inequality inflation and winter dissatisfaction new barriers in the form of red lines plot from austria rebuilding the world after yalta what changes await us in the materials of our program? we did not have time to look back, as the concept of wartime mobilization, nuclear deterrence, turned from an abstraction into something not abstract at all. but almost a mirage. it seems that life as it was at the beginning of the year, the expected trajectories have changed for the world of the country of each of us, the reversibility of events is not provided, therefore it is advisable without unnecessary understand emotions. what is the specificity of the moment and what's next in the conditions of acute international struggle assessment of misunderstanding. ah, the possibilities of the opposite side they constantly talk about

what russia is today and begin to measure this is the amount of gdp and say that it is 2% or less of budgets and so on, but the actual geopolitical analysis is complex and interesting. not enough, but on the russian side they are just focusing on certain advantages that russia has, of course, they do. but, nevertheless, there is also an underestimation of american possibilities of what america is capable of doing and in fact today. here we have, uh, the culmination of this whole ukrainian conflict. and what is happening is, in fact, a gradual shift. this is asymmetry, a symmetrical conflict that changes the balance of power. it changes due to the active connection. the west is doing something to almost everything today, ukraine except landing alive. this is all done by living ukrainians, but everything else

is already there, and therefore, so to speak, this is an asymmetry that was, a certain advantage for russia, she also leaves the notes turns into a symmetrical one in this situation. given that there is this, this is an underestimation of both sides, this leads to an escalation. and the further, the more intense the current military-political crisis. it is difficult to compare with something that we saw, of course, the cold war was rich in aggravations, but it lasted a long time and got used to it. can to express the correct scale, threats and dangers, what they are afraid to avoid, and that the coming alluvial year 2022 was a shock, because in three decades everyone believed eternal peace, it has practically arrived, universal interconnection is extremely beneficial for the

majority. well, yes, contradictions are growing, and socio-economic to geopolitical, but they will be resolved, however, they are resolved, alas, as this usually happens in the world of states and people on the juicy task of not crossing the red line, beyond which either the unknown, or vice versa terrible prejudice. the red line or red outline is a term that means the limits of patience of one of the parties, and its origin is often disputed, mentioning the 1928 agreement of the same name on the division of the oil industry in the middle east or recalling the red scale on car instruments. this is in english in french they say about the yellow line. perhaps this came from the yellow color of the road markings, which was in france until 72 in england, recalls the events of the

crimean war of 1854 to repel the attack russian cavalry under a balaclava, the commander of the ninety-third scottish infantry regiment ordered the soldiers to line up not in four lines, but in two fronts. the taki was too wide a soldier was not enough, but the maneuver allowed the army to stretch out, the war correspondent of the times williams, described a regiment of british in red uniforms. a thin red line about bristling junk, and although the race was not present, during these events the expression entered the english language and became a cultural phenomenon. there is another term meaning deadline or deadline. this expression came from the first concentration camp in the history of mankind, better known as anderson wilskaya prison, organized by southerners during the american civil war, its population was three times the estimated figure of 10,000 people. the camp was surrounded by towers, which created a

perimeter that could be shot through, and it was called the deadline. everyone who tried to escape sentries shot, without warning, there are stories that some could not stand the terrible conditions of detention and committed suicide. they strapped through fence and found themselves in a dead zone. draw red lines so that it would be impossible not to notice them. or, even more so, to ignore the special art, let's talk with our kind, comrade dmitry trenin, the real doka and in matters of international security. have some good afternoon, beauty. that the president, well, we have entered into a major international crisis, an international military-political crisis. it seems that having forgotten the safety instructions a little , how to remember, well, generally speaking about safety engineering as it still existed. it was intended not for

