Skip to main content

tv   Cross Talk  RT  November 1, 2021 1:30am-2:00am EDT

1:30 am
it deals with the internal conflicting parties. so kevin bon boss is very, very explicit. i saw, and this is the foundation for how to solve it. and not only that, the agreement means is quite explicit, but it makes clear. and this was written 6 years ago, more than 6 years ago on the one he was also established dialogue with don't boss and to work towards a certain degree of autonomy for them. but now everyone signed this agreement that runs in the esl consensus. now the problem is that the west and assess that officially support and they wants to honor it. but at the same time in work stores, undermining him. a he mentioned the, the u. s, but we recently have the same case now of the you as well. so, you know, the micro on the france and germany as our medical of germany, the cold moscow, and the fully firm their support for the means cont, agreements and says, keep must abide by it. which means talking to them bus, which to have refused to do. and, and also recognizing that russia is not part of this deal that however, thereafter, i mean, even needed to have her after the u. s. meeting with cylinder give you credit,
1:31 am
the hail him for how he has carried out. 1 the application of the key agreement, then that you signs a common statement, naming russia as an aggressor. those effectively reject thing, then ta, him. disagreement is quite extraordinary. so the next that now for you is pushing, including to meet with zalinski to move the green the forward. but again, this is only a way to remove it from the internal issue between even boss, instead percentage as a conflict between ukraine and russia to deprive you know, on legitimacy, away from the bus. and the, and this is through direction we're going in. meanwhile, the target means to be means as throw out the window. so rush, us quite befuddled. what is it supposed to do? i mean, they haven't done followed to the commitments of the previous agreement, and now that you suggesting we have to move forward. but what the really things of build on the past they're saying must throw at the old agreements. and let's begin with an entirely new script. so it's, they're sending old is barry selecting messages. so you must beginning to see the
1:32 am
year beginning. it says to you more and more as a somewhat on reliable partner because they're not doing what they're promising. want to saying in the same time they're encouraging kids. ok, george. i mean, this has been the fundamental problem, because if you look at western analysis and analysis and western media coverage, what's going on and you can, they always conceptualize it as a conflict between russia and ukraine when in fact that is an internal conflict that needs to be resolved and rushes up because it's on the border because of the ethnic makeup of the dumbass, primarily russian. they've had very little choice, but to get involved, a particularly after up to 14000 people who have been killed in the dumbass by the key of government. so it's the conceptualization of this problem. that is the fundamental issue here. and it is, it is being framed in the very destructive way. so essentially, it can't be resolved except for maybe through conflict which, you know,
1:33 am
this is something that the russian side says they don't want in all other parties to one degree. another kid is in a different category, but europe is set the same thing. so, you know, glen glen is right here. i mean, the, me, the contradictions here create uncertainty. uncertainty gives the potential for conflict. go ahead, george. i completely agree with you because as you say, this is a conflict with ukraine between here and the dumbass and it flows directly from the events of february 2014, when the legal, legitimate government was overthrown. and the people who have supported those, the government with the people in the dumbass rejected the illegal regime. but as far as the mens go go, russia is one of the guarantors as is germany and france and the germans. and the french know is that everybody knows, go, i'm returning the rush. is
1:34 am
a policy to the conflict of what's going on in the dumbass is a conflict between russia and ukraine. and so that's all to see how the media presented us all the how the united states presented as gland points out. the europeans go from one to another. so, you know, when, when the last april that seemed like it was going to be an explosion in ukraine because of zalinski was threatening and offensive against the done by the germans and the french on the go, very anxious that this will provoke our conflict. and then, you know, they have the telephone conferences with and, and make play. yeah. we're right with the board. we believe that the minister orders should be supported and then you know, the very next day they go. busy back on this, but what is happening now is that ukraine is in effect, if becoming the fact. so a member of nato. ukraine is not taking part in nato meetings. so in fact,
