hello on the air international review in the studio of fyodor lukyanov today in the program of the international review of the event of the week of the chronicles. russia has suspended participation in and are ready to return to testing the materials of our program. they threaten china to test the relationship for strength. what is the response prepared in beijing

by the effectiveness of western sanctions and the attempt to abolish russian culture a year ago, peaceful life ended. at first it was hard to believe that between the two neighboring countries, closely related, very close in cultural and historical terms, unfolded full-scale hostilities, then the reaction was a surprise. the west's attempt to inflict a knockout financial and economic blow to knock russia off its feet did not work, but the funnel of the conflict quickly began to expand quickly, it became clear what was happening. not just a local skirmish. although this fierce battle for the international hierarchy of the stakes, in which for all those involved is extremely high , no one is ready to retreat, the rejection of the ultimate demands is tantamount to a complete defeat on february 22,

no one could imagine. to what extent yes there is a confrontation and how familiar the thought of the inevitability of escalation will become. from january to november 2022, the united states provided $ 48 billion in aid to ukraine, of which $ 23 billion went to military spending, such figures lead the council on foreign relations to an influential us think tank for comparison in 2020, the largest american military aid received, israel 3 billion 300 million dollars, a little less than 3 billion, went to the president of afghanistan, ashrafugan soon, who fled from kabul, the taliban and egypt. a little over one billion.

true, israel egypt has been receiving such assistance annually for 45 years as a payment for peace among themselves, enclosed in a container of forty countries providing military assistance to ukraine, american packages were the largest in absolute terms , followed by the united states in britain germany canada poland france a as a percentage of gdp , estonia and latvia spend the most on military assistance to ukraine almost 1%. according to bloomberg for the entire time of the special operation in ukraine more than 4,000 pieces of armored vehicles were delivered, artillery guns, aircraft and air defense systems, most of the heavy weapons. received from the countries of eastern europe, the former members of the warsaw pact gave kiev more than 400 tanks , 250 soviet-made infantry fighting vehicles, 40 grad multiple launch rocket systems. in addition , american armored personnel carriers, m113 and m117 and almost 40

highmars and aviation multiple launch rocket systems are supplied. ukraine received attack aircraft, soviet -made fighters, mi helicopters, as well as bayraktar drones from turkey, air defense systems this is a german self-propelled anti-aircraft gun. cheetah systems eight batteries per self from us production soviet strela missile systems and british sides from artillery ukraine received about three hundred two-sim howitzers predominantly from the usa as well as self-propelled artillery mounts from britain poland germany and the usa to the end, because the main task has always been to confront moscow, as the british prime minister rishinok, no need to feel sorry for kiev weapons

shells. they were already intended against russia, florid, as always, emmanuel macron for the victory of ukraine but against the defeat of russia . however, joe biden clearly showed himself for its strategic defeat. he told everyone that he was going to warsaw and he first assured both capitals to kiev of unshakable support and threatened the steglich house in moscow, and joe biden's priorities, the president says it's time to meet with those who are suffering from a grandiose humanitarian crisis to go to agayo, where there is an ecological disaster or at the southern border, he says, the assistant is not in kiev , ukraine clarifies the biden. drawing by harry varvel, joe biden in yellow and blue against the backdrop of an environmental disaster. vagay her expressive posture and facial expression family contract from france flo y kan ukraine will join

the european union in the near future. yes, we have already managed to get used to the asterisks , the soldier leopold from austria says st. valentine's day against the backdrop of the militarization of ukraine and the supply of weapons. nato to kiev shahid antikulakh from afghanistan now the artist lives in switzerland the work is called munich security conference. vladimir putin delivered a long-awaited message to the federal assembly, where at the end he presented a surprise, suspended participation in the strategic offensive arms treaty and hinted at the possibility of nuclear testing if the suspension turns into a denosation, and this has happened in recent years, an entire era will end. security within a year. after him, in the sixty-

third, the ussr and the united states signed a nuclear test ban treaty. then came agreement on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. it limited the club of nuclear powers in october of the sixty-seventh year , an agreement was drawn up that prohibited the placement of weapons of mass destruction in space, but in general the sixties of the xx century. it was still a period of an arms race. the ussr sought to achieve nuclear parity by the 1970s, the goal was achieved. this prompted the united states to negotiate from the moment of the caribbean crisis to a systematic approach to arms control 10 years passed, and before the reduction of arsenals 30 treaty on limiting strategic weapons. sv-1 was adopted only in 702, and so2 in 79. and although it was not ratified in the united states due to the war in afghanistan, its position was observed by a new

