cross sucking security guarantees. i'm joined by my guess, the boy mileage in washington. he is a blogger, and column is in quebec. we have dmitri last caught us, he is a lawyer and freelance journalist and in worth and we crossed anthony webber. he is an independent political commentator. all right, gentlemen, crossed huck rules and effect, that means you can jump in any time you want. i always appreciated a boy, let me go to you 1st in the imperial city. um, this idea of indivisibility of, of security has been quite lost ever since the end of the cold war, because it was the hallmark of the helsinki process. and nato is just thrown that into the wind, and i would say that speed in that is to be the result is a conflict. do we have in ukraine though? no one in the west seems to want to use that logic, but it was the west and the soviet union that came up with that logic. they kept the peace in europe during the cold war. so what are they missing? go ahead and the butcher. well this you are quite correct that this was entered, the call ended up preventing the cold war from turning hot. unfortunately, it was red con, from history in the ninety's, amid this whole end of history, triumphalism that, that became the ideology to sure. and washington and the helsinki process basically became a conveyor belt for the us to brow beat, other countries into doing it, speeding. and this doctor and it wasn't quite so clearly formulated. but they basically said that the only sovereign truly sovereign country in the world is the us. and everybody else has to do what they're told or else. and we saw what or else men to 999. when nato proceeded to attack you, then you was flavio without any sort of, you know, break into you went charter, its own charter, the hell. think you charter all imaginable charters? it was privy to and it that was just basically ok. we did it because we wanted to and what are you going to do about it? and, you know, 23 years later we are, we are, we are as so it's one of those. obviously none of us would have happened had the west abided by the treaties to decide, but that has really never been the case has it to me treat? i mean, it was a few days ago that the german chancellor came out and said that, you know, there has to be new security guarantees per europe after the conflict ends in ukraine, which russia, obviously in his mind, will lose which he is obviously wrong. but it's really kind of befuddled me and is that the, does the german chancellor that those low security guarantees were in place before nato expanded? i mean it's, there's this sense of, of forgetting history. it's really extraordinary how the german chancellor could say something like that. your thoughts, dimitri? well, we have an overwhelming tendency in the west to have a shorter non existent historical memory. and we tend to choose the date of the starting point for history. that is most convenient to the narrative of the u. s. hedge him on the united states government. and the fact of the matter is that it has been eminently well established by the historical record. in fact, that beyond reasonable dispute, not only that europe signed onto the, know the notion of indivisible security and recognized that the insecurity of one state affects all others within the european region. something we're seeing today and very vivid and painful in a very, very painful way. but it's also absolutely clear from a historical perspective that the leaders of the soviet union and russia received assurances that there would be no expansion eastward of nato. and there were repeated warnings from luminaries across the, the west, including george kennan, including henry kissinger, including even william burns, the current director of the ca, that across the political spectrum and russia, there was antipathy, entirely understandable, and typically towards nato expansion. that there had been assurances given that the breaking of those assurances would have potentially catastrophic consequences for europe and west relationships with russia. and we simply conveniently forgot all of that. because the ice days decided that its status is the world sole superpower was at risk. and that it needed to take measures to weaken russia and then beyond that to weaken what it seems to regard as its prime competitor, china. well, you, anthony, almost. exactly. one year ago, russia sent to nato and to washington to notes ultimatums, whatever you want to call them about, you know, it's, you know, basically they're up against the wall and you have to listen to it because the security architecture is collapsed or the, is that be something that could be possibly entertained. now i me because because we have mixed voices in europe, you know, there's no relationship, no future with russia than macaroni or any got criticized for it. said there has to be security guarantees. your thoughts, anthony? well, the problem is, sir, there's a huge amount of distrust which has been caused by what's happened because has been rightly said from the 90 ninety's when the cobra ended. and they were these assurances, but there wouldn't be an expansion of nice or even though they weren't in written format, ah, but the problem is since the end of the cold pool, ah, they toes early, massively expanded it, especially since the end of the century. i'll say it's been a complete our sense of distrust there, because why should the need russia, our trust and a p. p gland, nato. but i yourself to look at the situation office, see any concrete needs to have some security. and the united states wanted security where may have the cuban missile crisis. ready and you have to look at what are the former president gorbachev said, and because he was the architects with agreements between the old soviet union and nisa. and he said a, you may not humiliates a country and it spec prayer where to be no consequences. and because there are consequences and mismatch, they p millie millie heights in russia, which is what's