you must support russia. you must actively support russia, and you ould defend russia. sean: boikov has led groups of australian cossacks to russia where they fired guns and visited a military training facility. [gunshots] sean: in 2018, simeon boikov told a russian media outlet, "we have a unique opportunity to support russia from within an enemy state." he was referring to australia. he said cossacks in australia could "pursue a pro-russian position, lobby politicians and members of parliament, oppose anyone who lies about russia, attacks russia, or imposes sanctions. basically, they can wage an information war." sean: why do you regard australia as an enemy state? simeon: no, australia, in this context, a state which is placing sanctions against russia and behaving in an anti-russian manner, you know, in that way could be perceived that the activities are not the activities of an ally. the main thing to know is we're not against australia at all. we love australia. we will defend australia, and we'll try to defend it, and we wanna facilitate the rehabilitation of aus

ukraine poses no threat to russia. it bears repeating that it was russia that invaded ukraine in 2014 and occupies crimea to this day. it is russia that continues to fuel a war in eastern ukraine that's claimed nearly 14,000 lives and destroyed entire towns. it is russia and their proxies holding hundreds of ukrainians as political prisoners. it's because of russia's action that nearly three million ukrainians are in need of humanitarian assistance. while the suffering is most acute in crimea and eastern ukraine, ukrainians everywhere have felt the effects of russia's aggression. russia has interfered in ukraine's elections and blocked energy and commerce, launched cyber attacks and used propaganda and information to sow distrust and causing renewed crisis not only for ukraine, but all of europe, indeed as secretary blinken said for the wider world. one country cannot change the borders of another by force, or dictate the terms of another country's foreign policy, or forbid another country from choosing its own allianc

let's remember is traditionally very russia friendly. the former spd chancellor sits in the board of directors of gazprom and one of the leading proponents of north stream two and this project. um should it be canceled should the german government openly declare that it will be void if russia invades ukraine. this will have a real domestic political fallout for t the spd for chancellor schulz party. and these are the issues right now. unfortunately in the internal debates in germany that are being placed over our international obligations to lead on security and peace in europe. michel, you say it's all about the showdown between russia and the us. so does anything germany could do actually matter, would it make a difference. oh yes it would make a huge difference simply because if we do actually matter, would it make a difference. oh yes talk about all the possible measures the west could take if there was any conflict between russia and ukraine or a russian invasion. in in this case it is above and formal of it is germany in the first

troops towards russia. this isn't, this isn't an issue of where russia is coming out and saying, oh, we don't like that the united states as station so many troops and in her texas, for example, on the border with mexico, the united states coming out and saying that it's concerned with russian troop movements inside russia. there are passages full of inhuman force, his hand stupidity, for example. they call fake mosque a statement that the re positioning of russian trips in russian territory means repositioning of russian troops on russian territory. brilliant. what is there more hair lies or illiteracy? i did not even want to deal with it. i know one thing for sure. this could only be published by the ministry of truth. the document is full of obfuscation and misleading statements. for example, it says that this is fiction that the nato isn't surrounding russia as, as moscow has claimed in recent years. well, the, the facts of it is earth said, says russia has 14 neighbors. only 5 of them are nato members.

russia has a mass troops, allegedly inside of russia. russia has said in writing, look, this is a red line couldn't set at the end of the year. press conference, this is a red line. we will not let you crane. we will not let our border area be a staging ground for advanced weapons with missiles whose flight time might be 2 or 3 minutes to their targets in russia, or to allow ukraine to be permanently in nature. so that kind of scenario can play out. that's a red line, we're not going to let that happen. and so, and as he also said with the u. s. possibly of what russia do this at the us mexican border, or the u. s. canadian border, of course not. so again, this is an american created crisis, but one where russia actually does have to respond and actually make clear that this, in fact, is unacceptable. long term and short term for russia's national interest. you know, john went looking at the media drumbeat here and the gaff that we, well that was just mentioned by biden. i mean by just let the mass drop for a 2nd. each time you talked about one of the scenarios here. he got off script

