the united states is put before a fact, but to try to draw the united states into where the united statesnot want to be drawn in, and you quite rightly noted the application for ukraine's entry into nato bypassing the stage, and partner of the hr membership action plan and, of course, today's is just an infernal statement zelensky that the west and the united states should launch a preventive nuclear strike on russia. that is, he calls for a global total nuclear war. well, in fact, the problem lies in the fact that such behavior was quite common in the history of international relations, but on the part of the satellites, when the satellites really tried, realizing their own interests, to drag their patrons into the war. ah, and force their patrons, but to realize the interests of the satellites. at the same time, they did not correspond to the interests of the patrons in during the cold war, there were a lot of such situations, and by the way, both moscow and washington then found the political will and wisdom to prevent such escalations and pull their satets in time. but here's another

and again, logically speaking, one way to the united states, or maybe the only way to turn the united states from supporting your credit and to the level when that support can make a strategic difference for russia would be to strengthen departments. now how do you strengthen deterrence? you basically strengthen by saying that, you know, in certain circumstances, but we will not be hitting at ukraine will be hitting elsewhere. and that shared the so, but people of, so basically the idea was not to try to suggest russian needs to know hip united states where the nuke, the idea was to strength and to tons the foundation of peace as we know it. and it's interesting that most of the western decision makers, when they make statements about rush as possible, use of nuclear weapons, they need focus on tactical strikes upon ukraine. they never met, even conceive of russia being able to reach their own homelands. do you think that said deflection on their part, or do they honestly believe that given russia's potential and those people in the know they know of fresh as nuclear potential? they k

i mean the united states of russia and , uh, the united states.ingly obvious and vital issue as for a conflict, as the prevention of a direct military clash, because we understand even the threat of escalation in different ways, because the dialogue between russia and the united states resembles a conversation of a deaf person in the last few weeks, when russia directly text says that the threat lies precisely in a direct military clash between russia and nato as a result. american arms supplies to ukraine, which are acquiring an increasingly large-scale and more and more sophisticated character. while the united states is talking about russia's alleged readiness to use tactical nuclear weapons in ukraine, the absolute thing is what is called in english miss match yes, that is, really a conversation between the deaf and the blind. and even in this matter there is de-conflict. it is very difficult for us to agree with each other, but it is even more difficult for us to agree on content not on deconfluxing. therefore, how to properly regulate the uk

the united states in the conditions of the energy crisis hastily transferred european production. production resources are all that the united europe has been accumulating and developing for decades. the inhabitants of europe are left alone with their problems, but no one cares across the ocean that europe is expecting a very dark, cold and long winter. now listen to what about this same act of hybrid war and international terrorism, said the president of the united states joe byte. a lot of people ask me about the pipeline and i'll tell you what, it was a sabotage and now the russians are spreading disinformation. we are working with our allies to find out exactly what happened and at my direction have already begun to help our allies to strengthen the protection of this critical infrastructure at the right time, when everything calms down, we will send divers to find out exactly what happened we are not sure yet we know, but do not listen to what putin says, we know that this is not true. i think it's brilliant. we don't know what happened yet, but don't listen to putin because

i often think in the united states, and particularly in the united states congress, there iy a confusionbetween operational and american strategy. we would be a lot more advanced, both the united states and as u.s. allies, in our dealings with the people's republic of china if 95% of the focus was on the clarity and consistency of our operational behavior and its consistency with the coherent strategy of deterrence asit opposed to what i would describe as this continued rhetorical to -- detraction to what we put into our strategy about e the chinese everyday of the week. furthermore, if the emphasis is on the clarity side residentt operational side then you create all sorts of opportunities to cause offense, cultural offense and the rest which frankly clouds out your ability to do with the extensive issues of the day. i have a deeply realistic view of how you deal with leninist. those of us who come from social democratic parties like i do by the way for 100 years since the second international in the 1880s we'll dealt with thee' problem of communist parties whether in europe or the unit