been happening now, but it's as though these agreements we had, ah, the helsinki, the, the, the structures we have in place to reduce tension. i have been totally ignored, as, as he said, and the voices for peace are shut down. and a, one of the objects is of great nato is c supposed to be to protect freedom. but there's a freedom in the, in the west at the moment about a free and open debate. all this whole issue. and is it really in the interests of nice, i countryside conflicts? are we've russia, ovalia's crane and they, it clearly isn't. so we all have to look at our new trustworthy k r countries point of view. there's no strategic or other interest in being involved in this conflict with the bikes. i mean, if there are going to be relations and you're gonna, it's going to have to be mutual. that's not a message. it's coming out of european capitals. it's a, it's a to our way or the highway. i mean, it's really extraordinary that they don't reflect upon how we got here. they don't want to do that and it, and it has been pointed out, they choose their dates. okay. right. well, that the thing about european capital is, is that i see a lot of rhetoric coming out of there, but not a lot of agency, essentially, micron and sholtes and others talk a big game. but they do what they're told at the end of the day. now, they're being told that by, you know, i choose to believe that it's not joe biden, because that would be even more humiliating than the alternative. but the problem with the collective west is twofold. one they can't under they wouldn't recognize their own interests if they, you know, literally fell in their lap. that's one and 2, they're not agreement capable. there is a very clumsy but wonderful, rushing the ologist them. that literally translates it's not agreement capable. these are to people you cannot make deals with because, and this is something that collective wes, it's forgotten and i'll put it in terms of the pop culture terms that everybody can understand. if, if your method of dealing with people is to say i'm altering the deal, pray i do not alter it further. you are to villain in this story, not the good guy. so, you know, this is, this is a bit of self reflection that's needed to be done in the west, and i don't see it an effect anywhere. i think microns passing thought about giving security guarantees to russia, which is about a year too late. is the closest it's come to it and he's been viciously attacked over that. and yet, you know, he's been said, sorry, is at home at band any sort of criticism as, as you know, russian prop, again say what sholtes in germany and they entertain these fantasies that, you know, once russia will lose things, will go back to the way they were before, well, i've got a good news for them. first of all, russia not going to lose. and secondly, nothing is ever going to be like, as it was before, no matter what the outcome of this current conflict is. that's not how these things work. yeah, and dmitri, if, if russia is not granted security guarantees, it will create its own. that's what the west doesn't understand. dmitri, again, i want to come back to the point we meet at the outset about the historical amnesia from which we seem to suffer in the last. we forget that the soviet union, according to a 993 study of the russian academy of sciences, suffered some estimated 27000000 losses in the 1st world war, the 2nd one. and that included approximately $9000000.00 military deaths. of course, the, these horrific casualties were inflicted upon the soviet union in the 2nd world war by an aggressive nazi regime emanating from germany. and i think, well, dmitri dmitri, if you decide to point out collective west minus the u. k at the time, it's really interesting. ok, because you had the entire european land mass. ok. joining nazi germany. keep going . i'm sorry to interrupt. obviously this is the historical trauma of tremendous proportions. i mean, these losses that the soviet union sustained the were vastly in excess of those of the axis powers, the united kingdom, the united states and canada combined. and yet, we seem not to understand that this historical trauma affects the perspective on of the russian people and the russian government with respect to security, particularly under western border and lesson until we come to grips with that reality. we are going to be at risk of interminable conflict, military conflict with potentially disastrous consequences because of the risk of nuclear. a nuclear dmitri, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a hard break gentlemen and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion on security guarantees. stay with our team. the i look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, accept where such order that conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. and the point obviously is to create trust rather than fear. i would like to take on various job with artificial intelligence, real summoning with a robot must protect its own existence with a jagger's archipelago home of the cho, san diego garcia. the largest island in the archipelago is now the location of a very large u. s. military base, you get given med, he's a u. s. government to make a military base and just deported all of douglas and people from their country. so they call it returned back on the island. no, but we are fighting. that's why i'm quite real fighting for the right. so i, we do not consider the right to self determination actually applies to the general . since i don't the question of self determination, the legal advice we have received is actually the chic options. we're not, i'm not a people for me, it's time to move on and see what we can do for the tumbler, said committee to return back home. there is no support from the united nation. i commission african united nish. i don't care about chug restaurant people ah, welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered on peter. let's remind you. we're