listen also to russia argument. if it's interest and security objections are threatened by a further nita expansion, germans have their own term for those whose who sympathize with russia and with its president vladimir putin. they call this putin festa, none the less few people here would have supposed that such sentiments would manifest themselves at the highest levels of the german military. ah, the german admiral and far away, india fired these words like gunshots, striking many ukrainians, right. in the heart. i spoke with his nose of east loose. it's bliss. oh, he really lost disrespect. ah, yeah. russia against trotter ronny evans was gone. look a minute. this is effect the ukranian response was swift with ukrainian ambassador firing back on twitter. german arrogance and megalomania. the german government has to change its course towards kiev, and he has major vitale couldn't go even complained that germany had committed treason against ukraine. is germany, still a trustworthy ally to ukraine? i wanna put tha

so, for russia, this is going to harm russia as well? >> of course. any kind of breakup of relationship with europe will harm russia immensely. europe is russia's -- the european union is russia's biggest trading partner. china right now is number one, but europe is more important. there is a lot of business relationship especially between mas -- russia and germany. there's a lot of connections on different levels. vladimir putin is very fluent in german. he addressed the bundestag once in german. russia was always looking for a special relationship with germany, and germany very wants to make germany a hub for russian gas. to all of western europe. possibly bypassing ukraine. and that would be a breakup of that relationship with the very costly in terms of political and in terms of money too. >> this is not the first time we have seen energy being used as a diplomatic political weapon. this happened in the 1970's when opec decided it was not going to supply the west with oil over a variety of different things, including a much money they were getting

except that russia has invaded ga, russia has taken over crimea. russia has invaded dunbar. russia has installed iskander, a nuclear tipped missiles with arranged to reach you in berlin. and russia has shot down that malaysian airliner with citizens on it. so actually, it should be us that should be asking russia for security guarantees. i to ask you, mr. sure. course you actually, as we mentioned at the beginning, worked hard to bring ukraine closer to the european union when you, with a polish foreign minister. how did you expect russia to respond to that? well, why should that russia respond to it at all? countries have the right to choose which should trade, which customs areas they belong to. we were negotiating a similar arrangement with russia herself. it's none of russia's business. so you creighton is an independent country. in the face of what you say is very clear aggression here from russia. what do you think the european union should be doing now? well, decisions to supply defensive equipment or national decisions. but if you are against war, you should be helping ukraine

and russia have suck. in fact, it hasn't been this bad since the cold war ended some 30 years ago, and called right in the middle europe and ukraine. here is ukraine's un ambassador . ukraine strongly rejects any attempt to use the threat of force as an instrument of pressure to make a crane and our partners except illegitimate demands. there is no room for compromise. on principle is use the most principal position of for ukraine that we have inherent, sobering right? to choose our own security arrangements, including treaties of alliance, which cannot be questioned by russia. more although, these ride is enshrined in many international legal instruments. the thrush itself, a body to my 1st gets to 9, says this crisis over ukraine is about more than the threat of a russian invasion. it is about the trans atlantic security order, as we know it, and rushes determination to change it. in her latest book putin's world russia against the west and with the rest, professor angela stent analyzes what is motivated

and criticizing him in personifying russia, in the person of russia's president. to the extent that anything that vladimir putin says or does is inherently evil and must be opposed. and that's what we have right now. as you said, it's cartoonish in nature because this is bateau bullwinkle. you know, boris and natasha kinds of sinus. it's not reality. and it's going to lead to disaster because again, i'll leave it with this. we can't fight a war in europe today. we cannot, neither can europe, neither can nato nato knows this. i've challenged anybody who's affiliated with nato. tell me how nato can mobilize an armored core in 10 days. you will never get an answer to say can't. they would be able to do it in 10 weeks . rush on the other hand, can put 2 combined arms army that are trained for deep offensive operations in the field was in a week. this is the 1st garge tank army in the 20th combined army. both former cold war formation station did east germany that were the same. whoa, whoa, whoa. european peace and the aftermath of the solution of warsaw pact to paul t

the russia, u. s. talks in geneva settled basically nothing. however, the biden administration can no longer say it does not understand russia's position on pan european security. the ball is in washington's court. ah, discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess, glen beeson in oslo. he is a professor at the university of southeastern norway as well as author of the book, great power politics in the 4th industrial revolution. and in budapest, we have george samuel lee. he's a pod, castor at the goggle, which can be found on youtube and locals are a gentleman. crosstalk rules and effect. that means you can jump in any time you want, and i always appreciate it. oh, let's go to glen 1st. glen, you know, we had about 2 weeks of meetings, different formats are essentially on the same topic, at least from the russian perspective, and trying to get nato on the same page. to talk about pan european security. i watch. the presser is log off and blinking, blinking is move though, got a little bit in the right direction, but not very far in my o

