tv Cross Talk RT September 7, 2017 12:00am-12:30am EDT
there should. be. clashes and arrests as south koreans voiced their anger over the deployment of a u.s. missile defense system. the taliban suicide bomb a tall gets a u.s. air base in afghanistan but no soldiers were killed also in the headlines on t.v. . i am japanese chancellor merkel is booed at a campaign rally ahead of the country's federal election it comes just
a day old to she was pelted with. another a but. that's it for me for now nikki erin will be live from here almost in around and hours time stay with us. hello and welcome to our all things considered time peter lavelle how bad can it get how low can russia u.s. relations go at this point it's anyone's guess but one thing is for sure donald trump's call for better relations is now dead in the water.
russian u.s. relations i'm joined by my guest here in moscow mark sloboda he's an international affairs and security analyst we also have petro he is a professor of political science at university of rhode island and we have to me he is a political analyst we spoke to international all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate it professor let me go to you first here. where are we in this relationship right now we talked about this earlier edition of bullhorns. what does each country want to achieve in this spiraling downward effect it wants to embarrass the other side yeah that's tit for tat and it's like to bullies in a schoolyard i guess they they have to keep sniping at each other so it's a prestigious you right now more than anything else particularly on the issue of the expulsion of diplomats in the closing of these diplomatic missions the interesting question that we were talking about before before cameras came on was
the issue of rules and are there still rules that apply and i think what we're seeing now is the erosion of rules which is neither the absence of rules nor clear rules and the erosion creates a great sense of insecurity among everyone both participating and observing because we're seeing holes appear in predictable behavior so anything is possible now and that's a very frightening situation because it's a very frightening situation here because we it once you've been in the rules i mean i think our viewers have to understand is that there's a certain kind of etiquette that is expected in diplomatic circles and even the worst rivals respect those things you respect the immunity of diplomats you respect property rights here all of this is been blown out of the water and it is not mentioned in western media that this is happening right it hasn't been blown out of
the water just recently or only with russia even look at julian a song in the ecuadorian embassy precedented i don't undersea charade for years. this it's all since the one nine hundred ninety two with the uni polar moment the us political establishment became addicted to not being here into the rules and the american exceptionalism. so if the u.s. is not bound by the rules of international law or the etiquettes of international diplomacy and this is this is only the latest round of this and also there's other factors of the game now i prefer to think it is a great games and i call going back to the nineteenth century and nineteenth century that weren't ever established and rules cyber warfare i mean this is suddenly a siren klaxon coming out of the us media over russia several tactics the u.s. has been cyber attack in russia in other countries for years that's never been
reported on there are no rules established for that president putin has asked repeatedly for the u.s. to sit down and negotiate rules for cyber warfare for economic warfare for these other things that they're not only you know we're talking rosen they're talking new aspects of the game that rules were never created for. the latest tit for tat. is washington trying to push the kremlin into doing something irrational. to make them over react because with this this environment of no rules you can expect you could expect the unexpected i don't i sense that's not going to happen that there will be a reaction but asymmetrical probably well i mean right now we have some liberal commentators here in russia over a great thing the fact that we didn't didn't respond in the twelve that way immediately. and obviously these people are just interested in the deterioration of
relations if not over the group i say yes i regret it i don't agree with the process that basically there are no rules but i will just tell the you quickly what are the rules that i represent knowledge that were in place during the cold war during the cold war we had an arms control regime which is basically dead now you know a.b.m. treaty of was destroyed two thousand to. see if you can version of force in europe doesn't. committee range nuclear fear as you know russia now is going to have joint exercises with bell are always there to see as an excuse for dogs and so to say this right on russia's borders. in romania in georgia everywhere so basically and there is another very sinister development the u.s. is now targeting the russian elite a look at their sanctions for what it says that president trump and the u.s. government in general should produce every year every port more of them on the big business in russia on the connection of russian businessmen to the ground in on the
incomes of their spouses their children their parents their property abroad so now the lead to start get at so these game is not only very dangerous and unpredictable it is also very undemocratic what is the end game what do what do the this this american onslaught you know starting in in the end of december when i used to onslaught correctly when there was no evidence there was no you know they didn't catch a spy they didn't have any microfilm they didn't have a hard drive that they can i mean there was no evidence for this here it was capricious ok and that evidence has never been shown publicly year so i think it is very rational what is what do the u.s. what does the u.s. want in this kind of behavior except for to embarrass and into force in overreaction which historically is not something that comes from the kremlin go ahead the lack of predictability leads to an inability and inability to