periods of crisis, but for a period of more or less calm, when it was necessary. well, just make sure that the other country correctly calculates and reads your signals. here, where the conflict in syria, for example, is an example. here is an example of such things, and now we are in a territory where, in principle, there is no safety equipment, because we find danger in the territory and here, uh, the red lines that were drawn russian side americans. well, let's just say that it is not very respected , moreover, as i understand their line. their own line is to keep moving them constantly testing and moving them. in general, in the american one, here are, uh, the rule books on which the world of our red line is based. no,

so the only thing that can stop. uh, the united states is in this situation. this is the fear of your own fear. er, next step. that's it, there's nothing else. have fear apparently or not? or they skillfully hide it, because uh, well, i i think we both have this experience in recent months , american colleagues have repeatedly and informally said that, well, we thought. you can really pose a threat, so to speak, but in fact it is a complete bluff, therefore. why should we limit ourselves? the other day, literally , the khodja bank with a well-known military leader in the past said that it means they are ready to destroy the black sea fleet there if these weapons are used. what should be done? and is it possible to do something so that these red lines of faith returned, just how they would perform. well , i think there is little, what can be done to bring them back. uh, i'm back to the idea of ​​fear again,

because there's nothing else to hold our opponent back. if you can't speak seriously. i think the american strategy of strategically defeating russia is based on the belief that russia, uh, hmm, won't use nuclear weapons. what is she either? he cares or considers that the destruction of civilization is still too high a price for maintaining his positions here. on my look, there is a potentially fatal miscalculation for all of humanity, because i have putin’s phrase from the eighteenth year that we don’t need a world without russia, it somehow stuck, and i constantly remember it, but i don’t think that it also taken seriously

by many people in the united states for example. well, the whole experience. uh observation. for e. vladimir putin had to convince that he almost never says a word just like that, but, apparently, he does not convince. well seen here, probably too big. or rather too big. the temptation to use the current situation in ukraine for, if you like, a solution to the russian problem, as the german problem disappeared as a result of the second world war. from the european landscape, and why not, can the russian problem disappear from the western horizon? and here, in my opinion, our colleagues

took a bite of his business. and moving forward towards the collision. now a new situation is clearly emerging. in the case of a favorable outcome for the organizers of the outcome of the referendums, the russian border will be officially changed and accordingly, er, those words that our officials always say about the use of nuclear weapons to consider read the doctrine. but, if you read the doctrine based on the new frontiers, what does this mean? well, i think that , firstly, the territory of the russian federation has long been under attack. yes, a ukrainian strike, but a strike at the suggestion of the americans and nato, uh, with the help of weapons that were provided by the united states by nato countries in this sense, the kherson region will not differ in any way from republic of crimea from the belgorod region of kursk and

possibly other regions of russia where can ukrainian arrivals fly to? our doctrine says that nuclear weapons can be used if there is a threat to the existence of the state. uh-huh no, some kind of projectile will fly into russian territory. yes, and the threat to the existence of states. here e! evaluate and decide does this or that action of the enemy threaten the existence of the state? this is the duty of the supreme commander. but i will say more in my opinion. many people in the united states and in europe well, in europe it's much less so, but in the united states . nuclear exchange of nuclear strikes in the

european theater of war that is, not only ukraine but wider, as something, and ukraine, of course, as something, in principle, is not catastrophic. and the main thing here, in my opinion, if we make nuclear weapons to turn nuclear weapons into an effective instrument of deterrence in the specific ukrainian situation is to convince the united states is that the strike will follow on the territory of the united states because the strike on the territory of ukraine will not stop anyone in general, the strike on the territory of europe will not be considered as critical critical dangers. but hitting the united states is a different matter. but i say it again over the past few decades after the end of the cold war , the opinion has been that this is what constituted the

greatest fear during the cold war. this is an exchange of massive nuclear strikes between nuclear superpowers of the ussr by the united states. this is now already hmm history, no one will return to this, and nuclear weapons, again with it , are reduced to the level of use on e-e maximum in the theater of war, and so in the theater of operations. nuclear weapons did not immediately become a deterrent after world war ii , they were perceived as another way of conducting hostilities already in october 1945, the us military began working on a secret plan for a totality nuclear strike. now some of the experts calls this plan a nuclear bluff, the desire to create the illusion of a large number of atomic bombs in the pentagon's arsenal, but in fact there were only a few of them at that time, although after the