would actually go to war against russia, not just over ukraine, but, you know, take by crimea, push russia out of south. so you can have it both ways. you can't say the brush made in the future company, no threat to rush on at the same time. are you that are, you should use force against them. also, this idea that rush should have no beat. so this is also, you know, we say over and over again as if it makes any sense. i mean, if it made was going to monopolize so security in europe that and the biggest country in europe should not have any say or, i mean, this is an absurd statement. obviously, russia will have, you know, either has it within institutions or it will have to rely on its own, on this military in order to uphold that, you know, which is now express a red line. so nothing makes any sense. and the last one is nato secretary general, explicitly saying naval does not discriminate against new and old members. well, this was the whole point of the navy, russia funding act of 1997. this very explicit promise committed not to putting metal to permanent troops in eastern europe. and n

and if russia chose tojoin it, fine, russia canjoin too. but i would say we are not trying to make it about us and them, we want it to be europe and the us, and russia is the one trying to pull that away and break up the alliance. and do you see it, as olha is asking there, that this global instability has been with us for a long time and may continue for a long time? that's up to russia. i think, if i can step in, there is a huge gap between, we're not about talking eu or nato or us, orjust any other, it is something where the collective west has got the extremely good experience of building the consensus. and now in a global world, where you cannot take decisions only on your own, on behalf your country — when it comes to covid, to energy crisis, even to military force. we have learned how to make the consensus, and how to make collectively the decisions. but what putin hadn't learned is to be part of some consensus. broader consensus. and until he understands that he should be a player together with everybody, this could change the sit

what does russia want most? an unstable dependent ukraine, or a new sphere of influence in eastern europe? like a well, you know, we spoke about she has of inference today as well. when on a stable ukraine is indeed recently a factor of our everyday political life. but this instability, well, i know you are an experienced journalist and i do understand where this instability comes from. if you look at what's happening around portia angles returning to keep of all the subsequent events house all organized as for spheres of influence. go i asked anthony, blinking to day, i asked him to explain but you will have to present a cath, austin, boy asked for help to the c su based on this year's due chapter for assistance in mr. pursing the terrorists and her brooklyn beautiful my daughter. so, you know, there were demands that catholic, stanford explain why it did what it did. you know, this illustrates that the west is confident of its own special status. they are allowed to do everything. others are not allowed to do

so again, this is a test for russia. if it is serious about resolving the situation in eastern ukraine, and to resolve it diplomatically and peacefully, minsk is the way to do it. we will fully support efforts to implement the minsk agreements by both parties, and again, we'll see if russia is willing to do that. mr price: simon. reporter: mr. secretary, we'd like to get your assessment of events in kazakhstan, and how that potentially weighs on these meetings with russian officials next week. and more specifically, u.s. officials have raised kind of questions about the csto troops deployment there. what is -- what specifically is the concern about those troops going in? is there an implication that the kazakhstan government hasn't actually invited them in, or how do you see that? secretary blinken: thanks. so first, we are very concerned about the ongoing state of emergency that exists in kazakhstan. secretary blinken: . so first, we are very concerned about the ongoing state of emergency that exists in kazakhstan. we'v

obviously, one of the 1st things we talked about is relations with russia, between a rod and russia, the strategic corporation deal. that is, that is still being in between the 2 countries that goes way into the future, 20 years into the future, envisioning all sorts of cooperation between iran and russian. i us, the iranian president, why, by russia, and he says that the 2 countries have a lot that they agree on. there is a lot that they can mutually benefit on and that ultimately they are both countries that want to be free or their own. solitary. a main principal is that we do not want to accept domination over other countries and do not want to be oppressed. we want to be an independent country, just like russia wants to be here. and it is these countries that want to be independent, but being attacked by their right below the americans don't want to independent countries. i mean, we oppose american domination, pushing the gist of what he said is that the united states and its allies think again, many that they want to crush any nation that wants to charge it its own course in in