detente. it began with the coming to power. gorbachev, a whole series of summits took place, first in geneva and then in the river, as a result of communication between gorbachev reagan at the highest level , it first led to the signing of the inf treaty, which eliminated a whole class of medium-range ground-based short-range missiles, and then their negotiations not on limiting, but on reducing strategic arsenals, the sv-1 treaty was signed in the ninety-first year, and 2 years later, the sv-2 appeared; the third agreement was signed by presidents medvedev and obama at the summit in prague in april 2010 snv3 reduced nuclear warheads to 1,150 units, and delivery vehicles to 700 units. however, when donald trump became president, he called the agreement one-sided. not a deal, allegedly it is beneficial only to russia and necessary, in which it would

participate, china beijing said it was ready to join only if washington reduces its nuclear arsenal to the level of the chinese, after all, replacing trump. joe biden, agreed to extend the contract for another 5 years. without any conditions, while the possibility of joining the british treaty with france was not even considered, despite persistent american requests. include china we are used to the fact that the nuclear sphere is the most dangerous, and therefore the most regulated cancellation of the rules associated with agreements makes us shudder. although, to what extent these rules still apply, the question has not been idle for a long time a couple of months ago there was a central here is an element of expert discussion about the current events. after all, everyone compared last fall what was happening with the caribbean crisis, if we went through

the caribbean crisis in a different way. if we came out of it not with the understanding that we can support nuclear deterrence not with the most rigid forms, but with some softer ones, which include, among other things, a contractual basis. but if we went through the caribbean crisis differently, then, uh, apparently, arms control will also be completely another, and in the form in which it took shape after we passed that original caribbean crisis, apparently, in this form it is not needed now. we passed a certain fork in the road, which then us, uh, in the early sixties. we turned in one direction. we, i say, not russia

, but in general. this is the world situation now; it has returned to e in a different direction, and the arms control system that was created under e, then a military-strategic and military-political understanding of the situation. it now turns out to be inadequate, but i still want to emphasize that we, uh, bring such an intellectual conceptual basis under all this, but there is also simply the dynamics of relations, and in which one already clings to another measure. uh, countermeasures are intertwined into a single ball of action. and this is also the case in these terms in these categories. uh, the president very logically formulated what is what is happening. uh, containment works without treaties. and if the treaty is now being used to

spy on us, that is, to send a nuclear deterrence, then we do not need it, the current situation really differs radically from the caribbean crisis, then there was a frontal, clinch of nuclear superpowers with the risk of mutual destruction. now the two nuclear superpowers are also confronting each other militarily, but one of them is fighting directly, while the other is mediated. however , nuclear deterrence is no less intense , it seems to be working, but the more active the hostilities, the more doubts about its strength . now there, go they rub their hands on these reports. of course, if they were very pleased with the bolt, it would become much easier, because since russia does not want to take part in the treaty. why

exactly? to take part is an ideal world about him, and on the part of the administration , to be honest, i think that the reaction will be calm, and without a little that changes, in fact, the inspection has not been carried out for 2-3 years. and it seems that the russian arsenal is not growing in the near future. at least a and i think we all understand that a world has become the last one is much more difficult, say, 10-15 years has come, as far as strategic stability is concerned, and i didn’t become a truly multi-row world, but china, first of all, which monetizes and develops its arsenal in

this area and most likely reached parity with russia and the us during this decade, and if other factors are not only bright , which uh very much affect the issue of strategic cyber stability but spatially, for example, a high-precision means conventional weapons, a and many different actors, but take part am. the hero of this areas. i think everyone understands. uh, usa what despite the fact that they shared such a reservation over 2 years ago, that this is the last such agar between russia and the usa and in any case, ah get the day of the third vote. well, any policy is unimaginable in our current

us political environment, so we need a different approach to the issue of strategic stability, which includes uh different options for bilateral multilateral uh agreements. e, one-sided, means practice, a and so on and so forth a therefore, and as i said, it seems to me that the reaction from the side of the administration of the bydn, and to putin's statement, uh, to send his message, will put us at ease. as for the congress, of course, uh, the noise will rise, but because in all although, uh, well, the republicans of it, and, therefore, of its regions, but

i think that this is not serious, of course. of course, we will talk about the methods of the american reaction to moscow's decision to suspend participation in the cis with a wonderful specialist robert legvald - one of the most authoritative and well-deserved experts in international and russian us policy bob can it be said that the classic treaty and arms control on start, the start treaty will end , is not dead, but the second is dying, the fate of the treaty has now become a derivative of the military company in ukraine, and as long as this confrontation continues, the foundation of the treaty will be undermined. further, the third start will not be the basis for further work on arms control, but it could remain a platform for a common effort to develop this topic. if we don't save him. you can say that the entire treaty system that existed in the seventies will end here, and at the same time it will be possible to forget the approach itself, that we can find a solution to regulate relations between russia and the united states in the nuclear

