tv Cross Talk RT May 10, 2018 12:00am-12:31am EDT
it was a fun who's up in these parts of the fine. russia celebrates victory day marking the seventy three years since the end of the second world war with a fireworks display ending a day of spectacular military parades. a sea of people swept through moscow taking part in the immortal regiment march remembering relatives who died fighting what russians called the great patriotic war plus. oh. god. the cia veteran is thrown out of the confirmation hearing peduncle trumps pick as the new agency chief amid protests over her alleged involvement in torturing prisoners. and protesters burn u.s. flags on the streets of tehran after donald trump decides to withdraw from the
iranian nuclear deal. to have a full news bulletin ahead for you in the next hour with my colleague rory sushi here in the studio well up next the panel on cross talk discusses how world war two changed russia and its view of the world. hello and welcome to cross talk where all things are considered i'm peter lavelle wore in remembrance day marks the seventy third anniversary of victory in europe over fascism this is one of the most important dates on the russian calendar that can't be said of the europeans and americans we discuss how that conflict continues to impact russia's view of the world to this day.
across talking the great patriotic war i'm joined by my guest mark sloboda he's an international affairs and security analyst we also have exactly he is the founder of the center of political strategic analysis and we have peter cousin and he is a professor of history at american university as well as co author of with oliver stone the untold history of the united states all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in in any time you want i always appreciated let's talk about what the russians call the great patriotic war or as the rest of the western world calls it the second world war now peter you've been visiting in moscow. you've probably seen a lot of evidence celebrating the victory day on may ninth but you don't see that in the west you don't see that in the united states why the significant difference . one big difference is that the soviet union lost twenty seven million people
how many people in the west know about. well actually i've got some statistics on that i didn't have to show nonscientific sampling by students undergraduates not history majors and i asked them how many americans died in world war two the median answer i got was ninety thousand which means they were only three hundred thousand off ok that's not bad that's in the ballpark asked of his university students to person to students mostly freshmen came are these are mostly freshman i was at university i used to teach university. a few chairs yet and i asked them how many soviets died of world war two and the median answer i got was one hundred thousand which means that they were only twenty seven million off so these kids know nothing not only about world war two they can't understand what's happening in ukraine they can't stand anything that's going on between the united states and russia now there is an extraordinary degree
of ignorance in the united states about world war two it is it's not intentional ignorance i think it is i think there is a deliberate role both officially from the u.s. government dominant within the us media and particularly perpetuated by hollywood of the role that the u.s. played the you go put out a poll just this year asking the questions of the u.s. and six seven european states in your opinion which one country would you say contributed most to the defeat of germany and world war two most americans surprise believe that they played the. just rolled by fifty five seemingly private ryan right brian france most french this is a big change from right after the war right after the war fifty seven percent of french believe that the soviet union played the biggest role in the defeat of nazi germany today forty seven percent
a plurality believe that the united states played the biggest rise where only fifteen in germany a plurality believe the united states played the biggest role by thirty seven to twenty seven percent in the u.k. they believe they played the biggest role by fifty one percent. to fifteen percent denmark sweden finland norway all also a plurality believe that the u.s. will that big but that's a function of the cold war that's a function of nato i would say it started it started just after the second world war i turkey and specially for germany because if you remember my stein. ok it was not a religion that you created himself after the civil war it was not. you were you were you believed in germany but you were advisor for the for the west germany army the chief of staff. in the one nine hundred forty he was advisor for
that he. so it's one of those interesting things that you have good not spare the good nazi ok and then you whitewash the rest of you know one of the most important things the legacy of the second world war we have the division of europe we have the cold war. but on the bright side we had the establishment of the united nations charter. and i think that's really significant speed up to the present i think mark how many. posture reports as three i think already. china russia iran and north korea there are the revisionist powers i would posit in light of the establishment of the united nations charter and in light of what's going on in syria it's the western powers the revisionist powers if you put it next to the united nations charter we have the french we have the british and the americans going all the way back to one thousand nine hundred six. in deciding the