but that's exactly what russia and china had been doing. in the case of syria and elsewhere, i should think was like, you know, more than 2500 miles away from where we are right now in syria. the misery for millions who are still living under a saw that misery continues and it's faded a lot from the public radar. we have to admit that. what does today's landmark court case? what does it mean for those syrians? well, you know, one important element of this is, there are certain countries. denmark is a good example which want to pretend that it is safe to send the syrian refugees back to syria. because in most of syria, the wars or restrict, you know, the assad government back to its usual repressive ways. but you know, human rights watches don investigations where we found that, you know, people who on go back to syria relative handful people are treated as suspicious just because they laughed and they are subject to the same detention centers. the same torture, the same risk of atrocity so um, in what we saw today in plants, the focus of th

it's a very, very painful for russia and whatever russia tries to go to read down very badly on russia. so i don't see any real upsides for the bike ministration to do very much, to help out roger with the exception of what they call the strategic stability to nuclear weapon. and that's an issue. i think there, there is a kind of a us interest in restraining the sort of the arms race when it comes to intercontinental ballistic missile. that's a separate issue from major to expand your they americans are very happy just just to make life difficult. rush, well, you know, in the same theme here and we go to earns thin and novice out the is. we have nato steve sultan berg. he said right before the summit, he said on nato states are fully prepared for a quote, new armed conflict in europe. i mean, what kind of language is that going into a summit? ok to de escalate tensions and all of that. and what is it, what does he mean by that? what i mean, how do you think he's defining what a military conflict is? because nato is already said, and the united states separately said, they're not going

s. framework to contain russia. also, we have to bear in mind, at least trust is aiming to step into boys. johnson shoes is a big advantage. we'll have to go in february and one more time to russia and portray her so as a totally read leader who can, you know, stood up to kremlin them to put in. so this all the politics within the tory party and national politics in the u. k. so yes, it is a distraction on this, not only the u. k that moscow believes is bogged down in fake news. just hours ahead of security talks on friday, the u. s. state department outlined what is cited as examples of russian disinformation rushes. foreign minister was critical of both the content and its timing it to my you concluded rosenberger. these documents which the u. s. state department has of course prepare deliberately for today's meeting. a simply impossible to read. it's enough to scroll through a couple of random pages to be sure, none of the provision stand up to any critical analysis. in many cases, it is simply a lie. in response

these a v, both russia and china. and if we look back a bit in, in german history, it was a green, foreign minister, yoshika fisher, in 1999 who actually helped the green party break through its ideological pacifism and back the nato bombing of serbia. yet we're not seeing similar action here from foreign minister, bear bark, or could that change? well, i think she has a done quite a lot in the past few weeks to, to actually make germany somehow visit in visible in the world. and especially in ukraine than in moscow with her visits there. and the problem is that in fact, at this, in this moment, we seem to have in the leadership of the so called traffic light or coalition in the red for the social democrats, the green in for the greens and the yellow for the free democrat. them are for us anyways and, and the greens and the social democrats simply lack at this point in time. these strategically thinking politicians like yours, catfish at the time who was able actually to pull around the cause of his party and . and ev

even if russia says they are unsuccessful. all these talks recently we had china, of course, in alaska, that famous blinking meeting went by and became president when china started reading the riot act about native american genocide to the united states. and we saw that tweet or no, it was actually statement by the russian foreign office and replying to blink and saying don't if i read basically don't, if i russians and you houses guests because they'll stay longer than they should. and of course, the russian said you're more likely to be raped or robert, if american stay in your house, maybe the americans, maybe nato, maybe they have their people. they're saying, look, there is a resurgent and certainly a rhetorical, ah anger from moscow badging that we've not seen for a long time. the best thing is to up the ante. i doubt that i think lincoln statement is actually stupid, sang by the russians in another. i'll never go there, and it is now proven wrong. and surprising to go back to a point you made a bit earlier. america's ke

all of the issues between russia and nato, russia in the west. what they were an opportunity to do was to, to make sure that the diplomatic route was still very much open. certainly what we've heard from certainly love role. that seems to be the case that there's plenty more ground to be covered by diplomacy. yet when it comes to the situation, the tensions between russia renae so we of course have to wait to see how the united states viewed these talks before. we can get a full picture of exactly how they went down. like the ts me are expecting me. anthony, blinking to talk to the press. any minute now and as soon as he does, we will go straight to it. but thanks for now. that was printer all reporting in geneva, watching out east or to come for you this hour. ok, well i'm sorry. we sold that to auntie, blinking. it's gonna talk any minute now. so we'll get prepared for that. but in the meantime, we're gonna take a quick break. ah booty lou ah ah ah. with no i oh, when i would show the wrong one, i'll just don't rule out the thing because the at