so-called chinese volunteers entered the korean war, the general. macarthur demanded that 30-50 atomic bombs be dropped on the border with china, they were supposed to create a radioactive search that would isolate korea. truman refused, fearing the ussr would enter the war, but publicly announced on november 30, 1950 , that the use of nuclear weapons in korea perhaps the effect turned out to be rather open back. they took the indignation of great britain, france , and other states of western europe joined them. they were frightened by the response of moscow, its tu-4 planes, a copy of the american b-29s with nuclear bombs did not reach the united states, but could easily reach london and paris on the impossibility of a retaliatory strike by the ussr, by the way, was a new american plan for nuclear war was built. the korean war on april 12, 1951, forced the drop to change estimates.

a large group of b-29 bombers. at supported by hundreds of fighters, was about to strike at the bridge over the yelujiang river, it was supplying korea from china, 36 soviet jet fighters rose in alarm in less than 20 minutes of battle. they destroyed dozens of american aircraft, without losing a single one of their own, more than a hundred american pilots were captured in the press, this is an incident. black thursday styles, and the corridor along the river, the alley of moments, poured into this area, was banned. with the development of jet fighter aircraft, it became clear that in a nuclear war, most likely, everyone american fortresses. they will be shot down even before they reach the combat course. in addition, by the fifty- sixth year of the ussr, their own bombers appeared, capable of reaching the territory of the united states. a year later, the ussr ruled the successful test of the world's first

intercontinental ballistic missile. so there is a problem for this when the russian president seeks to contain the enemy by direct or indirect references to nuclear weapons. the enemy interprets this, at least publicly , as a threat to use nuclear weapons. moreover, the threat of the use of nuclear weapons falls into the western concept of waging a war, when e failure on the e front, if during a war using only conventional weapons is compensated by the use of nuclear weapons, they attribute this doctrine to us, yes. hmm it is quite possible that the blow will follow not at a specific theater of operations, but at a certain distance from it

. completely incorrect, a different situation, but if you really try to return, that's hmm that way of escalating to solve the problem, then there must be a direct direct threat from the dual-nuclear powers. they are such a sequence, but from all that we are discussing. uh, in general, it follows that this is a funnel, from which there is no way out yet, that is, absolutely linear logic. it turns out without the terrible horror that suddenly everyone will feel on the americans, there and so on. and how is there even a way out of this spiral here? well, i i think that we have a unique case in many respects. to be honest, i can’t recall another situation that even remotely resembled the current ukrainian crisis, indeed, the funnel is drawing in

not only us, but also the americans, and we are going. in general, we are on the road to a head-on collision. for us, this is an existential question, because we are talking not only about the fate of ukraine. but what is much more important for us than the fate of russia, and in the most fundamental sense of the word? in the mid -nineties, mobilization was resorted to during the balkan conflict in the summer of 1995 alone, the ministry of internal affairs of serbia put into service about 10,000 refugees and returned them to the front in croatia and bosnia and herzegovina in 2008 against the backdrop of an escalation of the armed conflict. general mobilization was announced in south ossetia georgia, the latter, according to various estimates, deployed from 60 to 100,000 reserve lists in the combat zone in september 2020 due to the events in

nagorno-karabakh, general mobilization for the first time in history declared martial law to armenia introduced nagorno-karabakh repeatedly. mobilization was carried out in libya, where two authorities have been reigning for more than ten years, the parliament elected by the people controls the east, and the government formed with the support of the un and the european union, the west in january last year, the command. the national army of caliph hafta declared jihad and general mobilization in order to resist the actions of turkey, which allowed the military to be sent to the lily, israel generally exists in conditions of partial mobilization almost from the moment of its formation in the country there is no contract army calls both men and women are subject to service. the backbone of the armed forces is the cadre army, but in the event of a threat, all citizens subject to mobilization must stand up due to this during the arab israeli wars, the ratio of