explain these actions rationally but i would flip the question a little bit and perhaps we can discuss it from this perspective who benefits and who loses which side gains more and which side loses more from a continued deterioration because the trajectory we see at the trajectory is downward so who stands to gain who stands to lose more rushed. or america. i think my immediate assessment is that russia does not loose as much as the united states overall from a deterioration in relations the relations are really so bad right it doesn't affect our commercial ties doesn't affect our diplomatic ties because all of those and intelligence ties those are all pretty much been suspended but a continued deterioration of relations between these two superpowers frightens the
europeans and it leads to a rift between the united states and europe and there are already there has already been pushback on that front against a further what the germans call let's not have another ice age so the german foreign minister you know. one of the things i've been noticing in this goes all the way about the. ukraine situation two thousand and fourteen with the rhetoric that we hear from western politicians don't care what political party in from congress and of course from the media how do you walk back any of this to improve relations when it's necessary or are we looking at in and now maybe i'm exaggerating here or this for the next generation it's going to be very low level it's going to be a diplomatic cold war you know there has to be an intention to walk back and sort of getting there is what i'm getting is no such intention and when nicol i asks who benefits and who doesn't use exactly right but we can't look at this outside of the prism any more of us domestic politics agree that president trump
campaigned and won the election that perhaps the only foreign policy platform that was relatively coherent and continually expressed to his own political detriment in the united states is he wanted detente he wanted improvement in relations with russia and he wanted to end the pursuit of many regime change nation building democracy promotion all these euphemisms around the world. so he is now effectively hostage in the in the white house him and it's very small the willing circle of loyalists who were with him at the at the beginning during the campaign were when you would see who benefits it's not the trump administration who benefits they're continually victimized and demonized throughout all of this and associated with russia and that's both are demonized it is about the deep state it is about this on the elected continuing. rule by bureaucrats technocrats that
continue no matter who reigns office there is just a piece in foreign policy asking can the deep state and the media survive trump and they tried to cast these are people as paternalistic patriots who are protecting the country and in the rather than assaulting democracy with leaders like their holy ghost yeah there they were trying to recast their treasonous patriotism and they said they would follow and obey a reasonable president they get to decide what is reasonable what isn't and anything that the search from the us as far as i get someone who doesn't trust me i don't know i don't i don't like that person let's turn it again around why should the russians care if you want don't want to parlay then you can say ok fine well i think the professor is the very important issue who is going to lose from this well i would ask the question who's going to gain i think breaks and china in particular they know so more much more reliable than the united states and the main would say
is the credibility of the united states i mean when president trump says i decided to suspend the trade with countries that trade with north korea what does it mean if you're going to suspend trade ties with china which is six hundred fifty billion dollars per year maybe india is a little so that is a blow to that u.s. reputation to that of the u.s. foreign policy if russia had. been such a bad country you know it would rejoice but i don't think so because russia does not want to defeat what damages the united states russia wants to defeat the i do all of your change and that ideology is the same in the united states in western europe in central europe i mean. after all this is the u.k. he basically keeping him cost with you know the situation you are absolutely right there's really no cost so there's no charges for the use of money
mulayam all the e.u. in the former soviet union ukraine is now going to introduce legislation that would make it a criminal offense for the ukrainian officials to visit russia which is like make it a criminal offense for canadian stories at the united states you know or even worse so you have this i do all of which is the real enemy not the country this is your favorite card to play so gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on russia u.s. really. years ago i traveled across the united states exploring america's deadly love affair with the gun bad guy trying to get to one of my family members he would have better a lot better and i think it's fair and hurting whatever my my baby says my book was published in the year two thousand more than half
a million americans have been killed by us and we had a team yes we did yes this is a middle school we go through drills and we put ourselves in real scenarios it was interesting to see who actually got here. and i decided to return to the subject to track down each gun owner who i'd met and photograph those years ago i don't know the but. we are. selling you on the idea that dropping bombs brings. the battle. to new socks credit tell you that. the most important. thing.