they cannot b o, a niecy arrangement to be russia because if russia, oh will not be considered as an adversary of natal. they will be no joke. no objective for nato and venus. united states will lose its super rossi in europe and the object if she is to fragment europe on to torpedo any reset between western europeans on russia, and in order to prevent mercy, pull our richie to emerge. pierre, and i know it's a man geopolitical expert. thank you very much for joining us on the program. we appreciate it now, just hours before the nato chief spoke, russia's foreign minister spelled out clearly that the country does not want war, sir, gala ralph reiterated moscow's position on escalating tensions with the west. however, he also noted moscow. com to stand by watching its interests being ignored. love rob shared his thoughts during a 90 minute interview to rush and journalists among them was our teeth editor in chief, margarita sim onion, his aunt, mister latter. i've had to say, yes, this is alicia authorities configured c. lately. if it depends on the russian federation, then there will

should russia attack ukraine? ladiva, what do you think is bush's biggest concern is cit, nato's expansion? or is it just the fear of seeing a neighbor which is more vibrant, setting up a strong democracy that could further spread eastwards. ah, well ah, thank you for the question. actually. first of all, i would like just to show brief the command on what the r y aah ukrainian kali ker panel is set. i was surprised at saying by him that russia is made an aggression to a crimea, that that is not true actually, because there was a dialogue, both in crimea and the crimea, and sexually or near voice the gave their voice the to the original location with rush well, that was not the gears of just for the record that the russian narrative internationally were talking about annexation of the crimea. and also actually that one and encouraged and not in the delay eastern territories. ah, that's was not annexation. and that was not the end in gush. it's the casa, well, actually, i, i, i will get straight to the point, i wou

that it threatens russia. and that to any kind of pressure from the us about what russia should do with his own troops will not be tolerated. it will not help the situation . the deputy foreign minister also went on to say that russia is not going to make any changes to their troop movements in their own country, and that russia will never allow ukraine to join nature. and that is something he was very clear about. he said that russia will do everything i can to prevent ukraine, as well as georgia, from joining the nato alliance. and that is something that will continue and that any kind of a temporary fries on their membership is also unacceptable. this is the line we'll be hearing from the kremlin as well. earlier on wednesday, the spokesperson from the court for the kremlin dmitri pest golf at said that this upcoming meeting in geneva on friday is extremely important for russia. and that the agenda is already cleared, the russian foreign minister will meet his american counterpart. and it is believed that t

it's russia that has a 110000 troops. it's russia has the apples. but, ah, why are we here? the question becomes much more complex. it's because the rest of the world buys rushes. oil buys russian. yeah, that's what created the power which is harness right. that is the reality of the europeans in particular have to face because 40 percent of gas that they input comes from russia. this is a situation where we are much more dependent on each other than we were in the period of maximum tension in the cold weather. i say so was it was allergic. that's why it's up to everyone to decide whether the world will remain a safe place or if it will be guided by so called other interest. as for a counter propaganda system, an apparatus like the russian propaganda machine, we don't have it here in ukraine. russia is constantly trying to bring ukraine back into the orbit of its influence. ukraine doesn't want to return to that. and that is the choice of the majority of the ukraine. and the last time the israeli government tried it. it failed, but it's taking another shot at funding an orga

and, we will see how russia responds. reporter: secretary, have you considered the russians are just buying time to find a place to invade ukraine. maybe you jump through hoops like get delivering handwritten questions to answer and meanwhile there stabilizing ukraine from human -- from within. at what point do you stop playing russia's game and take preemptive action now. sec. blinken: first, we are not standing still, and we can walk and chew gum at the same time and that is what we have been doing. we have made it clear to russia that they are -- that there is a path of diplomatic and deterrence, and if russia chooses aggression it will lead to massive consequences. even though we engage in diplomacy which is my job and responsibility, we have been resolutely preparing for russia to take the path of aggression. and as i laid out the work that we have done over the past couple of months and bringing allies and partners together around massive consequences for russia shuddered new its aggression in the very detailed repo

essentially, russia believes that ukraine is moving closer and closer into the western. russia believes that it's essentially on the kind of slippery slope to nato membership. and this is partly seen through increasing cooperation between the ukrainians and western military's. the russians want that door to potential nato membership to be close. the thing is, the nato side say it's not in rushes, it's no place for russia to decide what any other country should do in terms of its military alliances. that every individual sovereign state has to have the freedom to join whatever alliance he chooses. so it's pretty difficult to find any kind of agreement on that. but where there is potentially scope for agree.