1:35 am
the, the billing here, zalinski included a reason to saying, hey, we keep pushing this on pushing a little bit further. eventually, nato is going to get involved in that side, because increasingly, nato is getting involved on this side. and so, you know, it's in their interests to keep escalating the conflicts last week. they use the drone that they purchased from turkey against the other don't last. so what, so, nature's response is broken when he was a russian to start that ukraine is being acting defensively. so ukraine is making your calculation that you know, we can keep aggravating and aggravating sooner or later. they're going to come in on our side. well, glen, that is a preposterous proposition because that means we're gotten down to a game of playing, playing chicken bluff. and then is that is,
1:36 am
that is the recipe for an explosion that we saw in potentially happening in the spring. here. the russians made it very clear that there are red lines here and the consequences. i'm paraphrase the russian foreign minister lover. he said that this couldn't spell the end of ukraine. the in those are not words spoken lightly. i mean, it, you know, we, when we had the defense secretary, us defense secretary and go, he was in what, in georgia he was in ukraine, went to brussels and then we end victoria new and show up here with a very bizarre meeting. here is any game of chicken that they're playing, glen, all it is because the role is kind of problematic because on one hand, they have to tell the russians, you know, we're buying by the peace agreements. but at the same time, the, the do, the mission will go on as to keep it popping up. you can push it towards that are changing. that means agreement. i mean, the policy over the spot 7 years has really been pushing in this direction. so over
1:37 am
the past 7 years, the west coast all is anti russian sanctions and weakening, trying to weaken russia, obviously didn't go ask them hope and the same time popping up your grades. and then at some point, they should be able them to change the power balance and them being able to renegotiate. and this was supposed to be back in april and you know, your credit again, mobilizing his troops are along the us border. us, you know, the west comes with stern warnings, naval says, do not there to do anything. russia and then russia, mobilizes and ups, you know, get alternative to means is more. so then they have to step back and say ok we, we will follow minutes, but nothing changes this deal with your credit. and this is kind of in the post cold war experience between russia they don't, all along. nato's continues to rush. you know, we're not going to expand and insure we're not going to put the new troops in eastern europe. and then gradually they have all this agreements and to begin to make incremental changes on the ground and step by step and one day the saying, well, agreements got reality that's, you know, there was the person and it was,
1:38 am
god rush is kind of fed up and the also doesn't seem or are going to do so doesn't want to start to renegotiate from scratch on the old agreement. so it's kind of drawing this clear red lines. i mean, you're going to agree or disagree with the russians about, but this is kind of, it's not going to move anymore on this because you know, when, why should they? i mean, if you're going to constantly be changing your mind and what is the value of your current position of this moment? you, george, what the dangerous thing is, is that you're getting into a wag. the dog situation. i mean, is kept going to be determining nato's policy. and it's a very dangerous proposition. and i think, you know, the, what do you remember the adults were supposed to be coming back in the room? i mean, this is, this is, this is a very, very dangerous path because it is a wag the dog situation and i wouldn't put it past the zalinski. this is the way to
1:39 am
turn the corner. he'll do it. yes. yeah. i think that's right. and it's clear that had europe me clear the landscape allied by them in the board to change the constitution to give the dumbass special state to see better relations with russia . zelinski would have had no choice. the writer's zalinski thinks that he has a choice that he can just continue to aggravate the situation. mean the recycling your hasn't told him that. and as glen pointed out, that that's the europeans position that they keep pushing and pushing and pushing. and then, you know, when the russians a, we have an agreement, you know, we, we signed the agreement as well. that's, that's all news. you know, let's get on with new use. i mean, they use the same argument whenever the russian said, hey, i know you made all sorts of commitments to go. they do not expand these words and what happened to that was a, well, it wasn't on paper. we never wrote anything down. is it any kind of an argument i know who you believe?
