tv Prime Interest RT June 12, 2013 2:29am-3:01am EDT
choose your language. because we can without. the consent to. choose the opinions that degrade to. choose the stories that impact your life. choose access to. ok now let's move to the topics. very important you've heard of mr snowden he's the second to sun so to speak he's leaked the information on the fact that the us authorities were eavesdropping on everyone in this society and so on the one hand he's a kind of a traitor because he's told everyone about it but on the other hand in the nation
of high level importance what do you think about it. oh that would sure he didn't tell us anything that we hadn't known before i think everybody knows. for a long time that modern intelligence services control correspondence of citizens in there in the era of comedy in global terrorism. it has it is seen as necessary but the question is how far is it being controlled by society because it is in a way she came into a phone conversation without a court warrant. and in principle this is the way it should be in a civilized society when fighting terrorism using whatever technical appliances in
means possible stay within the boundaries set by the law if there is the case that's all right if not that is bad about this. quite so quickly that you can share one hundred percent security one hundred percent privacy oh yes you can if you follow the law if it is in compliance with the law i would like to repeat here in russia we are based on the premise that you need a court warrant a court order for any action taken by a law enforcement authority so why you know would be relevant for a special services and that's then you must look at the topic of the week well as you know we discuss not just snowden syria we everyone just talked about your divorce and so you've announced this in detail and you and you know when leaving the valley but there are stumm issues which. which have
not been disclosed but what about the religious aspects of your voice well a lot of people write about that they ask questions can you reply something about that you know what you know the true first of all i would like to say that both myself. but we. we. we believe that seeing open me. of fears is more correct than conceding things that's what they say both camps say that well. there that much is good in thank you for that as for the religious issue we never get in a church so that's not a problem thank you very much our next question is from. the she's a war correspondent of r.t. english she spends fifty six days in syria and when i was represent i was presented and introduced as a war correspondent people say that correspondents those individual invisible
soldiers and for the past two years we worked a lot in conflict zones the war. under way last time i spend fifty four days in syria we traveled across the city you we were at every village we were in neighboring states where in the majority of cases people don't support the assad regime there are people who are who are angry at russia the really angry a trasher why some people say the trasher has not acted really well because it's not just taken any steps to end the conflict some say that if you support assad you supply arms and iran has been waiting for syria for russia to take action. and like cheech asked you as the president of this country on behalf of these people as the country was ripe for some kind of change in the government
of syria should have filled there in due time and should have undertaken some kind of reform or some kind of change had they done that what we're seeing in syria today would not have happened that's number one secondly if you're. what i said is that we are not advocates of the current syrian government and personally of bashar al assad but we are concerned about questions such as how the future state of syria is going to be organized how the rights of its citizens are going to be protected and only after that we are prepared to start some kind of action not going the other way around by starting from eliminating one of the powers and then trying to introduce some kind of order our western counterparts often tell us that the armed military opposition. is headed by this organization and.
this is one of the key organizations in the syrian military opposition but it has been dubbed terrorist by the u.s. state department of state and that contrary does not even even try to hide its ties to its links to al qaeda so what are you going to let the organization join the future government of syria. are calling our counterparts tell us no so are you going to just make them go away once you have victory in syria they don't know so it's really unclear and so on the one hand you see the west supporting. certain organizations that are fighting asset in syria right now and they are coming those very same organizations those very same groups in those very same people in mali it's exactly the same kind of guys whom the west is fighting in mali but once he crossed the border into syria these are getting western support where's the logic
in that and where is it all taking yes i'd like to talk about the use of drones. the. craft as we know the u.s. sends out. to strike some countries almost every day especially in pakistan and number of other countries you mentioned there. can result seen multiple casualties among the civilian population so true it's may be used effectively parts on the other hand do we do see the real effect of course the societies and many countries have been angered by their view moves to with and the use of drone saw at the international level what is the russia's stance on this issue. well. there's a really important i remember. the case with gunpowder.