fate of syria in the middle east by passing in the age of they would say it's a legitimate bypass of the united nations charter peter that we're going backwards and we're not learning some of the very few good things that we got from that conflict that ended in one thousand nine hundred. well the first item on the agenda for the united nations was nuclear disarmament to make sure there was a deterrent only but seventy two years we haven't gotten exactly close to that i mean the real purpose of the united nations has never been achieved and the potential for the united nations has never been achieved but during world war two roosevelt had initially but different approach in forty two here start to set in mala target a trusted general to washington and late may forty two and that's when roosevelt promised to open up the second front in europe before the end of one nine hundred forty two and it's also when roosevelt said what we need after the war is for
policeman to the united states russia britain and china should get together and we should maintain world peace security stability and that was a vision that clearly was never put into effect but we need leaders now who are going to act a part back a little we have a deficit of leaders in the institutions under attack markets worse because there is a will from the west to twist the idea of the international structures and not only new ones but every kind of stroke that you could be on to do. it could be anything to just want to make this is struck to which we are created and i think it was a good thing just after the war to avoid future wars they want to use it as an instrument of foreign policy and that it's very dangerous what we have here is a sense that this many many times in this program really who are the term used in
the west the international community what does it mean it means nato membership japan australia new zealand actually israel and some to sponsor ok so again this is a reversion of the vision that was supposed to come about with the end of the most horrific war which. given the statistics that you've given us most western publics forgotten and have never been taught. the speech of for my chrome on there you know which is a foreign minister just after syria was incredible telling that. it's so you know it's not to. get into because it's not illegal sort of to know but legitimity. legit wants they should just leave her essentially galloway and also oh you can define it that it is or they want to say we did for you there is a return to just war yeah most of you know the late medieval period. in the
west in the halls of government academia and the media which will echo they continually talk about russia and sometimes china as revisionist or revanche just powers against they don't there's two different world orders we're talking about they refer to the liberal world order not to the un stablished world order they're talking about the world order that they believe started with bretton woods and continued up through the collapse of the soviet union and came to its biggest height of union polarity of u.s. led western hegemony during the one nine hundred ninety s. and what they're talking about is russia and china returning to positions of great power status in the world are blocking their control of the world whereas russia and china and i'm not going to stand for it k.k. from a realist perspective and of course from a relativist position of weakness little to the us prefer the rules bound system in
one thousand nine hundred five established by the un. whereas the us regards the principle un prince of the security council principles un charter principles of sovereignty and non interference to be antiquated policies ok i think you are paraphrasing mr john bolton. there you know peter one of the things one of the biggest problems and we'll talk about russia's relationship with the west in the next part of the program but i think one of the biggest problems is that you have policymakers and media in the west we can never put themselves in rush's shoes have to look at how they see the world you know nato has demonstrated. that it is it will pursue policies that are beyond the bounds of international law meaning they didn't. rise above it and we got the goal would be versus legitimacy issue here in the russian sea nato expansion is a threat ok and the there are you know here we are in two thousand and eighteen and
we have. american and other nato countries having their militaries on russia's borders i mean this is the worst nightmare for for the russian leadership considering today it's focusing on what happened in june one nine hundred forty one corporate child got a promise in one nine hundred ninety when he allowed the unification of germany that nato would not expand one thumbs with to the east and then they started to. hedge on that and hungary. what's interesting i'm sorry but you know but then now nato has expanded thirteen countries to the east doubled its membership since the end but the real turning point came in two thousand and eight when george bush said we want to expand to ukraine and georgia and that was passed russia's red line and they were there and putin has not allowed our can't really stop it but he stood up to it and what's happened since has made this a very very dangerous world. beginning with syria and the u.s.
involvement in syria and the syrian civil war and then what happened in ukraine and they're very conscious effort to wrest ukraine from the russian orbit and what we've seen now with not only with nato but with the nuclear confrontation increasing putin's march first date. the nation address announces five new nuclear weapons that can all avoid america's ballistic missile defense program but there was the all of branch of let's sit down in talk we haven't heard a response from that well we're going to jump in here we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on some real mistake with our.
deep seated myself. americans i would say i'm not american but americans helped out really. world war two cures the depression cars tonight shows his concern prosperity of course in store. for the for us the whole world what it what and. historical rewrite ever since world war two to foment the cold war against russia against communism and.