sphere through agreements. informal rather than formal, exactly through negotiated agreements, this will mean that we will lose the basis for working on nuclear issues in a multipolar context , and the prospects for a settlement between china and the united states will disappear. is it possible to repeat the race nuclear weapons. it will be a different type of arms race, it is doubtful that there will be a desire to quickly increase the number of nuclear weapons in china, yes, but not in the us or russia, there will be a pursuit of qualitative superiority. after all, now we are talking not only about nuclear weapons. there are non-nuclear strategic weapons, hypersonic weapons, a new space in the confrontation , like cyber ​​or space, and in all areas we should expect intensifying competition with a complete absence of steps to regulate it , the goal of those who were involved in problematic control over weapons in the sixties and seventies was to achieve a certain level

of strategic stability in nuclear relations now. you are lost to many in washington, the decision of the russian president, relief in the administrations of bush jr. and trump were people who generally believed that arms control was a burden for the united states alone john bolton remember there is no doubt, you are talking about people who have always been fundamental opponents of treaties on control over weapons and used any pretext, to force the united states to abandon certain agreements, but now this group of people is receiving the support of those who were not initially against this topic, but have a negative attitude towards any agreements. with russia , he criticizes the government for how it does business with moscow. that is, it is a derivative of the general anti-russian attitude to understand that the issue is about nuclear testing. may be returned to the agenda. what kind of us reaction can be expected, i don’t know what us policy is going to be pursued in relation to nuclear testing in the republican party, there is

france which is for their renewal. if the united states moves in this direction due to the general decline in the arms control situation, russia will respond symmetrically. i personally doubt that russia will be the first to take steps towards resuming testing, but again everything will depend on the general atmosphere in the context of what is happening in ukraine, and this is now determined by all thanks to the professor. on the good news of the insane inflation of arsenals, wait until you have to. tom agrees. the races weren't, at least not the usual ones. eh, because actually already uh, high-quality edge breaking is coming. let's go to other areas. uh, this text is a logical race, uh and uh, events around uh, artificial intelligence for example, and drones

and so on. and now and what kind of innovations will the americans be, uh, towering the balance of power between uh, china usa russia usa than i say already in my opinion, and i think that these are important, and factors and important changes in our understanding strategies for stability a and the balance of power uh in this world. we talked about bilateral russian-american documents on multilateral treaties on international security is also getting scrapped. the fact is that of all these multilateral. uh, there aren't really that many treaties, and actually, the current treaty, which has become the mantra for the uh destruction community, and around which its own non-proliferation so-called community has sprung up, is a treaty between

doubts about nuclear weapons. this is a deal between nuclear and nuclear powers, and let's say that the system of discriminatory access to nuclear technologies that has developed is also a violation of the treaty on the certainty of nuclear weapons. we all say that, let's say, the creation of nuclear weapons is a violation of the treaty, and not in a country of nuclear weapons. but it's discriminatory. uh, access to nuclei to peaceful nuclear technologies. and we see this in the example of many states. eh, that's also a violation of the day. it's just that we kind of forgot all the same about what is behind it. uh, a specific system of commitments that western countries have by and large failed to accomplish. and this is the whole political aura that has arisen around a treaty not in a country that does not exchange weapons. she also linked to the détente of international

tension. and it is also connected with the fact that the world was moving in the direction of moving away from war. especially the departure from hard nuclear costs, as far as the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty is concerned, it has not entered into force at all. uh, the united states neurotyped him. or rather, so to speak, they submitted it for ratification, to be precise, and failed and the more unbearable identification, but the truth kept their signature under it, and israel did not ratify it either. uh, several countries it was not signed at all. whose signature obligatory for its implementation, therefore , from my point of view, they took it as if a delayed collapse from my point of view, the collapse, chiai has come. uh, well, around the middle of the 2000s in the second half of the 2000s, when 10 years had passed since its signing and it became clear that it

would never get those signatures and ratifications that were needed for it to enter into force, therefore. it must be understood that the entire system of treaties is a system that arose against the backdrop of broad political and strategic changes. so the political and strategic line was laid down that we are withdrawing because of nuclear deterrence, in general, we are reducing the fact of force in different ways. rapprochement is detente, in some very literal sense of the word, and this whole system of treaties, it served such a system, e.g. , military-political strategic relations, if this was said today. and the world wow , uh, if the united states staged the last battle for their behemonia, then