it was originated in china and nobody managed to restrain its spread the spread of its application. the same is true of nuclear arms modern day means of warfare are evolving and they will they will keep upgrading involving you cannot restrain that but of course you can put this under control and make it compliant with certain rules that is possible and the united states is not. of course aiming didn't does not intend to. inflict casualties among civilians i think this is rather human error those operators i think the people who actually operate those drones they do realize all those dangers. in the they do realize the dangers for civilians if in i guess there's little they can do about it and you still do
need to combat terrorism. but like you said you do see this issue brought up by increasing the often international institutions so you do need to put it under control you need to have a sort of set of rules to minimize or fully eliminate civilian casualties the collateral casualties i don't know whether our western counterparts will go that way but it is in their interest to we also have a other threats right now in the united states they're debasing they're debating in issues of using strategic ballistic missile without their nuclear components do you see how dangerous that is imagine such a missile being launched from somewhere. the ocean imagine that early warning means see
a missile launch. a missile approaching another country that has nuclear arms how are people in that other country supposed to know whether that's a missile with a nuclear warhead or not just imagine what kind of stress and what kind of what kind of decision that's going to be. the theory of applying. power. fire power or nuclear or and just imagine how destructive it is for the very notion of application of nuclear arms and where is the threshold who's going to decide. whether a nuclear warhead is going to be a low intensity or high intensity we have a lot of dangers in the only we we can address of them is within the framework of international law. it seems like we live in the age of opposition. when we have the arab spring you heard about europe and the crisis there. and the occupy movement
united states which our team did an excellent job in covering but what about the opposition in russia public opinion polls show it's very small not much support what kind of opposition would you like to challenge you. and i believe any opposition is helpful. you mentioned occupy wall street or cook we have seen at some point. government authorities in the united states being cracking down on those occupy activists and being rather harsh. i won't say whether they were right or wrong but i can say that any opposition is helpful for society in the country as long as the operates within the framework of the law if the law is defunct the opposition should it works.
great it's through legal means. should seek to find. to come to come to terms with the population to attract them to their cause we should seek ways to get elected. into the local legislature or the national legislature. or use that as a way to change society and. what it once. really an opposition group violates the law and it's to operate outside the law the governments of the state should be entitled to prevent this and to keep those people accountable this is the way it works in the united states and this is the way it works in russia. the only difference is that russia gets criticized it's what happens in the united states that is considered their normal. we were already used to the double standards used in the west when it happens in the us we criticize them. but there should be the
same approach even in a country where usually in the country when you don't see rush's diplomatic service . impeaching actively occupy wall street activists what you do see foreign diplomats. is. interacting very actively with the russian opposition and i don't think that's right. should be dealing with government agencies and government representatives. with non-state groups and legs gambling venture is so evil is violating the law you shouldn't deal with them as long as those people are staying within legal bunnies or if they're just expressing their views they have the right to do so that i was there so they like to ask you a question as a follow up on your previous response and terms of principles that i like to talk
about iran because the rayney a nuclear issue is he's based only on vague suspicions. americans american secret service special services don't supports the only suspicion and everyone nourse the fact that iran has been compliance who is the nonproliferation regime by ninety nine percent or even one hundred percent. in the mainstream media is that all you know suspicion of course when you're on the run partly to blame but i think that it's really at its biggest flowing she addressed the u.s. because they rely on the principle of those who are. not with us those are against us a friend of principle for. deval i mean i think that they have almost zero tolerance to discern that challenged you to find this line
between what's. voyaging and open confrontation. in fact security but on the other hand. preserving the promoting these national interests when i. was there. with a hit against iran or against the nation states with a critique of iran or the u.s. she starts off. this is a question that you can spend several hours. answering. what you know try to be sure to be concise. and i've said this on several occasions and this is an official stance of russia iran is entitled to have a military nuclear program and. discrimination among any subject of international law. secondly but.
that said. told this to my friends. we cannot forget that iran is located in difficult complicated region and when you hear threats from other countries of the region such as israel. when you hear. it when you hear respectively from iran that israel should be eliminated of course there isn't helping it it's quite. correct or incorrect when people see this kind of saying being possible you know or if you will realize that there can be. a wrongful interpretation keep cool with what they say so. this attention towards iraq's. nuclear program does have its own reasons there is
a logic behind it i don't know what it. is working on a peaceful nuclear program everybody because you don't see any proof of the country even see. a report recently that said the same for us. there is nothing difficult nothing complex in this issue the issue itself is complicated but now for russia russia has delivered on all of its international. commitments you know that russia has constructed the. nuclear power plant in iran we have delivered on all of our terms and conditions and we are willing to go on cooperating we have proposed it to have even in reached in russia but for some reason our partners have declined. this proposal we don't
