tv World Apart With Oxana Boyko RT September 14, 2017 9:29am-10:01am EDT
even call event implying a tire packed one skier says it offends orthodox believers as it exposes the personal life of bizarre he's being made a saint by the russian orthodox church you can't touch saints you can't show them having sex because that offends the feelings of believers this is not censorship this is about the violation of people's rights opposition has turned violent protesters set fire to cars parked near the office of the director's lawyer threats to burn cinemas that show matilda have resulted in two chains canceling it before release prompting condemnation by russia's culture minister vladimir putin skiing to calm down the hysteria any attempts on the ground to ban the release of the film any attempts to pressure private or municipal cinema as a pure lawlessness and censorship is directly against the russian constitution and with the film's russian premiere still more than a month away the director himself is stunned by the strength of feeling especially
as the public haven't even seen it you know all this discussion can remove the surprise to me when i first started to work on it i could move or believe something like this could have been the absurdity of the situation is that those who are protesting against the film haven't actually seen it no one has seen the film yet missile that isn't the first film to court controversy martin scorsese's last temptation of christ elicited cries of blasphemy and bans for depicting a sexual jesus ron howard's the diving she code was also boycotted for proposing jesus and mary magdalene had a daughter and the catholic church passed it up but it's not just religious issues that while steven spielberg's e.t. was forbidden to kids in part of and in a via due to its negative portrayal of adults e.t. really had to go home but maybe those who oppose these artistic interpretation should remember that the best way to make a film successful is to ban it the protesters could be more effective by staying
senior years ago i traveled across the united states exploring america's deadly love affair with the gun if a bad guy tried to get to one of my family members he would have better live better and i think they are and hurting whenever my my babies says my book was published in the year two thousand more than hoff a million americans have been killed by followings in the us on how to saute me as i did this is a middle school we go through drills and we put ourselves some real scenarios it was interest same to see who actually got hit. and i just saw it had to return to the subject to track down each gun owner who i'd met and photographed those years ago i don't know this but we are not. oleksandr annoy you are
a member of the left party and the spokesman for the defense committee parliament. elections will take place in two weeks can the left party hold onto its positions in parliament as well as. i hope we strengthen our positions currently we have sixty four seats in parliament which is eight point six percent i hope that after these elections will have ten to eleven percent this would send the right message to the people. there have been quite a few developments in foreign policy and security policy over the last four years i remember the two thousand and thirteen campaign when relations with russia were more or less ok and the syrian crisis was still in its early stages what do you think has happened with security policy over the past four years. yes the syrian crisis escalated greatly in recent years it seems though that we are pulling into the homestretch with this matter it looks like the islamic state a terrorist organization banned in the russian federation will soon be defeated
once this happens russia and western nations will have to divide syria into their respective zones of influence that's number one number two ukraine the ukraine conflict started in november twenty third teen and reached its peak in the spring of twenty fourteen this conflict remains unresolved it is still boiling it may become another frozen conflict at the same time the situation in germany is changing the military has adopted a new policy boosting the number of personnel building up the number of troops the amount of weapons financial resources germany wants its share of the pie it wants to increase its influence and this includes projecting its military power. what do you think about this parliament's defense policy which is what has it done in matters of war and peace in. the last four years were extremely disturbing we made little progress in the matter of our peaceful policies on the country if you look at our tensions with russia in late twenty thirteen early twenty fourteen which
started with the riots on my down. in the nazi coup in february twenty fourth teen the west admired those nazis and did not view them as such even some members of the green party did not see them for what they really were and then there was crimea's reunification with russia and similar tain asli the escalation of the syrian war which is still going on but we are putting into the homestretch islamic state a terrorist organization banned in the russian federation will soon be defeated but then there will be the issue of the zones of influence the west has ground troops in syria russia too has ground troops in syria and i don't expect the west to give up the territories it controls easily and respect syria's sovereignty and as for the military we have seen a new trained defense minister. plans to abandon the disarmament program in a year and start building up personal and financial resources as well as heavy weapons so the goal is to secure one hundred thirty billion euros over the next thirteen years to purchase heavy weapons they think they need