attacking and defending forces never even reached two to one therefore, israel over and over again won in the confrontation with the arab states. for the united states, these are questions rather of political prestige, questions of leadership, questions of position in the world system. such a big global one, yes, but even if we allow, if we allow, uh, the success of russia in ukraine and the failure of the american strategy of defeating russia, this will not be fatal to the position of the united states in the world in their part of the world where they dominate, in they have no rivals, on the contrary, i would say that the potential defeat of the united states in ukraine could lead to even greater rallying.

uh those countries that president putin called it years around the united states 'cause i simply cannot imagine myself otherwise, well then, the last question. he must be so active. but, if we ignore the understandable bitterness with which we all comment on the situation, how were the figures shredded, right? you look who rules us now. i am the world between us. eh, people have lost, therefore, a sense of reality, it is clear that there is some share here. well, such excitement. well, well, seriously, if we say, has something really changed in the perception of political leaders, and what used to be, uh, added confidence in the understanding of the frontier and that it only changed or that it was not a big war. i think the feeling of fear has disappeared. generally speaking, the world is based on fear. about nothing else

. therefore, if fear disappears, then the world is in danger. and in the west, in the united states, first of all, but also in europe , fear has disappeared, otherwise the europeans would have reacted differently to the shelling of the zaporozhye nuclear power plant. and i think the lack of fear and , uh, i would add the case of the europeans, the lack of responsibility for their own safety, because it completely and completely before the united states of america create a situation in which we uh, well, there was a very famous book uh, dedicated to the centenary of the first world war. e hmm sleepoin with

eyes closed, so to speak, e walking towards disaster. i have the impression that now, at least in europe, we see people who have closed their eyes and go, uh, towards the cliff towards the abyss. and it's very, very dangerous. so bring back the fear biden knows the truth. i think it's biden, well it's hard for me talk about abai as in a person. if we talk about the collective baidan, that is, in the white house. i think that the white house thinks that they, you know, that's how they said about clinton, that she uh, i don't know how to say smartis in russian anyway. yes, he himself is not that smart, but that's the most like that. well, he is a head taller than everyone , so he thinks better than anyone. yes, they have the impression that they understand better than anyone in the world per head for two and sodium, and so on and so

on, and russia is uneven for them, by the way, speaking about red lines. how did we start this conversation? they were perhaps in a relationship between more or less equal quantities. and when, on the one hand, uh, so to speak, there are superpowers, and on the other hand, uh, the remnants of the former superpower, from the point of view of the united states , there can be no question of any e even nominal equality. thank you, dmitry was training with us. after the advertisement we continue, and the system generating both. the kitchen of this faculty, as you can see, even here we could not pick up our textbooks a lot of us, we are young and for

us the future of the city. the couples have already begun to remain cheerful and cheerful, strong guys even during the hostilities.

the heart of parma soon

residents of the holiday village of markonievo, like all normal people, want to spend evenings watching tv with their families. but the constant interruptions in

electricity cause them just anger . here's how it happens look. good evening everyone. so, not everyone ran yet. republic of afghanistan in new york, the high-

level week of the un general assembly is being held the atmosphere is inflated, but, perhaps not as much as one of joseph biden's statements might be expected. even aroused the approval of russia, the us president spoke in favor of increasing the number of permanent members of the un security council in moscow said, well, yes, and we have long rejoiced about the same sudden coincidence prematurely. no one is opposed to reforming the security council so that it meets modern realities, but how the current five is formed according to an understandable principle, the winners of the second world war, and now by population by the size of the economy by the regions do not agree on the criteria. and if it does happen. they will quarrel how to apply them during these