1:40 am
yes. a so that's kind of the way they're operating now. and i think that zelinski now sees and he makes it clear that ukraine is increasingly becoming a de facto member of nato. he sort of say, if we continue with this, then at some point, nato's article 5 will come into operation. the georgia, give me the scary thing is for ukraine is that they put themselves on the front line. they want to start a calm like they're going to be on the receiving end, a bit more than anyone else here. again, this is playing with buyer hearing that i'm paying now to conflict that i hardly anyone wants except maybe the ukrainians are gentlemen. i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to what you're breaking up to that short break. we'll continue our discussion with some real mistakes. ah, best kaiser's financials a lot. no, they say made it a girl. i just wanted to visit with you. so central price support dot com is gonna
1:41 am
call them right now. if they stop the madness. ah, in russia, this class of car was discontinued more than 20 years ago. even though stayed with just important factors. it took 5 years to close the gap on the will car industry from the drawing board to the 1st finish model. kepsa will show the key of dealing with the funeral motion commissioner, who should shift a commercial building with with commercial
1:42 am
powering ourselves to be more efficient or quicker with our transactions. we can make mobile payments from our stands. the truth is that every device is a potential entry point for security attack. i think a eventually there's malware on thousands, maybe sometimes millions each day. they use the cyber, they use the technology as an extension of traditional crime. artificial intelligence has not many main threat. this is due to the 3 laws robotics. one of the things that's happening at the many cyber implants right now, i'd be aware that really worried about it. most people would really be you can put a chip in my brain. so there has been a lot of progress from the hacker side using ai and using other advanced technologies. there has been on the defensive lineman
1:43 am
as in there's things we dare to ask in a welcome at the cross that were all things are considered on peter bell. this is the home addition to remind you were discussing some real news. ah, let's go back to george in budapest year. let's talk about some more ambiguous
1:44 am
foreign policy. let's shift gears to asia. a lot of people, of course, you saw in our viewers on as well as that when joe biden had his town hall with cnn . and he was asked about taiwan the long standing policy of strategic ambiguity. i seem to have gone up into smoke as it were. of course, later his handlers talked it. but, you know, we're getting more and more of this ambiguity is not being ambiguous at all. i mean, just in the last few days, secretary blanking is saying that the, the taiwan should have a higher profile in you and institutions and things like this. this is completely counter what was agreed to do exchanging diplomatic relations. this issue with taiwan interest teaching ambiguity. i want to be clear with everyone, it's worked for everyone since they recognize that the united states recognize the government in beijing. it's worked for everyone. and now we have this
1:45 am
administration fiddling with again, as we said in the 1st part of the program. this is playing with fire. go ahead, george. you're absolutely right. and you know, the chinese, some is part is mouthpiece global times recently referred to the bite administration as the most degenerate and incompetent in us history. so much for america is back and you know, the, the foreign policy professionals back, you're absolutely right. i mean, not only has now the united states twice, twice on with biden committed itself to going to war on behalf of one of them through other administration officials, including the defense secretary. they're also committed to going to war for these uninhabited rocks in the china sea. so it's very, very strange. what exactly the united states is doing here in provoking china. and at the same time, they're trying to russia. so, you know, the,
1:46 am
there are times when they thinking, well, what we need to do is to do a kissinger and reverse. we need to align ourselves with russia and china get separate the 2 great powers, and then they go back to no, no, no, we would prefer to confront russia and china together. let's have a global democracy summit, which we can feel good about ourselves, that we are now dead set against the on democratic enemies. is a policy that is guaranteed to create a, you know, doubts in the mind of the chinese leaders. and therefore, it is extremely dangerous, and that goes along with milly's famous or infamous, a telephone call to the chinese leaders during the days of the trumpet ministration, telling them, well, don't worry, we're not about to attack you. but if we do it, i promise, i'll give you a phone call ahead of time. so the chinese leaders really don't know what it is
1:47 am
doing. and i think that's why there is furious as they are. you know, glenn, what i find really perplexing here is this whole policy of strategic ambiguity is actually work for everyone. type one has everything but independence. ok. it was agreed that there is a one china policy, the west, pretty clean united states recognize that which actually means that they recognize that taiwan is part of china, though it has a special status unspoken, but it obviously exists here. so it is works for beijing. ok, and as much as they may rhetorically lash out from time to time, at the end of the day, this current situation is working for everyone. why is the administration doing this? i mean, the syndicate, me in, i mean, we can talk about this is that, you know, the intelligence that have community, they want threat in place and they want more money. they need, you know, budgets and all of that. we don't want to go to war. busy want to prepare for war.