we also understand that if there is a direct military clash between russia and the united states, it e very difficult to prevent an escalation in the nuclear level, nevertheless, it is openly stated. on the admissibility and expediency of striking in russia, the destruction of the black sea fleet, and so on, moreover, on absolutely far-fetched, but on the pretext as if supposedly, but the readiness of russia to use tactical nuclear weapons in ukraine, which absolutely does not fit into the logic or the letter e of the russian nuclear doctrine of anatoly ivanovich here. how would you comment on such statements by the united states at the embassy, ​​we noticed that in recent days. the rhetoric of the speeches of american former politicians has become very sharply toughened, and i emphasize that many publications have appeared, in the media , which talk about a possible decapitating strike on the kremlin, by the way, it is surprising that this publication was made by wiki and was not very noticed by russians. and i think that it is very serious when they talk about the murder, in fact, t

i often think in the united states. and particularly in united states congress. there is a confusion between operational and declaratory strategy. um, we would be a lot more advanced both the united states and as us allies in our dealings with the people's republic of china if 95% of the focus was on the clarity and consistency of our behavior and its cont and its and it's consistency with the coherent strategy. of deterrence as opposed to what i would describe as this continued rhetorical attraction to what we put into our declaratory strategy about the chinese on every and every day of the week. furthermore if your emphasis is on the declaratory side rather than the operational side, then you create all sorts of opportunities to cause a fence cultural offense and and the rest which frankly clouds out your ability to deal with the substantive issues of the day. so i have a deeply realist view of how you deal with leninists those of us who come from social democratic parties like i do by the way for a hundred years since the second international in the 1880s, we'

and it's different in the way that is adversary of the united states then. and now the views of viewed russia. so basically, what i'm arguing is that in 962, the united states could still afford a compromise with russia. welders compromise was presented to the west and public as a win for the united states. in fact, it was not images matter. optics matters today i can see no willingness on behalf of the united states to split the difference. and that's a, that's a car to know the difference between van and now he also point out in that article that the soviet union was perceived by washington as an equal worse and the current at western elite. see russia as a 2nd to perhaps even 3rd tier country whose province and national promised rafts only on nuclear weapons and energy sources. now putting the issue of hierarchy aside, nuclear weapons and energy sources. are they really so little in this day and age? what more do you need? well, i actually borrowed that from one of the pronouncements by president, by. and he basically said, i, you know, i have a, i pity t

china than it exports that has led to cold for the united states to decouple. in other words, this entangle itself from china, but it's not realistic. if the united states tried to decouple entirely from china, it would be very harmful to our economy. it would probably be harmful to our innovation. it would just have other economies industries step in where the united states stepped out so it wouldn't work. decoupling probably wouldn't be a very good idea for china either. china also knows that its larger economic faith lives with the rest of the world. and even though it has this tense relationship of the united states and others, it is you know, most of its economic growth that's been dependent on globalization with the rest of the world. it needs to find a way to balance those things. at the beginning of this video, we ask whether we're at the dawn of a new global economic age is the case of a us versus a chinese lead system. the differences are major. the market lead system of the u. s. favors a lack of government intervention that chinese system favors had

this very vigorously expansive united states united states that keeps coming back to them demanding more and more land and putting more and more pressure on them. and so in the early part of the late 18th early 19th century the united states encourages. cultural social and economic changes in its in its relationships with with native americans cherokees have a reputation historically as being more receptive to those changes. i think in some ways that's that's a server romantic image as well as some of the other images that circulate in american culture. so cherokees tend to for political purposes tend to play up the idea that they have. adopted elements of your american culture and society and economics in response to these these policies are encouraging those changes, but that's clearly an attempt to mollify the united states and to make the case that the united states can leave the cherokee nation alone and so in the public rhetoric you often get cherokee leaders in the early part of the 19th century say, oh, well, you know we've um, yeah, we've adopted yourself of agriculture and