discussions. in fact, there is one question about the right, the veto, which remains a rather exclusive privilege. it is only five permanent members that have only five permanent members in the un security council, these are the winners in world war ii usa great britain russia france and china that does not directly mention the century, but it says that all decisions, except for procedural ones, should be made by consensus when it first appeared most countries sided with washington on all issues that is why, even before the end of the war, the ussr wanted to join the un not as one state, but as all union republics separately, roosevelt said in response to this that the united states would then allow all its states to join the un as a result, in addition to the ussr, the organization also included the ukrainian and belarusian

republics of the forty-sixth to 69 years, the majority. in the security council, where in addition to five permanent members, there were six more temporary ones, remained on the side of the united states in order to block the resolutions of this majority, the soviet union imposed 93% of all branches, by the way, the resolution according to which the un troops intervened in the korean war was adopted without the ussr after the appearance of the prc in the forty-ninth year. moscow demands that beijing be given a seat in the security council. the rest of the council members refuse, and then moscow is boycotted without the korean resolution being adopted without taking into account the opinion of the soviets. the protests of the ussr had no effect, and in august moscow returned to the joint. the majority fell apart as a result of decolonization , the composition of the un increased new, developing countries. frequently voted against western initiatives in 71, china takes taiwan's place

and security council expands to 10 temporary members as a result of 70 to 91 , the us imposed 56% of the light and the soviet union less than any of the western powers after the end of the cold war in the council security there was a brief period of harmony from may 1990 to may 1993 centuries has not been used not a single time during this longest period in the history of the un veta valuable invention of the second half of the last century , designed to replace the world war before in the face of actions unacceptable to some of the great powers that used force after the forty-fifth year it became possible to declare about disagreement and the rest took it as a red light. true , there is an opinion that the system did not work because everyone

suddenly began to respect international law. it's just that the permanent members of the security council quickly became the owners of atomic weapons and was stopped not by the un charter, but by the fear of inadvertently provoking a nuclear power. now the fear has diminished, and the former balance of power and restraint that is associated with it is gone. the league of nations arose in 1919 after the first world war, it was supposed to promote peace and security, taking into account the interests of the entente and its allies, 63 countries became its members, but nevertheless, it was based on the principle of preserving the new world order by the winners of the first world war. the charter of the league of nations declared the need to limit armaments and proclaimed the principle of mutual guarantee of the territorial integrity of the participating countries, but the organization did not fulfill its purpose in

1933, germany and japan announced their withdrawal from the league of nations. and in the thirty-seventh, italy followed suit. austria or the partition of czechoslovakia well, the ussr also expelled its ranks for the war with finland. the league was replaced by the un about the creation of which in february forty-fifth agreed in yalta, roosevelt churchill and stalin 3 months later, representatives of 50 states gathered in san francisco for a conference that lasted 2 months. and now i am obliged and it is a great honor for me to announce a vote on

the approval of the charter of the united nations. the un has its own peacekeeping forces, which are not the league of nations had these un military contingents from the units of the participating countries, which are subordinate to the organization to ensure security. they can use coercion, it can be peacekeeping, a show of force or a blockade for 70 years. during its existence, the peacekeeping forces conducted about 40 operations, but it could not oppose anything to the american invasion of yugoslavia or iraq. were norms related to spheres of influence, what was it called? this has always been practically the case at the yalta conference as well. it was labeled more informally, but this also happened. and this also prevented the possibility of waging war. and of course, there were norms of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereignty, so on this basis there were

certain e, and compromises and cooperation were built and we remember how it was during the cold war, especially when the most dangerous periods were behind us from the sixties and especially in the seventies . a space for cooperation has already emerged, and on strategic issues a factor of economic interdependence has emerged. russia has become europe depends more and more, respectively, on russia, and this is what created the fact that sociologists are described by the state of the late modern everything, as they say in force. the contradictions of the universe are a certain understanding of how one should act and how one should not act, and these conditions they created reinforced their kind. this right of veto, about which we are talking, this informal side is the formal legal one, and the informal one is this understanding. e among the