1:48 am
ok. what are your thoughts? go ahead. i guess the main change happening is that is the change in the distribution of power. now are washing. obviously they've gone with china, but that the record keeping disagreements by the same time they want to enhance their strategic vantage against china, which means wrapping up disagreement. so they want that in both ways. as you point out, the main problem with taiwan is the status. this is the china, so for more than 40 years, the us more than 40 years, i was like that use accepted the so called one china principal. and it's very, very clear. there's only one china, taiwan, it's a part of it and it's capitalism, aging. so this is very explicit and this has worked for 40 years and from china's perspective, obviously it wants to have pie one back. but you can do this by peaceful means because it's power girls relative to us every year. so at some point they can, you know, gradually bring them in with comic incentives or however it is fun, but time is on china side. so really oh, as a result in the use,
1:49 am
it's time is mostly on that side. over the past few years you see it's beginning to chip away then at the one china policy, upgrading official status. 1 referring to morrison and defend state, also the from boldly to taiwanese to maybe seek independence. so if the govern dependents, this is the one scenario where china will intervene militarily. so if you want to the fuel situation, just the found china, you know, we will stick by the one china policy. and this is where the implicitly comes in because that's what it calls trying to explain. we're fully committed to one china policy just combo. but they don't repeat the rich rhetoric towards the international community. indeed, after getting off the call with china, the americans begin suggesting pie one must have an independent representation in the un, which isn't just a stepping stone, but it's like the last that before the session. so that it is no, it's a little bit like ukraine. you want to have it both ways to say we're going to live by the agreements. but at the same time, you throw them away in order to enhance your strategic advantage. so it's very,
1:50 am
how can you have diplomacy or is it must be very frustrating? well in it but georgia, me, where's the, where's the gray hairs in the professionalism? well, this, i mean, anyone that knows anything about american policy in the pacific is so p chic ambiguity. that that's the corners, the corner stone of it. ok. and that is before the quote unquote rise of china. it's been that way here. and it's as if the, these agreements never existed. this understanding never existed. our invasion, i would be extremely nervous. right now. you have mark miller, making that crazy asinine phone call, then you have biden just say, you know, we will go to war over time want, i mean, the people in beijing, the mostly think these americans must have lost their mind. yes. yeah. i think they up and i think that's why that's reflected in that global times. editorial. but this is the point is usually why exactly is the united states engaging in this kind
1:51 am
of pointless of blankenship on a matter that is really of no strategic importance to the united states. i mean, you know, i want nothing hangs on. i want one at the same time a no, no, no we, we don't want to co with join. i know we want to good relations with china. and then when it comes to something like a on that issue, which actually doesn't affect united states, the origins of the virus that again, no, we don't know what's going on here. let's just put that on the back burner. so this is getting itself into unpleasant conflict with china over a matter that isn't of any strategic importance to the united states. and it's a matter that's essentially settled. it is several and then the and that's why it is so strange as to why exactly is suddenly brought this up. i mean, this is a really,
1:52 am
was no good. it's not like china was frightening taiwan oil. is it saying we're going to settle the matter at the, by the end of the year or anything like that? so this was not unnecessarily provocative and has created a conflict over an issue that is no really, boards united states. and as you say, it was just no need for this, you know, glenn, a, you know, you, you are a big geopolitical thinker. ok, i mean it is, if we step away in the 1st part of the problem, we talked about the frame and then we're talking about china. mean, is this the american hegemony? it's and it's under threat, it's under pressure and is this by the u. s. is reacting the way it is, because when you, when you feel you should be chicken partners and, and in weight begin to dissipate, it creates a potential aggressive behavior. so it's looking for a conflict. we're really doesn't need it that we don't need a conflict in ukraine. it could be resolved in ukraine. it's a ukrainian problem. we have the situation with taiwan. the situation that was
1:53 am