socialists mishmosh you it was so you call me out. to swap and we're so used to call go. well i think world war two has been the story credibly by the anglo-american media and that's because they wanted to minish the role of russia. and stalin who actually defeated hitler. has supported to note that armenia is not ukraine or georgia and that our experience is unique to certain extent we're building on the success and the fielder's of past efforts to address the issues that you're talking about so in many ways we have a leg up on anything that's been tried in the past this is not just a democrat a grassroots effort by the armenian people for the armenian people.
welcome back across the uk where all things considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing some. real news. you want to finish up on this promise that was made to go to the. alliance would not move further east beyond a united very important united germany. i think it was during the interview it was a question about that with all of us tone. to go but sure of that should we get a signature. on the premises. and that does not tell you even if you tell me so i didn't expect it but you just i just have one question
at least getting a signature and of course if you don't you didn't get it and and i'm sure. you can sign with us to no it will just ask you a rainy. day well the the ok the u.s. was not part of the mint nonetheless you know he would do. more about nato yeah yeah i mean as a u.s. military veteran of nato operations peter brought up the number of the increase in the number of nato countries since the end of the cold war thirteen almost doubling the size of nato but that hasn't led to an increase in either nato as military strength nor in its security for either itself or the world to the contrary it has led to greater insecurity for europe montenegro and these other countries that haven't contributed to the safety of the people in nato countries and there's
a lot of challenges you know that we need to expand to protect europe from russia right and they don't that when russia responds that they feel threatened by nato expansion how could you be threatened by us if it's a for. act that nato and its member states are the most aggressive military bloc on earth the number of interventions regime change military operations in the past twenty years or just over that since the end of the soviet union from serbia to iraq to libya to syria to yemen today how could russia not feel threatened by nato they would be fools and if they did you could see this blatant illegal military aggression as a threat in the nato is a fig leaf to them to which washington to even call it seems there's a lot in the legitimisation and sholom it's gotten more and more dangerous we're closer to a conflict for more divisions in eastern europe nato plus the american
troops more funding and the russians respond of course and they sent troops to their side of the border they've got nuclear capable the scanner missiles. kaliningrad and now we're developing hypersonic you know weapons and where the u.s. is trying to make battlefield many nukes more usable right we're living through it is french really you know this is exponentially more dangerous it reduces reduces decision times it makes strategic conflict much more problematic and difficult to stop even so even acceptable that's what's really scary about even acceptable i think we're in a worse position than we ever were in the cold war but it was very clear there was no and you were there on the nuclear war as soon as you was used you couldn't a nuclear bomb you would get a nuclear bomb right there there's no. point in history that we're.
talking about and equipments nuclear weapons in my opinion but indeed suspended from the reagan did with the ideas in one nine hundred eighty three you started a new. race but this time the troposphere the u.s. and. if you look. u.s. senator yes. i have already noted two strong declarations look at what. does russia we have to do this i mean you have the anti-ballistic missile treaty the u.s. i walked away from one of the pillars of arms control and as we speak right now we have decision time with iran again i was a very strong critic obama's foreign policy but i laud him for this amazing move in because it's going against. fighting nuclear proliferation and it should be said is an example i have to disagree with you didn't start any arms race the china
india and the you have all been developing and you know everybody thought well you must be a minister you misunderstood me when i think it's putting exactly no works in us that there is a search. for a military complex that if you just put some new cards on the table all the systems would start to work. with any control of. it. because if you look at the difference in the defense of. the defense of the website the us defense which side newspapers or any magazines and they are talking about oh we are going to get again the first place before russia they want to know there is again one billion to develop some well i mean but that's also a function of the military industrial complex there's a lot of money to be only you know ok it russia. putin create the trap yes
because they're doing it. starting we're going to build the new system of protection and so on all right let the us bankrupt him so. and i mean you know peter. we were talking about the things that obama did well they read the treaty but obama also supported the trillion dollar modernization program over the next thirty years of america's nuclear arsenal which we now estimate is going to probably close to what he said i don't know he's prized right he didn't say have to go. well he did everything out to the nobel bit yeah it was only president for a few months before the head of the nobel committee has said i made a mistake with that no kidding. so you don't know how but you were never going to get better so no prizes the longer had any meaning right. gentlemen how do we get out of this downwards spiral. because it's good to ask this question today on the
anniversary of the peak of fascism in europe because the soviet union in the united states along with france along with britain were allies and it was a. world historic moment now look where we stand people how do we get out of this hole or we don't. but we have no international leader on a global scale who represents anything beyond his own country's national interests you're talking about the need to see the world for the eyes of your adversaries and nobody is really doing that trump is incapable. and he i'm not sure what he's more narrowly focused certainly merkel is not doing that i could with all my interviews i keep pushing putin to play that role. but he hasn't done that yet but we need somebody to speak for humanity will be called aggressive behavior i'm sorry i'm sorry we did an ok and so between the u.s.