great powers, how to behave in in relation to each other and how to behave in relation to the defeated powers, and then it all collapsed - the cold war was still such a symmetrical order. this symmetry was held first at the end of the second world war, then nuclear symmetry arose. and after he says that the crisis, so to speak, there was a clear feeling that we have symmetrical military potential, including especially the nuclear area, and then it collapsed and now, except for nuclear symmetry. no, there is definitely no feeling, at least from the american side the feeling that the order is symmetrical this is an asymmetrical rivalry the former insurance war has also disappeared somewhere time has passed, and uh there is no such fear, there is no more the old ideological antagonism. but this is what is not. this is not a cold war in that sense. and what is there today ? that's what we have is the rivalry,

the rivalry of the powers least of all for making the world order such that would meet our interests and preferences, first of all, and the planet does not play in this either. already previous roles. the topic of the abolition of the right of the century or the demotion of one of its holders, namely russia, pops up regularly. this is not possible without actually dismantling the system. un nuclear deterrent. of course it's not going anywhere. but as we discussed today, its effectiveness has decreased compared to the cold war, and the attempt to create a precedent for punishing a nuclear superpower. it will also change the world disposition, it is better not to experiment further. it is the most representative assembly of political subjects of the planet for three quarters of a century.

member countries grew almost four times the collapse of the empire and the self-determination of peoples had an explosive nature of the borders on the globe became much larger. where there are boundaries, there is potential conflict. change of boundaries. the question is always explosive, it can be agreed amicably, but this is an exception to the rule; border disputes cause sharp contradictions, usually military ones. land borders in the form of straight lines were often drawn by the british and french colonialists in the deserts of north africa, the demarcation was not carried out. yes and the lines themselves are conditional, a different situation in british india in 1947, in its place, the indian union of pakistan arose and later bangladesh, the division was on religious grounds, and referendums were to be held in the disputed territories. ultimately. this

led to conflicts. the most famous around nightmares even before the end of the first world war became. it is clear that the ottoman empire is losing its possessions in the middle east in may 1916, a secret agreement appeared with the agsa, pico great britain received the territories where located and cancer jordan israel france departed the north-eastern part of turkey northern cancer, syria ivan russia was supposed to get the turkish straits. following the revolution of the seventeenth year, she withdrew from the war. the promise of british intelligence agent thomas edward lawrence to create an arab state in exchange for the support of british troops. not even mentioned in europe , an example of the establishment of borders is the kerren line, a demarcation line between poland and the ero of the ussr, which was proposed by the british foreign secretary in 1920. she is far from

fully took into account the limits of the ethnic settlement of ukrainians and to the west of it. there are several ukrainian regions of the border left. often passed not only in countries, but also in cities after the second world war, it was divided, berlin, after the collapse of the ussr , half of the city of narva turned out to be on the territory of estonia, the russian part is called ivangorod, and the belgian authorities of the netherlands peacefully forged the town of borlek. both belgian and dutch municipal services operate there. and only by the signs you can understand who owns the territory the border was often redrawn sometimes radically, however, and in this matter there were shifts in the era of international institutions for changing borders. moreover , the forces began to consider it unacceptable a very correct attitude, but institutions, as it turned out , are not eternally tied to their time, and the essence

of politics is unchanged. when one ethnic group forms a nation state and this is the principle national self-determination and international law considers it as a legitimate principle of territorial integrity on the other hand. one nation is not in the ethnic sense in the civil sense, one territory, which is indivisible in the 20th century. the emphasis shifted from one side to the other, between the world wars the principle of self-determination dominated. after 1945 the point of view prevailed. if we recognize everyone who wants to decide for herself, the world will be extremely unstable, that is, territorial integrity is more important. now again swung in favor of recognizing the claim to self-determination, despite the dangerous precariousness of such a world, but i repeat the principle of sovereignty does not give a clear understanding. how to act everything