agreed to decades ago has worked for everyone. so it tells me it's a, it's a, it's a, or a geopolitical thinking in washington about it's relative decline in the world. am i wrong? i don't know if this was quite comfortable in its own position in the world. that is the global dominance or stable then obviously it wouldn't go in the center change of international agreements and risk or with major powers. as mentioned, it is the relative decline of the u. s. and feeling as time is not on its side. in other words, it will be in a weaker position tomorrow than it is today. so it's better to start changing reality on the ground. you know, bring, you know, ukrainian tomato. this is get independence for taiwan. so you can use a permanent like an aircraft carrier, which is function so, so this is the main goal is going for, but, but there's no great genius plan behind this. i mean, because of the end of the day, a russia,
1:54 am
ukraine is next. essentials are china. this goes back. you know, to the opium morrison. this is how they were there in the territory was split from them. i know obviously less of the dilution. and i think it, but the point is this is being especially a remnant of or power. so when interfering and the not going to give up their own territory. it's just, you know, they, they made their peace with the fact you know, this, they have autonomy. they sit there to govern themselves, but don't go for that last go, don't try to seek independence. and if they do, china will, and that's, i'm 100 percent sure of will use military force to get it back. and within that closer proximity of china, there's nothing to us can do to really win. i'm like all scenarios to just the china will come up. so it, there are, this is not a great plan. this is going to hope that you're not going to win. it went rapidly running on time. george, i mean, glen brings up such an important point here. ukraine because it's the location is
1:55 am
very important to russia. taiwan, because of its location in history, is very important to beijing, but the ukraine and taiwan are of marginal significance for teaching value for the united states. go ahead. yes, exactly. so these are both of great importance to do great power. and if the united states, that is provoking a conflict over something that's of no importance to the united states, there's getting involved in ukraine who isn't, has no other strategic purpose than to antagonize russia and the same with i one, there's no reason for any of this other than to antagonize the chinese and therefore, it seems very strange because it has nothing to do with the real us national interest. i was in your interest to antagonize rival great hours and that's why this was, is both foolish and dangerous. are containment?
1:56 am
oh, that's the one interest. yeah, that's why we call in the program. let's get some frantic joe. ok. that's all the time we have gentlemen. i want to thank my guest in oslo in budapest, one thing our viewers for watching and c, r t c. c, an exam, remember grossbach rules ah, ah, ah, the british and american governments have often been accused of destroying lives in their own interests. while you see in this, these techniques is to stay devising methods to essentially destroy the personality of an individual. by scientific means. this is how one doctors, theories were allegedly used in psychological warfare against prisoners deemed a danger to the state. that was the foundation for the method of psychological
1:57 am
interrogation, psychological torture, this year, disseminated within the u. s. intelligence community, and worldwide among allies for the next 30 years. and how to make them say they still live with the consequences today. long long i think wrong when i just don't hold any world yet to see how this thing becomes the advocate and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves will to part we choose to look for common ground. it's been 30 years as the soviet union collapsed in miss gotta go to chill them on
1:58 am
to what the talk so. so shown where you also trust someone call it ukraine was one of the independent states that emerge from the ruins of a super awesome good. would you also get on google greens? come a little, i'm surely confusing. some of the yet and less new lease in west, nor did better one more law. a whole lot of the past 3 decades been like the ukraine eye witnesses went cool. the events, there should be more or less of a little what i knew to know if that order. sure. i'm not sure. but i did that for months with wider windows and what other forces were at play. you have to do so to me. show engine mushy. in those them, you problem the kid. what it i'm going to come to when it shows up in was it was a version. jordan is, take a look at ukraine,
1:59 am
30 years out the gaining independence, a phone with us for dinner unless you mean like it was late, but it will, it makes you could be sure you have lunch with us on holding for a
2:00 am
ah, that lines. it's monday morning, europe's energy crisis coded and a breakthrough deal on global corporate taxation all thrashed out to the g. 20 summit. it's now wrapped up in rome, but it wasn't all smiles with the french president, claiming is a strolling, came to part, was lying back that troubled deal. the submarines i do see when, when we have with could be to and you have to behave in mine and consistently with people. i do. i don't think i know i'm all world laid is now in scotland for the you ends climate summit with cause to have emissions that are are crisis. and paul courses around $400.00 private jets will reportedly be flying in vi pays for the green.

12 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on