the 141 un states in the general assembly united to make russia pay. this is our unequivocal message to russia . about how to achieve parity to balance things. what if the americans reveal this ahead of time, really? i didn't know what a nuclear explosion was, the dog had to show his teeth. flame belongs to me woman to you heart parma watch to discover the world of educational programs and documentaries . we watch for free without registration two events of the week in the east of nato on nuclear containment. it would seem that some are building their course, others are solving military issues, and not one and the other do not come into contact with each other. but maybe it's tighter than it looks. we will try to understand this in the program of political economy. here we are talking about something important from two positions - from the economic point of view , alexander suvorova and the political about this, georgy podgorny so, with categories, exact numbers and data, they will help us figure it out. our speakers andrey korneev head of the school o

we've seen what happened to ran out. imagining that the united states is dangerous, and when the united states was using and this is public record, ukrainian territory to pump arms their to sunday and military advisors. what other means? we, as a nation, had to put an end to it. i can tell you what it means to not exist that should have been pursued and that is to say, and then make war on your credit. that should have been off the table. and then negotiations and diplomacy would be nothing. they weren't negotiations and diplomacy put in by the, in math, in 2001 in geneva. and they talked about that not pushing the situation further, but the american still continue doing that. army ukraine using its land for its own military purposes, even not making it a member of it without taking any defense obligations whatsoever. how could we have put an end to that? well, i can tell you that invading and then slaughtering people in ukraine is not a solution, nor does it reduce the chances of nuclear war. in fact, it increasing the chancellor nuclear war, which is what we began talking about. a nat

well , other developing countries are following the united states.l, european ones, which are also starting to raise interest rates. and in this connection already the un conference on trade and the third yung tat publishes an annual report in which they write that such actions cause very serious damage. first of all, on the developing countries of alexander mikhailovich, well, than neo-colonialism in its purest form to me, moreover, it follows from the president’s words that he clearly gave, uh, an indication that we both understand and see a real threat, not only in relation to us, but to the whole world. you look at what the americans are sacrificing today, they easily part with their allies. they actually destroyed europe and then, what was said on well in the speech of our president is not about colonism. we are actually watching. how is it in the example of germany what is happening today due to the fact that germany is involved in war games. uh, in ukraine, in fact today, uh, to the detriment of itself, it destroys markets, destroys its econom

and the idea that the united states believes that there's a future in selling l and g to the united states as i, to, to europe and, and you're not going to be bailed out either by the mythology of us, alan gee, even steepest possible price control. clearly, clearly, and none of these people thought any of this are, you know, larry and what are future historians are going to think about this. i mean, this is all self inflicted. these are craving choices. these none of this should be happening larry. so airy parallels if you will, with the 1st world war, because when you look back at the health, the world got drug in europe in particular, was drug into a completely unnecessary massive slaughter. there are the historians will look back at this period and see a complete failure of leadership across the board, an unnecessary provocation of russia and refusal to negotiate and, and then the end, it will, this is going to lead to, unfortunately widespread pain. i think das destruction, i don't mean to be a doom say or but it just or the future is dark and what we're looking at because the leaders

i don't see the united states doing this. this is, this is trickery that even the united states realizes, will lead to nothing more than an escalation of a conflict, both united states and they don't make clear. they don't want escalate. yeah, now given the weapons and supplies that the u. s. has already been giving to yeah, i mean, ukrainian troops have showed residential areas and crucial civil and infrastructure allegedly using those us applied high mars missiles. so what is your take on that, and is the us showing at all here that it's concerned about that civilian infrastructure, or is it more so just showing that it isn't quite ready to escalate that conflict directly with russia? well, i think it's, it's, look, the u. s. is clear that they don't want to escalate to. they don't want to turn this into a direct conflict between nato and russia. on the other hand, the united states has shown an absolute disregard for the strikes that ukraine has been doing a regular and ongoing basis against civilian targets, purely civili