depends very much on the circumstances, which means that, to a large extent, the unpredictable fixed, including it was put by the un, is understandable, but there is still the will of the people. yota must be respected. this is a very difficult question. if you respond to all manifestations of the will of the people, the level of instability will increase sharply in many countries, there is a minority with territories residences that overlap. the world community is all states. ideally , they should have clear and stable criteria for recognizing the right to self-determination and always. active diplomatic efforts. well, yes, it is an extremely difficult political task how and when to click on people's requests when something is not clear. turn to international law , lawyers will say and they will do it right, but what if it bumps into a wall of great-power ambitions, when force is primary from the point of view of the theory of realism

in international relations international law ends where the question of the balance of power begins, for example, we are talking about a large country that violates someone's sovereignty. take, for example, the american invasion of iraq under a fictitious pretext and where there was international law, when it became clear that the us could not carry out the operation through the security council. they simply said that they would act independently, because it was their law. the right, of course, is not good for the leading powers, and therefore they are such that they limit the use of force, they respect someone else's sovereignty and no one's rights. i hope that the emergence of a multipolar world will help restore international law, because there will be more balance, the annexation of territory, in theory, should also comply with international legal norms, but in reality, what is international law when it comes to real politics and certain goals? who can punish

israel for the nexia of the dutch heights or morocco for the annexation of the western sahara syrian dutch heights fell to israel during the six-day war 1967, together with east jerusalem, in july 1980 , the knesset passed a law declaring the city the single and indivisible capital of israel. a year later, the israeli parliament annexed the dutch heights. both decisions were not accepted by the un security council, the conflict around the western sahara is not much inferior in duration to the arabs in israel in the mid-seventies, after the departure of the spanish colonialists, the struggle for the independence of the region was led by the front, the palisario supported algeria fighting. lasted until ninety the first year and stopped only after he sent front fighters there on a peacekeeping mission. palisario, proclaimed an independent state, a saharan, arab democratic

republic with an adr, he does not recognize and does not sadris, nor annexation in the disputed territory. the kingdom of morocco, they control approximately 80% of the territory of western sahara, the rest of the front in the palisario donald trump signed a declaration recognizing the dutch heights as part of israel in march 2019. this happened during his meeting at the white house with israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. this step was condemned by the government of all the arab states of russia and the european union throughout the region, mass protest demonstrations took place, but no serious political and economic steps against the united states were followed by the arabs, and a year later trump signed a declaration recognizing morocco's sovereignty over western sahara. everything went almost unnoticed. but a year later, the sovereignty of the kingdom over western sahara was recognized by 18 more countries, including the emirates and jordan. when we

experts hear accusations that the recognition of some territories. this is something unheard of. we just smile because we know how many violations there are. the same kind was on the part of those who now accuse others of violations being introduced, the next thought. if you acted like israel or morocco, that is, you took something that belongs to another and are able to hold. it is under control for a long time. then it’s normal, israel is under the patronage of the united states morocco under the patronage of france so that everything turns out to be possible and the point is not in international law, but in the alignment of forces and interests to regulate world politics. to the state of a well-oiled mechanism. no one can neither right nor force, anarchy is the natural state of the world environment. any historian of international relations will confirm the question of how this can be treated in the spirit of the libusters, seize

the moment, but can you increase your prudence by understanding? real risks it would be better if the second in europe had its own economic concerns, russian gas turned out to be very important, it played an important role. european dependency drawing bulgaria christina komarnicki for the sega newspaper hello, my name is orlov and the man says i am dependent on russian gas. hello tins answer the rest dave repair the theme of the game of thrones does not let go of american artists on the house it is written europe and on the pipe. it's clear nord stream winter is a close-lipped look at the energy crisis from pakistan come on come on don't be lazy, one man says to another. let there be light inflation written on a giant stone by michael ramirez about us economic hardships the day before