know why they insist on enriching. themselves within their international mandate we don't see anything wrong with that as long as the keep in line with international law they should be entitled to. their program but we need to ask other countries to toe the line as well can i ask for clarification i was asking not just about the russian raining issues i was asking about the russian american relations and as i said do you agree that there are fundamental differences on issues of international. the so. you're actually actually want to get. the united states out of me. in the run up to my. meeting to make me meeting with president obama. i can see that you are a very tough journalist and we don't have any principle ideological issues or
disputes with the states it's rather philosophical. americans are individualistic in their policies where russia is collectivist there is a russian scholar. who researched pushkin and his writings and he entered gone with the window once in one of his articles. saying that the main character of ghana with the wind. is concerned with you know starvation and staying alive were as a russian would be more preoccupied with something spiritual with relations with god and everything we have different philosophies with americans which makes it difficult for ourselves to understand each other but it's possible but we have international law for that. definitely the united states is even
more christian. which evolved originally is a mockery see from day one when people really came to the american kind in the. organized and established the relations in dialogue in that way that's why i fundamentally it was founded as a democracy. well i hate to say it but you have forced me to we need to remember that the musicians of the american continent kicked off from unprecedented act of ethnic cleansing in the first few pins to come to. did exactly that. you know humanity knows a lot you know about. carthage and about carthage and how our room. invaded and occupied carthage when the killed everybody in the city and
so to the soil well in the states they didn't solve the soil they used. but they did they still killed lots of locals lots of indigenous americans. you see some of those issues continue. to today colin powell inroads in his memoirs how difficult it was for him growing up being a black person in the united states sume parts of those issues parts of those grievances are still stuck in the. in the psyche there. you know if you take russia we know a lot of things about. him that we didn't before we know things about jews of style in that he was a dictator and a tyrant but i very much doubt that in the spring one hundred forty five still in would have used a nuclear bomb against germany had he had it back in one nine hundred forty one
nine hundred forty three when it was a matter of life and death for the soviet union in might have but back in the one nine hundred forty five when the enemy was all but broken. in the the dignities had no chance of standing tough against the allies and i'm sure the stalin would not have used their nukes against germany in one hundred forty five were is there any states did use it against japan which was a non-nuclear states at the time and which was already losing the war you see you do see differences in military mindsets between russia and america but still people are willing to overcome those differences in try to understand one another. to do that. in the more than that we have no choice but to interact. seek to come to two terms to come to
a common ground with the united states if you look at history look both world wars you see russia. against a common full regardless of the or previous contradictions in disputes so there must be some fundamental. principle we all use they do keep us together in this is something that we need to give more attention to you we need to know our differences but build on our common features that will enable us to cooperate obviously think you have been in new york for the past five years or so we've talked about sister e. we talk about fundamental differences. things that unite our country i'd like to get back to the diplomatic you know. who are in the shoes of international law. at the moment yes well you know we've been talking a lot schumi and american policymakers and experts on the russian american
relations and off to me but not to the camera that's the it's just replacements of a very jackson very commandments and it's reflects the same did approach. of the relations with russia and as we know last year barack obama told verdi if we whispered that you will have more flexibility. you just don't get good are for the americans back to you. ok i'll promise you this we're going to be the last question i so brokered barmah here to have more flexibility but this is not the case touched upon a lot of issues today why yes. the reset switch has failed in china treaty happen on an equitable life principles or should we make concessions are the do they
expect concessions all the time. i have already started replying to your question in fact it could be any country seeks to pursue its national interests in the first place and in this sense the united states is no exception you clearly support their situation is only unique in that following the collapse of the soviet union the united states found itself a single leader and a single hegemony in the world for for a certain duration of time. but actually didn't serve them serve them right they did that they didn't do them much good in fact because they said that feeling as a global empire the started. you
getting this feeling of empire which influences not only your external conduct but also how you act domestically in empire for it appearing weak or being weak. in. willingness to. do it to have dialogue to pursue dialogue is often seen as weakness by pursuing this path of an empire you view you often refuse to look even in domestic debate when you know that the current us administration is very well aware of the fact that you cannot resolve most of today's global issues if you actually you cannot but sometimes you feel like they're very much. yeas to have this imperial this catch of an imperial stereotype unless you are being tough people will see you as weak and
so you need to either have a lot of. credit of trust and confidence from your citizens which. you need to have a new consensus globally universally that dialogue and that negotiating is better than imposing your will on others or you actually but of course that needs some time for such an understanding to prevail within a country in this case the united states. and of course this needs to come home with the ruling elite in a broad sense of the word but i don't think this is impossible i think that we should be going there that we should be aiming at that and i hope for that very much.
i. empathize having dreams from a very similar situation. so we're trying to actively support through this interview or in other ways use the snowden's wiki leaks founder julian assange praises as our hero the man who blew the whistle on the u.s. internet snooping program and this is he talked about one of the biggest political leaks in the history. antigovernment under arrest rages on in turkey with police showing force in a brutal crackdown on activists. to show no mercy to protest. the struggle between anticapitalist protesters and hundreds of riot police in central london a week until the g eight summit.