a stronger military to play a bigger role in international affairs including militarily. if there was a document in the circles close to the federal government in early two thousand and fourteen speaking of new responsibility what do you think is the federal government's idea of the new responsibility in terms of foreign and defense policies what does this term mean this is actually it is not in the circles close to the federal government this document emerged it was produced by the foundation for political science and politics together with the marshall fund they were politicians researches diplomats and business men involved in working on this document it is like a vision for germany's foreign policy strategy germany wants to become a key player in international affairs this document is a kind of road map showing how to achieve this goal for example the authors believe that the united states we're less active in europe going forward this is forwards an opportunity for germany to fill this void replacing the united states so as far
as defense policy is concerned this document was the first step towards building up the military at the same time the federal government is working through diplomatic channels to help resolve the syrian and ukrainian crises always ruling out the possibility of direct military involvement but this is a positive development right and. this was. there are some distinctions here in syria we have a military presence we have our tornado reconnaissance jets there refueling aircraft and a navy vessel this means that we are using military instruments in addition to diplomacy with us this violates international law because the syrian government has not asked for our assistance to fight isis germany is also involved in the ukraine crisis this is a somewhat weird situation the west poses an arbitrator only this arbitrator's size with ukraine wants to punish russia and basically this shows how much the european
union and nato countries like germany britain and the united states heavily involved in this conflict. there are at least parties to this conflict between ukraine russia the west and russia gauging the standoff over ukraine seeking to win through and see it. as. the left party has consistently opposed the war at the same time when the civil war in syria escalated how many left leaning people who are not members of the left party went to northern syria to support the kurds isn't this a contradiction what is the left party think about this situation that. we discussed it within the faction and it was a heated debate this is the situation with facing a pacifist cannot condone the use of force but anti militarists and this is an important distinction recognize the right to self-defense i don't think we can tell people you have to figure out somehow isis is at the gates you might die but it's
not our problem because we are pacifists as you not accept this reasoning i've never been a pacifist i am an anti militarists that means that in my opinion military force should be a last resort we have our national right to self-defense that cannot be taken away we should not abuse the idea of defense and self defense so the defense policy of germany and western countries is a misleading concept we don't defend ourselves we advance the interests using military force to the point of breaking international law and anything. so if i got it right you think that the kurdish people living in northern syria have the right to defend themselves americans and other members of the coalition support kurdish groups in this conflict but the courage don't just fight against isis they also target government forces what do you make of this. it's a really complicated issue for the kurdish self-defense if it's in northern syria and the blockade of isis forces are absolutely legitimate is what choice did they
have but now kurds living in these territories are seeking some sort of independence reports about. they fight for independence from syria often refuted but i do know that they a manipulated by the americans they get american weapons and serve as their boots on the ground fighting against isis so it's very unlikely that they will be willing to give up control over the territories we see the same happening in northern iraq and soon we even expect a referendum on kurdish independence i cannot approve that move i strongly oppose separatism my stand it is international law i know that any separatist movement creates more problems than solutions look at sit down sit on south sudan no no their problems were solved on the country things go even worse all former yugoslavia this situation did not improve because now we've seen seven tiny states one of which is on the verge of failing one is that there is a split there are no solutions things only get worse and the regional conflict is
dragged out. so exhausted you think that a unified syrian state and strong government will provide the solution to the current crisis. certainly we have witnessed the fragmentation of libya and know what it entails as you have just mentioned the federal government of germany hasn't contributed enough to the deescalation and resolution of conflict in ukraine and syria but there's one more pressing issue the iranian nuclear talks which started under obama's last term frank walter steinmeier the minister of foreign affairs at the time and zeke marr gabriele the minister for economic affairs who are actively promoting the talks and insisted that a diplomatic solution to the iranian nuclear problem should be found could you name at least one initiative that the left party supports. yes this deal is a great achievement we see that we avoided a war but we also see the achievements of this deal in jeopardy the u.s.
hasn't lifted quite a number of the imposed sanctions that have imposed new ones under various pretexts it seems that america. and the trump is not interested in trying to make this deal work and impose new sanctions to provoke a run to break it but if iran acts wisely or will not be provoked and the us will not find a pretext to start a war which i think america would be happy to do as for the sanctions the u.s. congress and president trump imposed a new set of sanctions against russia and some of them could even affect european companies the federal government and the chancellor protested against that what is the purpose of sanctions against russia and against the energy sector. it's true when washington and brussels i mean european countries play the sanctions game they usually coordinate these decisions but i do not support sanctions because they usually affect ordinary people also the anti russia sanctions are not legitimized when the u.s.