mid-term elections good news, says a man gasoline prices fell slightly chinese english-language newspaper china delly, and some features of the application of sanctions matryoshka, understandable and familiar image, but in europe apparently. it's hard about everyday life one of the most prosperous european countries in austria, reporting by julia hitl, our life will become so expensive, that what we had before will not be available to us, we will not be able to pay bills, we will not be able to buy food for ourselves. is that right boiling point people began to take to the streets the other day across austria were mass demonstrations demanding lower prices organizers. this time the unions. they say that they gathered about 30,000

citizens for the rally. i have a family of five last year we spent almost 3,000 kw, which cost us 1,400 euros together with gas. in september, we received a letter from our energy supplier that now we will have to pay twice as much. and this, of course, is not very pleasant news. life in austria before could not be called cheap, but yet everyone could afford to pay for utilities and other basic services, without serious damage to wallets. now with this difficulty, in order to somehow reduce costs, robert has to control electricity consumption. i don’t want to overpay for what i don’t use, so i always unplug the tv and kettle at night. it is clear that you can’t turn off the refrigerator, but, for example, the same router for the internet can be turned off at night, in addition, we almost never use the dryer drum, and only

shirts on the sites of power engineers write how not to spoil their mood with another electricity bill. for example, when cooking, use the residual heat of the oven and stove or wash clothes at a low temperature for politicians, the agenda has been replenished with one more topic, but it must be correctly connected by the rest. every second woman. in austria, part-time work. this means she has less income. and if she's raising kids alone, that means she can't pay for everyone's school, extended day. she just can't afford it. for the current government, popular unrest is not at all, by the way, in october the country will hold presidential elections and the percentage of dissatisfied may grow. it is not surprising that they decided to support citizens financially, but i heard that entrepreneurs will receive material assistance from the government. but so far i have not dealt with this issue. each adult received 500 euros, each child 250. in addition, they gave additional bonuses for paying for electricity, but

the protesters believe that this is still not enough. at even entrepreneurs support them in this. i have a lot of appliances that work day and night, these are showcases of their refrigerators, so as not to lose income. i'll have to raise food prices, but i can't double them. in that case, no one wants to. just the other day the government decided to freeze electricity prices from me. the cost of 1 kw will be even less than before 10 cents. but this is with one important condition when consuming no more than 2900 kw per year. if this number is higher, then the calculation will take place already at market prices with this situation, the rise in prices for electricity products, literally for everything plus accumulated fatigue from covid. all this led to the fact that the usually restrained austrians gradually begin to realize the scale of what is happening and conduct a not very restrained conversation with each other, the question is that it is not clear what to prepare for until the end , even more unclear how far. all this can

go julia title dmitry romanov specially for international review vienna austria anxious the program turned out to be in the spirit of the times. well, at least let's sum up life, affirming the lines of the soviet poet valentin berestov, no, the word peace will remain. it is unlikely that when people will not know the war, after all, what everyone used to call the world will simply call it life. rather, see you in the international review. the lord us musicians influence the soul. play

well, i don't remember such that they asked for the anthem of russia, the conjuncture, the people would immediately buy it, they don't sympathize, it's impossible to deceive them.

is it most

important for soldiers at the front to feel that they have not been forgotten? here i am i come to the front line to them, and they see. he is not afraid, so we are together and this is the most important thing in what we do and anyone can do it . you don't need to know how to play the script to do this. it is very important. if i am an artist, i should be here where the heart beats now, where the fate of the entire world order is decided. not marconi, who can never choose what to watch tv shows today.

where no one ever swears? after all, each of them has long had an application look.ru, which you can watch anywhere and on anything.

the first day of the referendum on accession to russia in the donbass kherson and zaporozhye regions has ended, let me remind you that voting will last until september 27 on the last day will be held at polling stations. in the meantime, and for security reasons, a member of the election commissions come to the house or collect ballots in the adjacent territories, the ukrainian military, meanwhile, are trying to