discussing security guarantees. ah, let's go back to anthony and we're thing that, you know, it's interesting that in the mainstream it's her bowden to talk about what we're talking about on this program here. and one of the things it's not talked about is that a european security architecture would not only excluded russia, but was excluded russian was against russia. and this is something that if we're going to have peace in europe passed to be rectified. and given the voices that we're hearing in europe and in obviously, washington in london, we have a very long way to go. maybe a generational issue. go ahead anthony. yes, that's very free. but we got to recognize what the real agenda is here. and i told him he got on the american color tissue, our sunday hot for a well, when she said the ukraine war is all about regime change in russia, and it's not really about anything else. and it's about our godless vested interest . that late or too big about change so that they get the country of russia ah, plays the game and the indigo able to sway. i know we need to look at what sub present pacing said in to thousands about our euro, because he said russia is passive european culture. and i cannot imagine my own country in isolation from europe and what we often call lee civilized worlds. so it is hard for me to visualize nathan as an enemy. so i don't think russia ever wanted a comb breaks or nature as an enemy, but we got hidden powers who had been trying to bring about this tong, fax between certain countries in the west and russia. i'm sorry, is interesting if any not that long ago that the united kingdom members of the role of family was visiting russia and improving relations between the u. k roster. and now we have a situation where the former prime minister of the united kingdom brought us johnson is actively war mongering. encouraging the sunday of mo weapons and the mo, aids to the bustle, bliss packs of president said, i'm skis are ukraine. i and the u. k. and some other countries had go blood on their hands because a lot of the weapons which had been supplied to the crime that ended up being used to bomb the civilians. as well as all li, military for casualties as well as he rightly said. we've got a problem, but the, the windstream major in the west of the u. k as well. he's not on debate. so the public does not actually know the truth. that was his guy on that. but a sort of bit of a was sad because nate, i was supposed to have an objective of securing peace, promising co operation, and guarding freedom a night. i was doing none of those in the crying and dr. europe as a whole lot. and if i say, i mean south and burn, makes it very existential. a, i know we must win. russia must be defeated. well, what happens or in the reverse happens, the boy ship, i mean, how, how does nato survive? this which i'm rubbing my hands with glee because it's a failed alliance. it when it's being proven. well nato's mission, according to its 1st secretary general, who was the british peer. unlike suttonberg, who is an absolute nbc said that the mission of the alliance was to keep the americans in the russians out in the germans down. and it has been doing that and it has been benefits doing that ever since. the problem is that you cannot have european security without russia. you cannot have, you know, europe with, with germany suppressed. and obviously, american tutelage is, is turning out to be not really a blessing of liberty that everybody thought it would be. nato is a fail alliance. if, if there is any justice in the world, it needs to be dissolved. yeah, it has manifestly served the opposite purpose of its official one. again, lord, his mace definition worked out much better in that respect. but again, not to the interest of the people involved. i would argue that don berg's in his infinite stupidity and i'm sorry, i don't have any respect for this man. he basically admitted that nato is a party to the conflict. he's actually insisting. right? so, you know, if you, if you're not involved in the war, how can you win or lose? and if you are involved in the war than welcome to the consequences, the one big issue is that what we've discussed before is that it's not just historically me m nisha. it is, it is a very deliberate destruction of historical memory to the point where most people in the west have this vision of world war 2, as seen on the silver screen and spielberg, movies were to soviet union doesn't even exist. right. and unfortunately, i've, i've been saying for the past few years before this calamity happened upon us that, you know, give them another half a generation and they will have read conduct. the soviet union is actually responsible for the war and even the holocaust because that's where things were headed. well, no, boy, i don't know if you've noticed. i'm a big fan of the world war series that came up in 1974. i think it was, it's been completely erased from youtube. i think this one episode, and if wiped it because of what exactly what you said, because it would, it would make, well, well, keep the memory of the war. authentic memory. dmitri, i mean what, where nato is drawn a line in the sand. i mean, how does it survive when it loses in ukraine? it won't, it's gradually. ok, i find it in thinkable that nato will survive in any meaningful form. perhaps some rumpled nato, confined to a core of states and western europe, might survive this disaster from a reputational perspective. but nato's in this, in this sort of existential crisis because it staked its credibility on total victory and ukraine, which, from a practical perspective is achievable. and you know, quite apart from that, nato's credibility, in any rational world would have taken a massive hit well before the commencement of the special military operation in february. because, for example, nato committed, you know, extraordinary trillions of dollars of resources. apparently, the nexus of a trillion dollars to the war and f dentist