that setting, uh, ceases to operate, political, which underlay this treaty system, resentment of a country that does not own nuclear weapons. one of these days one can feel that anna maria, the fourth famous mexican scientist and physicist in the past, deputy general director of mate, visited moscow. they took the opportunity to ask her if the treaty would survive without distribution. i think it will be replaced by something better. there have always been contradictions within the idea of ​​nonproliferation. it is necessary to keep the weapons that certain states have, but those who do not have them should not receive them, but there is another extreme to completely get rid of nuclear weapons, and i'm on that side. i am against arms control in its traditional form, because it effectively restricts those who do not have nuclear weapons of the day by allowing

nuclear countries to produce and improve their nuclear weapons. and this is a big flaw in the treaties. the professor was clearly once an activist in the movement for peace, which was favored by the ussr, but not by the usa. and why now the voice of scientists on this topic is not very audible. now scientists are less interested in working together for something. perhaps this is due to the pressure scientists feel to demonstrate the effectiveness of their research. they simply cannot be distracted by other things that, in my opinion, are extremely important. the environment has become much more competitive and i see how much it has influenced the approaches of many colleagues, this is competition with each other within the scientific community, primarily for places for young scientists. even the brilliantly prepared have to send out hundreds, that is, thousands of requests, before they are offered a good job, usually for a short time only.

there is competition between countries. the more the state invests in science, the same competition science now has. science has long been a source of economic development and has paid big dividends. in general , there is no time for solid capitalism, for a scientist to think about the sublime correctly, probably, the president of the message on the reform of higher education remembered, knowing as a politician. now entangles academic science could not help but wonder. anna maria's chum salmon did not prevent someone from her business trip to russia for scientists. in my opinion. this is the main principle and value to put politics aside and continue to work together. there are excellent examples. you know about the synchrotron season, a huge experimental facility built in jordan, but theoretical work is also being carried out there. it involves specialists from nine countries of the middle east, iran, israel, and the united

states, germany, they work together. it's the same story with the association. of the institute for nuclear research in dubna, i arrived there, and it’s nice, nevertheless, as a consequence of the russian the operation was a rather powerful wave in the west in an attempt to block scientific cultural humanitarian ties with russia it turned out that it was not so easy from rome fame and popularity of their small cozy gallery is located in the heart of the city of arts , a stone's throw from the cathedral of florence santa maria delfiore in the historical complex of the xiv century. they joke about what's going on here the spirit of philippine lipia obtechelli's beloved disciple, who, according to legend, was buried at the local church. culture. it

unites people, it does not separate culture either. it enriches people because our cultureless society ceases to be a society. here we have an international audience, and the french come and people move from germany and there are many visitors from america, and from japan from china from turkey they also come from russia and uh, a little bit from belarus get along within these walls and artists from different countries are now represented exhibition of the lithuanian artist. which in her works reveals her feminine essence. in the next project, the character of a woman, the theme will be continued by an artist from different countries, russia , belarus, italy and the usa, anatoly fattakhov. yes , he was from uh, america but snatched from the soviet union directly uh kuzmina chugunova she lives in russia uh. yeah, well, this is work. e selko and yuri khilkozha lives in belarus e. this is the work of the italian patricia

gucci and the same patricia gucci with the gucci family projections of avita art. without borders united children's music and art professionals. also from different parts of the world. soft power is in actions that do not find opposition. although it has become more difficult to present artists from russia with certain technical difficulties, if only because of the impossibility of sending a painting, it still could not do without cancellation. they were selective boris godunov troops. yes , there is no concert by samotseeva, and italians are increasingly recalling how russian culture is connected with their country in florence there is a monument dostoevsky. here he was writing an idiot. the director of the world-famous fizzi gallery is a german by birth, but aikishmid, an italian by temperament, has long believed in cultural diplomacy. and he is also convinced that world culture without its huge russian , which is incredibly poorer. a little over a year ago, he opened a museum of russian icons and presented to the public the most valuable and largest

collection of sacred art outside russia. she used to be in storage. unfortunately, how can you cut off your hand. you can also try cutting universal world culture. but how to live with a cut off hand is impossible, without huge damage, not to mention unbearable pain and huge loss of blood, this is a metaphor, as it is without tolstoy dostoevsky shostakovich and without modern palaces. world culture would incredibly impoverish mankind. it would throw back in time before the existence of these great creators to abandon russian culture, an incredible mistake this museum. it is also a place of common roots. here you have written ancient russia - this is the current ukraine belarus is the western honor of russia just like that . this is the story where everything is.