because there is not war he tween russia and ukraine. this is a war between authoritarian regime and democracy. and next countries will be countries from european union or from nato because as we know, it's not about, it's not about, you know, rational reasons for putin. it's more about the global idea. as he said a few years ago that it should be some common space from -- to lisbon. this is the idea. he tries to reestablish -- in their former border. he tried to spread kremlin influence on the warsaw pact countries. so right now we need to be stronger, is the bank of nato and old democracy. at our partnership understanding that we fight for all democratic worlds, not only for ukraine. i i think i can stop here, if yu have any questions, i would like to answer them. >> thank you very much, yehor for the coverage is outlook or i would like to get your opinion on what other security support measures could be on the right now in addition to the prospects of the nato membership action plan and eventual membership which will not happen in the

host: if you say that russia is not an existential threat to us, are we an existential threat to russia? and if so, why doesn't russia seem to fear that? why don't they seem to be worried about provoking the united states and united states allies? >> both sides have a very stylized vision of the threat that each process to the and in some particular respects that is accurate. if we were having this discussion in moscow and you were a russian government spokeswoman or spokesman -- i think the immediate russian concern is the advance of native toward its borders. i want to be clear this is not the only reason for the crisis nor is that the only item separating us on the russians. there is question that the march of native torts russia's border has created tension between ourselves and russia and by the way, while these objections are chalked up to mr. putin, his predecessor boris yeltsin was no less critical as was the last president of the soviet union, gorbachev. so it is not purely a putin phenomenon. it has certainly been ratcheted up under mr. putin. unlike the 1990's, russia opted -

up russia. let's to get to that for a 2nd. why does barton appear to be trying to ramp up the pressure on russia at the specific moment? i mean, you talked about the problems at home, he talks about the problems with mentioned, could this be a smoke sprint? smoke screen for those types of issues at home so that people don't focus on those as much? well, i think that that is part of the idea. i think the other part of the idea here is that the u. s. has moved and nato almost double the number of countries in nato over the last 30 years since the fall and soviet union. and at the same time, is trying to divert attention from the problem. as you suggested by depicting russia as the aggressor. it's not a russia that's moving westward to surround the united states is that they can possibly do that or western europe. and i guess, i think one thing that's important to note in this presentation is he talked about, well, if maybe there was a minor incursion and reporter question to me about that later. b

everybody can do it except for russia. i mean, it is, there is no self reflection here, or is this, this, the institution is fighting to continue to exist and waste billions and billions of dollars a year on generating a threat that isn't really there. well, it is now your are up to the border. you know, somebody's gotta do something. the status quo will not stand alexei well, i think, yeah, i think you're right in the, in the way that really surprised me. when secretary blinking said that like every, every country has the freedom to its own alliances. but when russia expressed an idea of maybe try trying to deploy military assets to cube or venezuela, you reacted by saying that the u. s. react decisively will react swiftly or something along those lines. so what i think is happening is the nato is trying to justify its own existence because nato, as we know, it was, was created for 3 purposes. depending western europe against soviet aggression. there is no soviet union anymore. it was created to bring together rival power

so i don't think russia wants to do it. and obviously the west doesn't want it to happen, but i mean, the 1st, once i got that is that even if russia does invade ukraine, it's pretty clear that nato would not get involved militarily. there would be very strong terms and so on. but the idea about the europe wide war between nature and russia as a result of what's going on in ukraine, very like going back to ukraine itself. russia's been very clear on its determination that ukraine will never join nato. nato has been equally clear on the principle. countries can join whatever alliances. they like. both sides have spent a series of meetings this week saying those things to each other. so i think is the question for mr. rob costs it today. the talk so far have failed and it's an interesting question where things go now, but i wouldn't, i mean, there's a solution to this which, which is pretty obvious one. everybody knows that ukraine, it whether or not it joins next. in the, in the term, the future is certainly not going to do