and russia there are three conflict areas now but we've got to find some way to sit down and talk and try to begin to resolve some of you know find something we can work together on to be the problem with. in it's a discourse of dilemma because if you sit down and talk peace mint ok that's what how it's been painted by the current political establishment trouble accused of appeasement and why do you want to talk to north korea and moon told them you know go f. themself and is now. it's now. made progress in terms of this thing that result because of trump's threats look out result you have to you could make that claim on syria as well if you when you look at the non western powers that are involved i mean what we could put turkey iran and russia working towards peace you know that's something they don't recognize again this is seen as a as
a strategy of appeasement in this is what i find most. frustrating because we had more we had two major ceasefires in the works in syria what power up ended it was the united states. since the since you know. the established. end of the neo. liberal global capitalist system which has been evidently led to its own the structure and by the trend of the west anyway it's a originators by the slow transfer of wealth from the west to the east as as the west declines in their relative share of global g.d.p. and other countries rise to the fore until the us and its client states in the west give up on the idea of the uni polar world of of us again many where they set the values and and standards for the rest of the world i'm afraid there won't be any peace but other than that you know polar moment is never interesting if not all recognition is not a recognition or is it recognition because the one who announced it was charles
krauthammer and first he went for the unocal a moment and then in two thousand and three said it's the unit paul era is going to be unbounded now in two thousand and five is as well the unipod moment is over so there is a growing recognition for it fukuyama has given up on the end of history but but do you know at all those books generally the us government the us political and it must be said now the european political elite have exceptionalism views that haven't given up on that until there is radical political change which i believe is structurally impossible for policy wise in the united states then it is only the us is economic decline that will allow room for the real both of a multi-polar world i don't believe we need one global leader to lead the pack i think we need recognition the there are multiple multi-polar some theories of power and we need these world leaders recognizing their own limitations russia recognizes
certainly now that it has limited you know we're going exceptionalism diana that is our own limitations that being just in my opinion there is a reason for hope it's the russia. of course mark. kimmitt. because russia is an open country we are in the cold war when we have in the west such an image of the. soviet union that you know a great country where it's always winter and everybody under you know another three and so for instance in one month and in my opinion is that the reason why the west tried to get out of this event with. i don't know hundreds of thousands. of supporters you see that there are bears roaming around the streets. and we obviously are talking about the world and it will be the end it's not you know it's
not intellectuals it's not intelligence or u.s. intelligence it's normal people you know loving and loving and. they will if they would come to russia they would talk to russia and they would see that. works not so bad in russia actually that there is no aggressivity from from the russian population even with the u.s. cities and all of the quote really that are here many thanks my guest here in moscow this is the end of our broadcast segment stay with us for the extended version on or you tube channel see you next time and remember. searcher out the way is anti american and anti-democratic and he can look at that quite plainly by understanding the stock price approach or half of it was that response so it's trading i think there are three hundred thousand dollars
a share so the message from charlie munger and warren buffett to americans is unless you've got three hundred thousand dollars to buy one share of berkshire hathaway you're a player you're a peasant here you know they are the neo feudal lords that are building the system milking the system abusing the system and aggregating wealth as wrong see a coupon clippers and nickel and dime or they add nothing to the economy. the new economic war is unfolding in the realm of education the right to education has been supplanted by the right to access education it's high education is becoming just another product that can be foolish and sold just not just about education anymore it's also about running a business where you good models of. good these souls.