meanwhile, in the west, farther north, the united states and england were both laying claim to the oregontory. if you want to imagine the modern states of idaho, and washington, an oregon, but also british columbia, up to the end of the southern panhandle of alaska, that is the oregon territory. they were sharing. which is fairly rare. that is a jointly occupied oregon territory. if either one of them was gonna no longer want to jointly occupy and draw borderline somewhere, they had to give the other one a years notice. the mexicans living in new mexico and in california depended on american trade for manufactured goods. the governments depended on that trade for revenue. the mexican officials there. there is very lose control, if any, between those places and mexico city where the government was. what's spain had believed, and then later mexico, in order to control what they called the northern frontier, what becomes the u.s. southwest, that's so far from the capital, they needed to settle what they called, quote unquote, civilized hispanic people there. what that meant was that white sp

that is, it says probably about the united states trying to test the russian red lines.eriously russia is really ready to defend these red lines. right now dmitry will receive an answer in this regard. what do you think from now on. and after these missile strikes today on e, kiev and other e, cities, e and the object of ukraine, the united states will more tightly control the actions of the kiev regime and prevent such attacks. but uh dmitri how do you guess? uh, no one told me how the united states, uh, would be to respond to further russian strikes, such questions are hypothetical, well, they don’t like to discuss, especially when they understand that i can use it, and in our programs on channel one , so i’ll have to answer you e not with clear information, and if want with informed intuition of my informed intuition, and i think that for now, uh, that's in response to what happened, a tonight, and i don't think that in response to this, the united states will change its course significantly, especially the day before , the forthcoming is soon less than a month from t

yesterday, the united states secretary of state very unambiguously reminded me of a pancake, speaking university. listen to his performance. from our point of view, there is now a competition for the shape of the world order, what will be the next period of history after the cold war, whose values ​​​​will be reflected in our simple choice and it became obvious after the second world war that the world does not organize itself for the united states such a choice, if we do not participate in the organization of the world order, if we do not if we play a leadership role, then one of two things will happen, or someone else will play this role, for example, china and it will probably play it in a way that would not coincide with our interests and values, or even worse, the leader’s place will be empty. in that case, there will be a vacuum that the bad things can fill before the good things fill in, so we would like to participate in this, we would like to lead the process and understand what these good things are and how they can benefit us. that's how it is in american the world is not h

the united states and russia.ere's a bulletin of atomic scientists has brought the doomsday clock to it than 100 seconds of midnight. it began at seven minutes to midnight. we are now at 100 seconds. the reason the bulletin of atomic scientists gives for this is the unilateral withdrawal by the united states from basically the entire architecture of arms control with russia in particular. so there has got to be pressure on the biden administration, not only to back off and allow zelenskyy and putin to talk, to allow them to have some kind of peace agreement that is filled with dignity for all sides, but also the united states needs to go back to the table with the russians and talk to them. if united states can talk to the saudis, why can't they talk to the russians? it is ridiculous to say the russians are not a good partner, they're not going to standby agreements. look who is talking. the united states is the country that unilaterally walked away from the iran nuclear deal. it was stop the iranians, it was the

as a major upheaval, i or major threat can only come to the united states from within the united states rather than from the outside. but they look at the behavior of many of the american allies, including some of the oil producing arab countries. for example, saudi arabia and i'm not even mentioning countries like china, india, south africa, many of their latin american countries. they're not taking sides, but they're clearly not excited about the american hegemony. because for very pragmatic reasons subscribing to anyone's hegemony at this point of time when you need sovereignty as a means of making decisions, it's not just an abstract and constant construction, but it's a way of functioning in them and predictable world. they don't seem to be buying that concept anymore. do you think gemini is sustainable in the world today? not in the mind of american the leads, but within the global community as well, within part of the global community. yes. that, that part of the community will include europe, that thought of the community will include other america, now lies in what they call th