we. will watch. welcome back to cross talk were all things we considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing russia u.s. relations. ok let me go back to nicholas one of the things that i you know i ended the first segment here why should russia really care if the u.s. doesn't want to parlay into part bilateral relationship then at a certain amount of a certain point you just say ok that's the way it's going to be but we live in a real world with very real problems and let's consider north korea i think the russia has been played a very constructive role in the united nations lot of people didn't agree with russia's position in voting on. the when they did do that in china did do that they had a roadmap how to move forward in
a very reasonable one i would say in that which has been completely ignored which has been it's been it's. ignored is an understatement ok i mean most people don't even know what happened ok so but this is a time when the united states and russia really truly need to work together and to resolve this crisis that i think that has been generated from the west that can be a different conversation but these are two key for goodness a good north korean russia border each other ok russia has a vested interest in resolving this situation here and with the with this tit for tat the deterioration of relations is the worst possible time for something like this to happen. in the west there seems to be an assumption that if russia is somehow marginalized from the international equation more decisions can be taken. the problem now is that russia needs to be a part of the international order america needs to be part and crucially the
relationship between the united states and russia needs to be funded is a is a has been and continues to be a fundamental cornerstone of the international order now when you take that out the international order collapses it becomes a free for all right. and. again it is it would be interesting to consider who benefits cui bono who benefits from a free for all because obviously somebody must be thinking that they benefit more from the collapse of all rules and international anarky than for any somebody might be thinking i don't see a whole lot of thinking out there more of it another derivative of that if even if the. countries of nato and the united states say even japan ignore russia take russia out of the equation on the international stage that
doesn't stop from russia in china resolving this issue themselves who becomes marginalized then it cuts both ways going that's why i talk about it as a great game with multiple players now not just although if the u.s. is doing its best to push it that way the problem when we're talking about international order is that we hear and western commentators and talk about two different international orders we talk about the post world war two one nine hundred forty five un. un security council un charter world of international order solver and noninterference in domestic affairs well they are talking a liberal world order as they refer to it started under britain woods the creation of the beauty oh and the global free trade regime and then it came to hyper power with the collapse of the soviet union the dissolution of the soviet dissolution of the soviet union in one thousand nine hundred two and the emergence of the us as a hyper power striking the world. so what we're left with in north korea and
specifically is that russia and china but neither one of them are proponents real proponents of the regime in north korea their people and it's not a real communists not that russia and china are communist anymore no matter how much americans like to believe that they are they certainly don't want a nuclear arms race in their backyards east asia but japan south korea looking develop nuclear weapons they don't want to but they don't want north korea to collapse. unilaterally with u.s. military bases running up north korean peninsula and you know they're you know faster because they want to and organic dissolution of north korea and the united korea the u.s. will never allow that to happen on terms that would allow south korea to emerge with its own sense of geopolitics that might draw even a little bit closer to china and towards more historical tag unism with japan. but i see this is a real possibility of that russia and china could be successful in dealing with
this situation who loses ok the reputation of the united states loses and there's a demonstration effect here i mean the the the proposals that the chinese and the russians have made i think they're almost identical from what i understood from the united nations security council there is a possibility of that happening and if we see that happening you could see the deep state that mark has already mentioned here they would want to spoil that they would want to make sure that. couldn't happen which brings us back to the same crisis that we started from going the problem is the deep state never stopped short of anything except complete victory and the destruction of being basically what does north korea want in the first place talk to us take a seriously a permanent peace treaty you used to do it you know the south korean president's mad north korean president just a few years ago president june you know the former dissident mad on the hill and the sky didn't fall upon the earth so you know the situation indeed improved but
this is the problem the united states simply doesn't notice an organization that it does not like for example the eurasian economic union you know the uniting the former soviet republics not the baltics not ukraine but those which have normal relations with russia the eurasian economic union exists we already have a free trade zone with vietnam but the united states doesn't notice it c s two or kinetic security treaty organization of the former soviet republics the united states and nato don't notice it we don't acknowledge they're not acknowledged and they don't even notice it in the sense that they never comment on any actions of c. it still even breaks they barely notice you know and this is all i think they notice it when they just the they don't want to respect it because it violates their sense of their granddaughter to images are they well in genesis other times i have an impression that the way the states for the first time in many years is ruled by hope cience you know hopes warned us that if you don't have