i'm seeing what russia is doing. there are strengthening its hand in a country where china has also been vying for more influence. exactly. this is the key. if we do me out of it and look at the bigger geo political picture. everyone is talking about an emerging by 32 in the us in china, but rather than we can actually pull other countries forward. so we've said back into it, it's an area of influence. and that's what happens here. instead of having the multi vector policy of china, russia, us, which they have been handling quite well once investment from all these, they have american oil companies there as well. but now they feel it appears as early stages that they're maybe closer to the russian orbit. we must keep in mind that the cut back population is only about 16000020 percent of that population is russian. and so there is some speculation that the concentration of the russian population in the northern part of the problems is what it's going to ask for in return for keeping the current government in powers. a

russia. but a 3rd of that passes through ukraine. moscow has already reduced the amount flowing into europe, causing shortages and pushing prices to record levels. now rushes that threatened to cut supplies further if sanctions are imposed and they're not just on gas, but also on oil and metals. some countries depend on russia more than others. germany gets more than half of its gas supplies from russia. and that dependency would increase if the german government gives its final approval to the north stream to pipeline. ah, let's bring our guests in moscow. pavel failed in our a defense and military analyst in burn, cornelia mayor, seo of mayor resource, and especially in oil and gas, and in berlin. o, rick brooklyn, a professor of political science at stanford university in berlin. welcome to the program. let's begin. inborn with a colina maya calling. this is not as easy as russia, switching off the gas pipeline. and america coming to rescue with lots of new natural gas is it's a lot more c

and russia. if europe doesn't get a more active role, it will simply be sidelined by the big powers and a warm welcome to typical bush julia from dws, russian department, he believes the russian wolf is at the door. so are the western ducks going to try and sit this one out too. if so, good luck, interesting stuff, plenty to talk about. so let's get on with it. mikhail, you are laughing. tell us a little bit about the ducks and the wolf. what does it all mean? listen if we see it as a game though morally it's it's problematic but if we see it as a game, then we can see a huge asymmetry in the conflict between the west and russia where russia is ready to raise the stakes knowing it is a weaker player, it still has skin in the game and is ready for action while the west is not and that's the huge difference between them. so the problem is i don't see in the moment any any i idea to stop putting from doing what he's planning to do, rachel, what have you got to say about that? who is threatening who?

good nato does not encircle russia. nato enlargement is not directed against russia. over the last 20 years old nato coalition potential has been a mass on its eastern flank. the lances expansion towards russian borders is accompanied by the creation earned modernization of military infrastructure. russia has 60 neighbors in the ninety's. only one of those was the nato state. that it became to poland joined, then it became 5 with ukraine and ga, potentially joining. that would be 7 with all the perks that carries like us bases and troops. pray tell how was that not the dictionary definition of encirclement. russia uses statement from high level officials, as well as disinformation and propaganda outlets to intentionally spread outright falsehoods, to attempt to create a pretext for military action. we all know how the u. s. uses differ information to create a pretext for invading independent states. the irony seems lost entirely on the us state department. we still remember collin bow, right. sadam. hussein has not verifiably accounted for even one teaspoonful of this

between russia and the west. he said that the west for the last 30 years essentially has been artificially trying to expand nato towards the east, essentially to provoke russia. and it also seemed today and in the last few days at russia is not budging on its main demands to the u. s. and its main demands towards nato, which had already issued in written form back in december, they've been demanding that there be no more eastern expansion of nato. and they want that written down as a written guarantee. they also don't want any missiles to be stationed near russia . and today, lover was very clear that he sees the us as being of the deciding party and all of this, even if the u. s. repeats that it has to talk to its data allies and to european countries. russia very much sees us as the deciding force here, and they want a written response from the us as soon as possible. so russia is not backing down despite this flurry of diplomatic activity. marina, how worried is the european union, and what did they want to do