, why didn't the united states do that? guest: without getting into a bunch of stuff that we can talk about on tv, i think the united states has the capability abilities i will say that it gets much harder when these missiles are not sitting on a platform being filled over a. of two days but when they are mobile they can move them around and it's like a pop up lunch platform and if the missiles have solid fuel propellant in other words we don't have this kind were we can see them do this. this idea that they lunch we don't think it has the link. but still, it is very difficult in general. the decision to take out the missile is a very important one because i think you can only be made by the president of the united states. because of the brisket poses in terms of it escalating tensions and perhaps starting a war or a nuclear war. policy is that the u.s. tracked these things very closely. we could intercept it host: know it was going to be launched, new the trajectory, new where it would land? guest: so that is one of the pu

now, at this point, what can the united states do? but rant and rave at the saudis for not doing what they want. hear some of what we've heard, what saudi arabia did to help prudent continue to wage his despicable, vicious war against ukraine will long be remembered by americans. we are looking at all the legislative tools to best deal with this appalling and deeply cynical action, though the no peck bill is up for discussion. this is a bill that would allow the united states to sue opec countries take them to court, possibly have you escort, seize their assets, if they don't do what the united states wants, it would allow civil actions against opec countries by the united states in retaliation for move such as this, that bill is up for discussion. in addition to that, the military relationship between the united states and saudi arabia is being questioned. this is what's been said as well. i just don't see any good reason for us to maintain troops that are there almost solely for the purpose of protecting their oil fields and their s

he plays chess in politics, and the united states played poker.t did you mean talking about these political games in our countries, when you play poker, carefully look at the cards and save, their advice played poker well. but at the same time, they tried to think through their actions, forward, like in chess. i was invited many times to play chess with him , sixth secretary of state, us us military units begin to move to bases in the us southeast president kennedy attends a service in st. matthew's liberty to celebrate the national day of prayer. then he we dined with crown prince hassan all, as usual, no messages in the press accompanied khrushchev to the meeting. never for the first time have we met such a militant leader who, verbally, perhaps not especially written, is portrayed as an eccentric politician. in fact, he was not such an alexander of the immortal soviet russian diplomats. first secretary counselor envoy of the embassy of the soviet union in the united states from 1970 to 1983, he was emotional, but he was a very cunning cunning.

you will actually post body united states on. ready russian yachts, it is not supported or has not been supported by you know, nation. well, we really appreciate you joining us here in a very busy tuesday at our t international. it's always good to have your company. a lot of the stories have been updated as we speak. you can get your updates either via r t dot com or check out all these numerous telegram a with with me. hello and welcome to worlds apart. rushes massive retaliation for ukraine's attacks on infrastructure has moved the war much closer to home for many ukrainians. but is it persuasive or frankly frightening enough to change the counter was not only in here, but also in washington? well, to discuss that, i'm now joined by a daniel about adjunct professor of international human rights at the university of pittsburgh school of law professor of alec. it's good to see you. thank you very much for being available. thank you for having me. now we are recording this conversation on monday afternoon, most good time when the

so i like this for the united states. for us. the war is very close to hong, both within the russian territory. and as i sat across the water in your crane, where most of us have relative, do you think the 2 sides have the same amount of issues at stake here? do you think this war means the same for, for russia, as it means for the united states? well, is completely unconvincing for russia to place a victim in this war, since it's russia that invaded ukraine and continues to bomb major cities from the air and new cray. i don't have any sympathy for the russian, ordinary russian people who are being killed in those strikes and that's just goes with them being happens right. i have tremendous sympathy for everybody who dies in a war. i have tremendous sympathy for people who are drafted, conscripted or bombed in a war. that's why we should have posed or not just an abstraction, but continue to work towards diplomatic solutions and say that it's not ok to send people in to battle to kill others. and to kill civilians. i also heard y