a rule if you don't have order which maybe sometimes you have a war of everyone against everybody and this is exactly what we are having no what you said born or who profits but we have situations in history when wrong they do or were just just created this international disorder and it was a lose lose situation for everyone it destroyed millions of people he destroyed billions of dollars in property. and you know it was not anyone's to anyone's benefit except they'd all just. but there is a profit motive i recall one of the popular ideologist of early capitalism is yosef. whose great contribution was creative destruction out of this total leveling of the field new groups new births come about if you want to get a contribution right. and here's the danger that they're not creating
a fire wall our intellectual community in the west seems is not creating a reasonable fire wall between economics and politics because where as in economics at least you could argue some potential benefit coming out of the rearrangement of assets and capital in the case of politics you're talking about debts real to talk about human lives being lost in general future generations being lost forever i'm sure the professor. should bet that he is and that would just because the role that involved his books about the collapse of the roman empire the reason why it collapsed was he didn't recognise any opponents they might all be that terrorists you know. the impious has no opponents only terrorists you know that it has no foreign opponents or only crazy regimes but abetted regimes recognizes only itself yes clients that are going to do this only itself so when you don't have
a legitimate opponents then you'll collapse simply because nothing can exist with the old and before you columbus you become increasingly irrelevant to the political order that's the danger that question repeatedly why does russia keep trying why does russia keep trying to parlay an improvement with russia and simple russians that weaker power russia is not the soviet union its geopolitical horizons are muchly reduced its ability to project power its economic its relative military strength are all much reduced. but where there is still the possibility of hope for russia is in alliance or at least partnership with other countries like jordan where you were destroyed to the russian federation is far more adroit in the soviet union was because it was driven by ideology is not driven fact to a fault it's not driven by ideology pragmatism and cynicism rule the kremlin now this is where the us is doing us a favor in the long run they are pushing russia china iran and other countries it
but particularly those three together and in this attempt to isolate russia which is only isolating it from the west which is no longer the whole world and here in russia those of us who don't want to eventually be vassals of us western hegemony we see that's a positive development we want to decouple in from e one penny on. china and the north korean crisis could it if it's resolved it could be resolved in a way that a lot of people don't expect well i think i'm not sure that ground is only by a pregnant ism because it marks bread which is the main cynicism so the reason i get all the legal aid although it's their ideology they're such different countries as egypt and china can accept look at what happened during the last brink summit in selman china invited gypped russia promised to invite iran
egypt and iran formally and you miss absolutely there formally supporting different sides in yemen but despite all of the differences. that global dissolved it and breaks despite all the all its people say all this is an organization dominated by china seventy percent of trade is via china well yes but they still come up with political statements every time and would do redo their statements it's always against regime change again. intervention into the internal affairs of other states that's what i do always have the money to go to the international those i know i do want to point out you've already seconds last thirty seconds american soft power used to be considered the source of its strength that soft power was based in large part on the its ability to act as a peacemaker around the globe both a peace maker and a peace and force now. that your map. and now it is losing that crucial element proving to be ineffective both in maintaining
international peace or in being a facilitator of international peace and that is creating space for alternative solutions very good point thank you gentlemen we're going out of time many thanks to my guests here in moscow and thanks to our viewers for watching us here r.t. see you next time and remember. here's what people have been saying about rejected in the senate is. the only show i go out of my way to you know. really. all over
a party america is doing the same. apparently better than. i see or heard of. the night president of the world bank very. seriously send us an e-mail. in case you're new to the game this is how it works my economy is built around washington. washington. the media the media the voters elect the businessman to run this country business it. just it's not business as usual it's business like it's never been done before.
the be. the city as a hollywood backdrop the glamour is attracting even more tourists they may well bring in more money than cruise passengers who might buy an ice cream before scooting back to the ship and that all inclusive accommodation this sort of tourism in particular makes it difficult for cities to develop alternative concepts as i'm as a village well knows she's researched the issue in other european cities as well. honestly essential mentioning about our case about us up to lamb unless i'm up to raise my. sense of us for minutes yet. on the placement of the little.