host: an russia considers crimea part of russia now. guest: that is correct. host: let's hear from james in virginia, republican line. caller: i am just confused. during the h. bush presidency, and then he had been in power for so long, but merkel from germany just got out of power and she only served three years less than putin had been and she probably would've ran for another term in popularity. but we continuously make putin to be a bad guy. correct me if i am wrong, he had not gone into ukraine yet, hasn't he? if he has not gone in there why cant he be on the border? it is his sovereign country. we are truly making more of this than it is. he came out during the russian collusion and said they had nothing to do with it. host: james, our guest. guest: it is a great question but i see that a bit differently. the first important thing is to return to the conversation we had about crimea and to recognize that russia has already invaded ukraine. they already seized part of an independent country and then backed an insurgency in eastern ukraine. russia has alre

let's start with russia. if there is a military conflict, sergei, what are the consequences for russia? well, the problem is we don't know what kind of military conflict we could have. could it be a small operation, a long operation? could the russians, you know, invade and try to capture more territory? or, you know, will they even invade at all? there are lots of uncertainties. i think the ambassador has rightly pointed out that there will be sanctions for russia, so that is something that i'm sure is influencing calculations, putin's calculus, as he considers what to do. their — obviously, if the war becomes long, which i don't think they want, it would have an impact on putin's domestic popularity. long wars do not help anybody�*s popularity, so i'm pretty sure that russia, if it were to take military action, it would want to avoid a quagmire, that's for sure. what are the consequences of a military conflict for ukraine? we do not consider that there will be a full military aggression on the territory

russia is out of slaves. and likewise west nice russian guests and so forth, right? you say the best apparent right now is political. and indeed, it doesn't seem like very appetite in the west for any military confrontation present biden has said that funding us combat troops, ukraine, to fight a war with russia is off the table right now. so how can the u. s. and nato help the ukranian military and government send off an invasion if there is one. well, i think it's good but layout talking with the crane because ukrainian government seems to be focused on completely wrong things. mean it, at least from distance, it looks like president lance is priority. is dealing with domestic composition and arresting former president that's about as opposed to preparing for war. so it could be good if outside is good, how's the pope was for mines and discuss with what can they to diplomatic, as well as politically not least the ukrainian government, if they were willing to invest again in the normal process. i think that'

it is owned and operated by russia. it transports natural gas from russia to germany, it has been an operation for about a decade. nord stream two is a parallel pipeline that has been built, but it is not yet operational, or online as they say. it is now potential leverage in the negotiations with russia. if nord stream 2 goes on a line, that would mean much more gas going from russia to germany, which actually could affect ukraine, it is not anywhere close to it in several ways. for more on that, i want to bring in chris miller, he is the author of putin onyx, power and money in resurgent russia. thank you for joining us this. evening oil and gas power the russian economy. but they are different, oil can be set anywhere by rail or by ship, but with some exceptions, most natural gas today primarily flows through pipelines like nord stream. how does this pipeline that takes natural gas from russia to germany, nowhere near ukraine, play into this crisis? well, right now, russia is europe's biggest supplier of natural gas

there were threats of more sanctions on russia and export controls putting, put on russia in a way to hurt their economy and access to certain items. now what's interesting was, while anthony lincoln's tone was rather calm. and he seemed to emphasize that they wanted a diplomatic and negotiated solution to the issue. it seemed like the press and the reporters were asking him questions, were anxious to demand that he go into greater conflict and there'd be bigger tension. this is some of the interactions that went on between anti blanket and the u. s. mainstream media. just finding time to later the place to invade ukraine, making you jump through hoops like and delivering written responses to questions that you vance at time and time again. in the past, the meanwhile, that the stabilizing ukraine from within the economy's crumbling, you're spending hundreds of millions of dollars showing them up. what point do you stop playing rushes game and take preemptive action? now? we can walk and chew gum at the same time, and that's very much what we've been doing. so we've been clear to russi

path forward should russia choose it. the secretary provided details on the u.s. and allied assistance, both military and economic to ukraine in preparation for military attack by russia, saying it remains up to russia to decide how to respond. we already either way. here are his full comments. unfortunately good afternoon, everyone. discuss the crisis and steps to de-escalate tensions and pursue diplomacy. russia had previously outlined its concerns and proposals in writing and last week i told the foreign minister that the united states would do the same. today, ambassador sullivan delivered our britain response in moscow. all totaled it sets out a serious medic path forward should russia choose it. the document was delivered and includes concerns of the united states and our allies and partners about russia's actions that undermine security and a principal and pragmatic evaluation of what russia has been raised and our own proposals where we might find common ground. we made clear that there are core principles that we