in an over 20 year period was unable to the taliban, who were armed with soviet era small arms. nato in the name of human rights. and the doctrine of the responsibility protect doctrine which it's abuse. shamelessly effectively destroyed libya, which was at that point in time up until that point of time, the most prosperous state in africa, natal bombarded serbia and even to this very day, that problem hasn't been resolved. it's festering and there could be war in kosovo . so when you look across the spectrum of nato intervention, what you see is one failed, stayed in one disaster after another. and on top of that, you have nato demanding clamoring stilton berg and others, that every natal members spend 2 percent of its g d, p on the military, whether there is a legitimate need for them to do so. and whether, even though there are pressing domestic issues, that every member of nato has to confront, including poverty and an environmental and be environmental crisis currently confront, you know, anthony, and one of the things is very curious in this propaganda rich environment, that this is an elite wore it because if you look at polling, if you dig down, most people are interested in domestic issues here. but this isn't an elite agenda . yes, it definitely is a we just had comments about the record of nights which should be one failure. in fact, of the one instance where they could have succeeded to get his son, i totally didn't grade dipper which i had 26 been in afghans shaban ride city case and standards for women and so on. i said they because they did a deal with the taliban. no, never lost a major battle with the tyler. so then he conveniently left afghanistan to get enrolled in the crime lab. we have to process with a wider picture here and it's all very sad. other people in the event saw controlling what is happening, but we have to do our best to are in all respects of countries feel involved in the crime should encourage our governments to exit from those policies . and oh, but that would be appease men, munich, gay. yeah, that's all you hear. it's all you hear and you know, you know, all of you, the people that say that don't even know what it means. ok, it's a slogan. it's simply a slogan. it's pretty good. and so that's about the deal with the taliban. good for peace. so is old. ok? well, i've got, you know, there bunch, i'm glad that afghanistan was brought up here because the ukraine is the new griffith. ok. because afghanistan was a 20 year griff, now this is a new grift. you know, it is the, the problem, the problem with this is that obviously it's much bigger grid for the weapons manufacturers. except that they hoped that, you know, there was banks would actually get the job done in 3 to 6 months. they're the ones who were hoping for short victories war and it hasn't been that then now they're facing the cold hard reality that their production rates cannot possibly compete with water warfare. and also, i guess there was a typical western expedition war, something that happened far away that didn't really impact anybody at home, aside from those poor souls who came back with p t s. d. this is having immediate consequences, not just for not just for europe, which is obviously directly impacted with the, with the energy collapse. but even in the us, because the, you know, dividing government tried blaming the gas prices on, on the conflict. so here's for the 1st time in god knows how many here are certainly the wife living memory, a conflict that's actually hitting home. however indirectly. and the population doesn't like it. and guess what the population doesn't get. it doesn't get a vote. it doesn't matter how hard they're, they're put upon because nobody cares what they think. it's let them eat cake all the way down. and it's too absolutely destroying any sort of delusion that might be persisting in the west about some sort of, you know, government talk to people in democracy. let me jump in here to make sure the last 30 seconds go to you. how is the west going to accept defeat and ukraine? oh, my great fear is that it won't. okay. seemed yeah, yeah. that speed is full speed ahead. they don't know how to deescalate. right now we're talking about sending patriot missiles to ukraine. every single reaction to a russian intervention in this theater of war is one of escalation. and i think at some point we, we as a people are gonna have to take matters into our own hands, get out into the streets and demand that our governments finally engage in a process of negotiation. and yet, yeah, a little bit of democracy wouldn't be a bad thing right now gentlemen, you know, and i, yeah, well, you know that, that's the one of the biggest casualties is, is democracy and listening to what people have to say. gentlemen, fascinating discussion. as all the time we have many thanks them i guess in washington, quebec, and wording. and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at ortiz, see you next time. remember, cross blue and blue need to come to russian state. little never does on and ignore santini devastation how sunset meet within the 55 when. okay, so mine is coupon. speaking with, we will van in the european union, the kremlin media machine, the state on to russia for date and split marquee sport that given our video agency, roughly all band on youtube and pinterest, and with the me, i, the all, the, once again, you're all the goals rather you, you're going to the information that at the office is the new hours on the cruise leave is feel when it's starting to clean the spreading around when we finally is that the virus mostly just picking up the respirator track. it doesn't go into your level, so that's why the system is not usually does not cause it to be. so this is a something which feeds a lot of other people and why and so much compromise needs with cognitively the ah, ah, i think it will lead to my very good very sake. and at midnight he called me and said he's not very well. sometimes.