such indirect decisions. uh, like, for example, the abolition of the legalization of abortion, this is actually interference in the agenda of a democratic president. that is, it turns out to intervene and very very actively, and here again we recall that the us political process is organized through parties and in conditions when the parties are radicalized. it turns out that the president and? it may not always be i am sure that he can carry out his social agenda, because the supreme court was formed before him. and if here he is, as he is already conservative, then the supreme will have its own agenda here. and it turns out that in the state there are at least three agendas - the agenda of the president, the agenda of the congress and the agenda of the supreme court. everything becomes very

complicated, as it were, our ideal idea that a court outside of politics is absolutely irrelevant for america . no, he is not out of politics. thank you very much victoria zhuravleva from immor was with you. the revision of the decision on abortion in the united states caused a controversial reaction from the supreme court - it is written on the starting pistol that opened a new civil confrontation. drawing by steve brin bill bramham from the liberal camp there is not happy not only with abortions, but also with the permission to carry weapons in new york calmly, the lady says to her husband i put contraceptives in the gun, apparently a hint that gun conservatives do not check michael ramirez and the traditional the donkey as a symbol of the democrats on the poster says death to the supreme court, and on belly inscription humanity. and then donkey says i need an abortion. harry warvel about the historic

court decision, death mourns the retrial. rowe vs. wade, aif branco's deeply conservative image hints at trump's return to big politics. he uses the famous biden meme. i did it, and raising the price of gasoline. it's right there on the poster. case review.ru vs. wade, gun permit in new york trump lookalike says i did it. something else remarkable happened this week did not make payments for servicing its bonds, as the western media gladly wrote the first default of russia on foreign obligations since 1918, the analogy is beautiful, but wrong 104 years ago, the bolsheviks refused to pay, declaring the borrowing of the tsarist and provisional governments

illegal. and now the russian federation wants to pay and is ready, but it is not allowed. as a matter of fact, creditors have blocked all the ways of the passage of money; imagine that creditors are imbued with the spirit of not acquisitiveness, but to make it difficult means that a landmark policy has finally won the economy. and if we add here the discussion at the big seven, the introduction of an administrative ceiling on oil and gas prices begins to smell of infusion. up not for the sake of speed, but for the sake of the will sent by the global gas plan. here is the share of the aforementioned bolsheviks and never dreamed of. it was an international review. see you.

in front of me are unique historical documents , the standard of living of german citizens was continuously declining until 1918, in some regions people began to starve. i must have rejoiced at the fact that such a good force was found, which for some reason would help disinterestedly like that. the whole experience of ukrainian statehood at the beginning of the 20th century, that the directory, that the gate fan of skoropadsky is one big continuous caricature. skoropadsky's trouble turned out to be that he tried to sit between different chairs, the result is understandable, this is a fall. the main reasons for the betrayal of the fundamental

interests of the people in favor of the german and austrian occupiers

of the russian army, the forces of the luhansk people's the republics took control of several more strategically important facilities in the lisichansk direction. this includes a mine, a sailor suit and a gelatin factory, which you used as your stronghold. well, where the militants have not yet retreated from.