imposed the last set of sanctions they did this unilaterally without discussing it with a european partners best of finding them the european countries are not too happy about it the federal government of germany is worried the sanctions may affect the ongoing projects maybe the baltic sea pipeline and the north sea pipeline. it seems that political and economic interests are involved here so they want to supply north american liquefied shale gas to europe and to us russia from the european gas market. it's interesting how the situation in the u.s. is developing initially from positioned himself as a tough and active person in various fields including foreign policy. but he's been sidelined by the democrats and by his own party members now we see that he no longer controls the affairs relating to brush up as for the new set of sanctions he signed the russia sanctions bill but he's not able to call them off this is up to congress we see that he delegated most of the foreign policy affairs to congress and became a lame duck president regarding russia. credit
is one of the basic instruments to drive an economy but it can also lead to tragedy i did it i took the whole gist i came to god and meant that the text i came to and in the spiral now. many lives have been broken except it the banks got you into trouble the normally big bankers got big. government by the banks but i didn't think of the ordinary men and women in the. back under creditors people see no future bad face can happen you'll become ill get into
speaking of defense policy there's another important matter with respect to the. westley the united states insists that all nato partners should bring their defense spending up to the two percent threshold the defense minister ursula found a lion and chancellor angela merkel publicly support this demand from time to time yet it seems that this is a very controversial issue in the ruling coalition in effect for example foreign ministers openly stated his disagreement with his position recently by what does this figure of two percent mean for germany's economy and what does the left party think about that. think about. this first of all the two percent is an arbitrary figure out there were several attempts to adopt it nato summits back in the early two thousand it is a political commitments not a legal one in other words we don't have to do it the cd you think this requirement is not legally binding germany can comply with it the s.p.d.
realizes that the vote is not going to like a massive increase in defense spending right before the election but i really doubt that the s.p.d. will put up a fight on the issue hasn't been one project in this parliament that the s.p.d. did not support in other words they supported all the military projects before the election they realised this will make them unpopular as well let's take a look at the twenty eight hundred budget it includes this provision about spending two percent on defense this plan was approved by the cabinet and all of the s.p.d. ministers fully endorsed it that's number one number two when the political decision about two percent was made in wales frank was the steinmeier who was the foreign minister at the time who is currently president speaking in s.p.d. member supported it which you can look up what the s.p.d. politicians say and you will see that the closer to the election you get the more they talk about peace but then once the election is over they continue with the militarist policies they've been pursuing say this twenty forty. which is the left
party think about this we absolutely reject. this policy let's take a look at the numbers currently we spend about forty billion euros on defense and that's a lot right for the sake of comparison russia spends about sixty five billion a year but russia has many more troops and russia has nuclear weapons which is extremely expensive russia's conventional weapons are not too cheap either in other words russia has much more weapons and troops than germany germany spends about as much as russia if we are to increase our defense spending from forty billion which is one point two percent to two percent by twenty twenty four and we adjusted for inflation in take into account g.d.p. growth let's say by one point five percent this gives us almost seventy billion euros which is almost twice as much of a drop long so defense spending will double yes we'll be spending twice as much on our military will be spending more than the british who has nuclear weapons more
than the french also have nuclear weapons because i would be worried about germany arming itself too much with the fact we should take a closer look at the figures some people say we should build up our military because the russian military is getting stronger but that's not true russia has a program to modernize its military by twenty twenty six and russia plans to spend six hundred billion euros on it if i remember right the russian government adopted this figure in twenty four teens that's true but next year in twenty eighteen russia will reduce its defense budget by five percent that's because russia's military is getting increasingly professional if you look at the absolute figures nato countries spend a total of nine hundred sixty billion euros a year on defense whereas russia spends only sixty to sixty five billion in other words the west spends fifteen times more brushes defense budget is one fifteenth of the nato budget how can you boost the spending even further by the time germany
increases its spending to two percent nato's budget will be twenty five to thirty times bigger than brushes budget besides most western weapons. systems are superior to russian ones at least as far as high tech systems are concerned and as for quantity apart from artillery and we have two or three times more weapons than russia the west has more combat aircraft more transport aircraft more helicopters more submarines is that the west has two or three times more weapons systems than russia so to me it doesn't make any sense to say that was russia is building up its military so we should increase our defense spending over the next seven years as well sort of and as you said this decision was not justified in terms of weapons and defense policy and what is behind such major investments in the defense said history here on. this in the several years now i would say that twenty zero eight was a turning point we've been witnessing the end of the unit world order when the west was the only power that could advance its interests without any serious resistance