they, uh, must return the united states to, uh, the field of nuclear deterrence, because the united states began to experiment and reached the point, apparently, together with the kiev regime, to experiments. uh, with either a dirty bomb or a tactical bomb. in general, some kind of nuclear, uh, nuclear provocation, and this is a clear demonstration that everything, uh, there is nothing to seriously experiment here. everything is known. uh, this is a return to nuclear to nuclear deterrence, as for stoltenberg's statement, well, by apparently, he just had a package opened, i don’t know, there was a package for him yesterday. yes, what do i need to raise, what statements to act the provocation has begun? yes, apparently, he was released until he was given. he is clearly leading to the fact that this is not a ukrainian pravocatsiya. rather. by the way, he does not deny that this is ukrainian, maybe a provocation. he simply says that in return russia has real tactical nuclear weapons. here, apparently, he was supposed to be throwing one of some house checkers. and here's some mean, uh, extra ad

the united states had never done so before. they weren't sure how offended france was going to be and were very tentative and nervous this step. but they felt like it was really essential because he just was so difficult to manage ultimately, france did issue recall orders. interestingly, washington did not make him go home because this was the height of the french revolution and if he had gone home, he would have been executed. so washington allowed him to stay in the united states as a private citizen. he went to upstate new york and married the daughter of governor clinton and actually lived the rest of life very quietly and got into actually no trouble whatsoever. so it was only when he was french minister that he was troublesome. but the fact that the french acknowledged that he had been a problem, the fact that france had said, you have a right to establish your own foreign policy and to demand that foreign ministers on your soil, respect that policy was precedent. so things with france are okay for the moment, for moment

the united states won't remove the blockade.course people in russia are against the war, also suffering on it when we are the other. they don't want to be conscripted. we need to fight for negotiations. we need to be peace builders in the world, not to accelerate conflict. i think noam is correct, anyone who calls for peace, anyone who has a dissenting opinion is called now a purveyor of disinformation. i think this is a very dangerous situation we have got ourselves into. those who are for peacebuilding are maligned and those who are wanting to accelerate war are considered to be heroes of human rights. very, very dangerous situation in the culture where those who are peace builders simply cannot find a way to be heard or to be taken seriously. i think this is a problem for the culture, not just for us. amy: noam chomsky, your thoughts on this and the subtitle of your book, the very end of it, "the fragility of u.s. power. >> that is not very distant background of all of these subscriptions. ukraine conflict has accelerated the

and, of course, no one listened to the allied forces of the united states.reat britain was noticeably bogged down in a positional struggle with the iraqi forces. top of the pentagon us secretary of defense donald ramswell and head of operations in iraq tommy franks publicly blamed each other for the failure of the lightning attacks. however, it was no longer important. washington won and installed his government. saddam hussein was publicly executed as a warning to others, virtually all infrastructure will be destroyed, people will be left without basic things for a long time - water, food, electricity and communications hoped that a civil democratic state would be created in iraq, but these hopes were not destined to come true instead, we got the chaos of the absence of statehood and the rampant islamic armed both shiite and sunni, they ran everything in the country , plundered and turned iraq into a terrorist state, where massacres , genocide, ethnic cleansing, the country returned to the middle ages as a common thing. and not soon get out of there years l

i mean, i think they are basically just tools of the united states. i think they're happy to be that. and i think they see that no matter what happens there are lands find zalinski ill, be a billionaire somewhere on an island or something. so they're willing to do crazy things, even things that hurt their own people to at least continue to have favor with united states. that that's how i view anyway. but they know that the well and the russians making a secret of that russian intelligence services have pretty long. hans, as we say here in russian lighting important is usually pretty straight forward and expressing his intentions. a couple of weeks ago, he explicitly said that the russian is going to retaliate and retaliate strongly that tax on it's land on its infrastructure, continue. and yet everybody seems to have ignored that warning. why do you think putting there's not being taken seriously, neither here nor in washington? i think he's being taken seriously. i mean, obviously he warned about the intervention in february. you said that was going

the united states must acknowledge the simple fact that ukraine ultimately do whatever the united states wants to do. that's the simple fact for better for worse, that's the way it is. we are not controlled by mr. lensky. mrs. laskey ultimately is controlled by us. so there's no way in the world that the u. s. should be acting on every statement the mrs. lensky makes, and they certainly should not be acting on statements they could lead to rapid escalation and nuclear war. well, let's leave it at that. thank you very much for your time, and congratulations on the book. thank you. and thank you for watching cold to see her again on will the part ah ah ah ah ah, ah oh russia is the gross. no. if injured much about we have any quality for russians. we have actual racism, bigotry, against russians. it's now dangerous to be russian than europe. so bruce, a was possible it a nation suddenly be disliked was the hotel it he always there and only now come to the for.

that is a steadfast longtime partner of the united states. but now we're seeing the circles of power in washington, turning on them pretty rapidly in response to recent moves around opec people will recall the words of former us president george w bush, who said you're either with us or against us. and that kind of thinking seems to be prevailing in washington dc. why can't the by get american oil companies to increase the output? they just won't do it. because american oil companies are doing is raising prices at home to make up for this slowing of demand. well, it's the same thing that the saudis and opec are doing globally, or, you know, negotiate to go on right now between us, well, companies and biden, about exporting oil from the u. s. to europe. so, you know, that's going to cause more of a supply problem, the u. s. and raise prices, even more. prices are going up fast. the u. s. a. partly because the oil companies are shutting down to refineries. no, they're not having these a regular maintenance. and then there's the so called fires

it was passed unanimously by the united states senate. we have now introduced legislation that would require that it be designated a state sponsor of terrorism. i hope it will be adopted as well both in the senate and in the house by the same bipartisan majority. it would tighten the sanctions, increase in height in the consequences for russia. it would also permit actions to be brought in the courts of the united states against russia and others. they would be civilian action but i wonder if you could talk through some of the additional legal consequences to russia and to individuals there if russia is designated as a state sponsor of terrorism. >> thank you, senator i think and i know that all americans share your revulsion in the wake of the ghastly crimes that have been perpetrated by russian forces in ukraine and continue to be perpetrated. but us for the terrorism question, that is beyond my experience, purview, at the department of justice. but i know of it is that it is ordinarily the secretary of state who makes the determination

this work published in the united states this work published in the united states this work made fukuyama famous all over the world made fukuyama famous all over the world made fukuyama famous all over the world the philosopher and political scientist the philosopher and political scientist the philosopher and political scientist argued that the spread of western style argued that the spread of western style argued that the spread of western style liberal democracy proves that the liberal democracy proves that the liberal democracy proves that the socio-cultural evolution of humanity has socio-cultural evolution of humanity has socio-cultural evolution of humanity has come to an end no more grand ideological come to an end no more grand ideological come to an end no more grand ideological confrontation global revolution and war confrontation global revolution and war confrontation global revolution and war there will be nothing beyond liberal there will be nothing beyond liberal there will be nothing beyond liberal democracy as it is precisely this form democracy as it is precise

the meeting also heard the response by the delegations of ukraine and the united states. each delegation then made further statement and p fine points raised in the statements. additionally, the meeting had mass now, states meant from 42 states parties and one signatory state. there then followed an opportunity to respond for the russian federation. united states and ukraine. 3rd parties welcomed the fact that the delegations of the russian federation, ukraine, and united states had sought to clarify the positions with respect to the issue at hand. state parties noted by the constitution or us fully in conformity with the conclusions of the final document of the 3rd review conference relevant to the application of article 5 of the convention. the former qualitative meeting concluded with state parties adopting a report. i agree in that in quote, no consensus was reached regarding the outcome of the formal qualitative meeting on court. the adoption of the report marked the end of the former consultation process. mr. precedent. the provisions of article 6 have not been invok