. world order is over and we're transitioning into the multipolar world order and the west is having a hard time accepting the fact that it needs to coordinate these actions on the international arena and its security policies without the powers such as china russia the brics states and other countries respecting their interests in the last twenty five years we've been doing whatever we want it sometimes disrespecting international law now we find ourselves in the situation where this approach no longer works didn't work and you crazy didn't work in georgia in two thousand and eight and that was a turning point what happened in syria the west could not overthrow the assad regime and now it looks like we might even leave syria defeated we're no longer able to advance our interests without taking of us into account for the west is still holding on to that tactic so we're used to dominating the world and imposing our interests we call it defense defending our interests which is absolutely absurd
we want to increase our military power to retain whatever influence we have left and not lose more germany is also participating just like in the nineteenth and early twentieth century it's a vibrantly developing power that wants its piece of pie. let's look at the recent conflicts in afghanistan libya syria and many other countries including the latest one in ukraine on many conflicts have intensified and turned into wars and what diplomatic and political measures to the left party proposed to end these conflicts . that. you are rights we were drawn into many conflicts the situation got worse and it was a loss at least for the residents of those countries i would like to go back to the conflict in yugoslavia slovenia is the only country where life is better than it was when it was part of yugoslavia bosnia and herzegovina is on the verge of failing kosovo became a safe haven for the mafia and gangsters let's look at libya it is in ruins there is no statehood there syria is almost destroyed the assad regime which i don't
support quite the opposite actually but it is the least of all evils because it provides some sort of stability of afghanistan is in ruins nato lost the war the war in iraq was a total disaster and it is also in ruins whenever the west got involved and it is true interests the real politic behind some lecturing on human rights and democracy has left behind a scorched earth there is no other name for it that is why the flow of refugees is constantly growing in twenty sixteen stockholm international peace research institute published a report stating that the largest number of refugees come to europe from countries that we graced with our bombs that says some things the second largest group of refugees who flee from poverty that's understandable we destroy these economies that were not the most competitive to begin with by demanding these countries open their markets for our products no matter what of course the economy in those countries ends up in
a shambles it happens all the time in africa the middle east latin america it is no wonder that it's some point people pack up their bags and move to germany the promised land where they hope to find a better life for themselves it makes total sense to me. that we need to change our foreign policy in terms of economy and security is first and foremost we need a new era structure of global economy we have to admit that protectionism for small economies is not necessarily a bad thing but on the contrary it helps countries grow stronger we also need to respect international law from the get go because now we invade countries and then blame them for disrupting peace and order in europe it is absurd the system of peaceful coexistence in europe was broken in one thousand nine hundred one and berlin is what has gone before that played a key role in that the left party wants to change many policies which in turn will lead to fewer conflicts in the world and less human suffering we could change a lot here is an example when we say that germany should take on more obligations
most of the time it is all about military issues but it doesn't work we want to be more responsible we can do it in other areas every year twenty to forty million starve to death germany and the west could channel their desire for protecting human rights into this area to supply food develop agriculture and suffering countries but nobody's doing it because everybody wants to advance their interests . or are you talking about economic interests such as exports etc yes exactly what is your prediction for the outcome of the parliamentary elections that will take place in two weeks what does the left party expect. i hope we get ten percent or more which will allow us to stay the third largest party in the parliament for us it would be a disaster if the f.t. got a lot of votes again i would like to reiterate that many voters choose the f.t. because they think that the opposition party will meet their demands but the if the is a neo liberal party like the free democratic party which was also racist this will
help nobody in germany it will not be good for retired people or ethnic russians or workers or the unemployed on the contrary they have a neo liberal program and the left party is very different from them so we want to bring minimum wages to twelve year olds now up we don't want jobs that off a minimal pay in a minimal hours we want all working people to be able to live well we want good and stable relations with russia we don't want nato to exist because nato is the source of instability so it is an aggressive alliance i think it is possible but we need to have a strong presence in the parliament so we can make a difference. mr noir thank you very much for the interview was my pleasure.
years ago i traveled across the united states exploring america's deadly love affair with a gun if a bad guy tried to get to one of my family members he would have better a lot better and i think they are inheriting whenever my my baby says my book was published in the year two thousand more than home for a million americans have been killed in the us. this is a middle school we go through drills and we put ourselves in real scenarios it was interesting to see. him. to return to the subject to track down each gun owner who had met and photographed those years ago. but we are not.
well known by the. marshal and. islamic states claims it was behind the manchester terror attack by the north front so kill the priest every time a terrorist attack happens all these people are out there screaming i says so bad someone needs to do something against them for me yeah why don't we do something. that. you. told. them to love. and if. you challenge it. check if these. has got a good. look to. show. i'm
round be the one percent. can all middle of the room sit. in the real news room. russian submarine destroy all targets a role in the syrian city of daraa sword as they continue to support government forces in it's going to liberate the country or the extremists. of the coming up this autumn use our officials perch to launch. pain for independence from spain met with fierce resistance from which is threatening to prosecute the region's members . colds a series of hoax bomb threats. affecting over one hundred thousand people telephone.