she is no stranger to the united states. a career diplomat. her first posting was to the french em-bassey in -- embassy in the united states in the 1980's. she was a spokesperson for the presidency for the republic. she's been ambassador to italy and san marino and ambassador to the united kingdom. would be curious about your thoughts on brexit. she became minister of europe and foreign affairs. minister colonna is an officer of the legion of honor, officer of the order of merit and commander of letters and ambassador of france in november, 2020. that's not all. she has quite the resume. it's a very tremendous privilege to host her today as her visit to minister to the united states. it's been quite a year. last fall the partnership hit the lowest point since the iraq war. the french ambassador was recalled from the united states since 1793. not the first ambassador to be recalled. the second. still been quite a long time. in the past year the relationship has been rebuilt. president biden and macron was able to right the ship and set it on th

it's the second world war that pulled united states into the world that makes the united states a global power, that engaged the united states the affairs of the world. it is a conclusion of the makers of american policy. after 1945 that the us has to act very seriously, very in a sort of creatively to prevent a world war three, to prevent a third world war. first world war was very costly for europe, for the united states for the world, second world war was immeasurably costly. the us paid a huge price, maybe not quite the price numerically of the soviet union, but it paid a huge price for the second world war. and so the lodestar of american foreign policy, the driving impulse of foreign policy is no world war three. we need to something better. we need to have a different system mind. we need to have a different state of affairs. where do the first two world wars begin? they begin in europe. they are european wars. what's the american as to why these wars begin is that you have too little democracy, the one hand and too little deliberation cooperation on the other hand. it is necessar

now the united states has pledged this aid package 200 armored cars of american armored cars brother also ammunition for mortars for small arms and many other things, let me remind you that since the beginning of the full-scale invasion and the united states has already provided ukraine with military aid for almost 17 billion dollars . that this is a program of presidential powers that allows the us to allocate weapons for ukraine from its own arsenals from its own stocks, therefore, in essence, it must be shipped and sent to ukraine, therefore, we can expect that all these weapons will end up on on the battlefield, yulia will soon be on the battlefield. on sunday, us defense minister lloyd ostapa called the return of the estuary under the control of ukraine an absolutely important development in the course of the war. how do the pentagon evaluate the latest achievements of the ukrainian military in general and do they talk about a turning point in the course of the war? the fact that russia is now losing on the battlefield, and despite the fact that russia has announced mobilization

europe, it's not as if the united states doesn't suffer nice is, does suffer. and the nice is also doesn't benefit from a week and broken euro, even if there is it, if they force a divorce between europe and russia to their own benefit. when a broken euro is, is a wage that the magazine has to carry with it. so it's not a waiver for the united states. meanwhile, china continues to evolve. iran is now used to the sanctions, even though the united states has tried desperately to the same life, the country. and it didn't work and it's not going to work. iran is now a member of the shanghai operation organization in the summit meeting. and it was pakistan. there were major and agreements between the line in russia. you've run in china, iran in the specs on russia and china, india wanting to do it business with russia to re run through the whole of asia is changing. the math is changing and there's really nothing that the nice it can do about a professional. i am in new delhi for the last time you were on the program. i think we, we talked about the, the g 7 it hadn

with the united states stepping up containment of china while the united states talks about the needmilitary presence in the pacific region, despite the fact that the united states in e. they are intensifying the technological and semiconductor chip war against china. they banned the supply of american e-chips in china using american technology and contributed 31 chinese technology companies. on the prohibited list with which it is not worthwhile, but to cooperate, china is ready to follow this logic, which at one time, hillary clinton, being secretary of state, very figuratively described how to go and chew gum and at the same time. i think that the chinese are ready for tactical compromises, but will not make strategic concessions. uh, america and the main reason is that china stopped being afraid of america, you know, in 1979, when the pin went to america to start with, china was basically in ruins after the great leap forward cultural revolution and, uh, danciopin asked to go west. let us go. give us money. give us technology. china was accepted into the western family under gene