let's start with russia. if there is a military conflict, sergei, what are the consequences for russia? well, the problem is we don't know what kind of military conflict we could have. could it be a small operation, a long operation? could the russians, you know, invade and try to capture more territory? or, you know, will they even invade at all? there are lots of uncertainties. i think the ambassador has rightly pointed out that there will be sanctions for russia, so that is something that i'm sure is influencing calculations, putin's calculus, as he considers what to do. their — obviously, if the war becomes long, which i don't think they want, it would have an impact on putin's domestic popularity. long wars do not help anybody�*s popularity, so i'm pretty sure that russia, if it were to take military action, it would want to avoid a quagmire, that's for sure. what are the consequences of a military conflict for ukraine? we do not consider that there will be a full military aggression on the territory

and, we will see how russia responds. reporter: secretary, have you considered the russians are just buying time to find a place to invade ukraine. maybe you jump through hoops like get delivering handwritten questions to answer and meanwhile there stabilizing ukraine from human -- from within. at what point do you stop playing russia's game and take preemptive action now. sec. blinken: first, we are not standing still, and we can walk and chew gum at the same time and that is what we have been doing. we have made it clear to russia that they are -- that there is a path of diplomatic and deterrence, and if russia chooses aggression it will lead to massive consequences. even though we engage in diplomacy which is my job and responsibility, we have been resolutely preparing for russia to take the path of aggression. and as i laid out the work that we have done over the past couple of months and bringing allies and partners together around massive consequences for russia shuddered new its aggression in the very detailed repo

so again, this is a test for russia. if it is serious about resolving the situation in eastern ukraine, and to resolve it diplomatically and peacefully, minsk is the way to do it. we will fully support efforts to implement the minsk agreements by both parties, and again, we'll see if russia is willing to do that. mr price: simon. reporter: mr. secretary, we'd like to get your assessment of events in kazakhstan, and how that potentially weighs on these meetings with russian officials next week. and more specifically, u.s. officials have raised kind of questions about the csto troops deployment there. what is -- what specifically is the concern about those troops going in? is there an implication that the kazakhstan government hasn't actually invited them in, or how do you see that? secretary blinken: thanks. so first, we are very concerned about the ongoing state of emergency that exists in kazakhstan. secretary blinken: . so first, we are very concerned about the ongoing state of emergency that exists in kazakhstan. we'v

ukraine poses no threat to russia. it bears repeating that it was shot that invaded ukraine in 2014 and occupies crimea to this day. it is russia that continues to fuel a war in eastern ukraine that has claimed nearly 14,000 lives and destroyed entire towns. it is russia and their proxies holding hundreds of ukrainians as political prisoners. and it is because of russia's actions that nearly 3 million ukrainians are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance. while the suffering is most acute in crimea, ukrainians everywhere have felt the effects of rush's aggression. russia has interfered in ukraine's elections and try to endocrine -- undermine ukraine's democracy. and use propaganda and disinformation to so distrust. now russia's actions are causing renew crisis, not only for ukraine, but for all of europe, and indeed, as secretary blinken said, for the wider world. one country cannot change the borders of another by force, or dictate the terms of another country's foreign policy, or for bid another country from choos

do russia propaganda claims? the russian language and russian speakers were never under any physical harm threat then the russian language wasn't right. this is completely concocted as a rational for the annexation of premier and the subsequent instigation of the war in the dunbar. what we're seeing is happening in ukraine. what we're seeing, what's happening with bella was, which has essentially become a protectorate of russia as essentially cease to exist as it defacto independence states. what we're seeing in context on where russia has invoked its collective security treaty to restore order. it really, it really matches what we heard say over the, over the years that he considers the breakup of this. so you have a great, the greatest one of the greatest geopolitical tragedies of the 20th century. he missed this, so he didn't, he misses russia's ability to project power to what is called the near abroad. obviously, there will be a semblance of that, that he will try to reunite as and under rushes umbrella. val

and criticizing him and personifying russia in the person of russia's president. the extent that anything that vladimir putin says or does is inherently evil and must be opposed. and that's what we have right now. as you said, it's cartoonish in nature because this is actual bullwinkle. you know, boris and natasha kinds of anal. it's not reality. and it's going to lead to disaster because again, i'll leave it with this. we can't fight a war in europe today. we cannot, neither can europe, neither can nieto. nato knows this. i've challenged anybody who's affiliated with nato. tell me how nato can mobilize armored core in 10 days. you will never get an answer because they can't, they would be able to do it in 2 weeks. rush on the other hand, can put 2 combined arms army that are trained for deep offensive operations of in the field was in a week. this is the 1st garge tank army in the 20th combined army. oh, former cold war formation station did east germany that were destroyed in whoa, whoa, whoa, european peace and the aftermath of the solution of warsaw pact to pa

caller: you remember a yelton of russia -- boris yeltsin of russia -- never happened. nato and the baltic states, alaska, lithuania, and poland, we are surrounding russia. it is not right. this is aggression. those people used to live for 300 years. what we call crimea. host: let's take one call after that. this is timothy, illinois, democrats line. caller: hello. i feel like russia's gdp is 1/10 of the usa's. its military budget is 1/10 of the usa's or less. it is surrounded by our military forces. it has shrunk massively from the soviet union. it is not a threat. it is not want to invade or attack anybody. all at once is to have a country or two around it. that is all it wants. i wish we could understand that and stop threatening russia and being the bullies ourselves. host: that is timothy in illinois. guest: there are a couple misconceptions about the russian military right now. one, that is weekend. -- weakened. that is not the case anymore. he has ramped up russia's military capability. you saw this and play in 2015 in syria. russia started to control the airspac

russia has a mass troops, allegedly inside of russia. russia has said in writing, look, this is a red line couldn't set at the end of the year. press conference, this is a red line. we will not let you crane. we will not let our border area be a staging ground for advanced weapons with missiles whose flight time might be 2 or 3 minutes to their targets in russia, or to allow ukraine to be permanently in nature. so that kind of scenario can play out. that's a red line, we're not going to let that happen. and so, and as he also said with the u. s. possibly of what russia do this at the us mexican border, or the us canadian border, of course not. so again, this is an american created crisis, but one where russia actually does have to respond and actually make clear that this, in fact, is unacceptable. long term and short term for russia's national interest. you know, john went looking at the media drumbeat here and the gaff that we, well that was just mentioned by biden. i mean by just let the mass drop for a 2nd. the stop you talked about one of the scenarios here. he got off script. th

should russia attack ukraine? ladiva, what do you think is bush's biggest concern is cit, nato's expansion? or is it just the fear of seeing a neighbor which is more vibrant, setting up a strong democracy that could further spread eastwards. ah, well ah, thank you for the question. actually. first of all, i would like just to show brief the command on what the r y aah ukrainian kali ker panel is set. i was surprised at saying by him that russia is made an aggression to a crimea, that that is not true actually, because there was a dialogue, both in crimea and the crimea, and sexually or near voice the gave their voice the to the original location with rush well, that was not the gears of just for the record that the russian narrative internationally were talking about annexation of the crimea. and also actually that one and encouraged and not in the delay eastern territories. ah, that's was not annexation. and that was not the end in gush. it's the casa, well, actually, i, i, i will get straight to the point, i wou

and if russia chose tojoin it, fine, russia canjoin too. but i would say we are not trying to make it about us and them, we want it to be europe and the us, and russia is the one trying to pull that away and break up the alliance. and do you see it, as olha is asking there, that this global instability has been with us for a long time and may continue for a long time? that's up to russia. i think, if i can step in, there is a huge gap between, we're not about talking eu or nato or us, orjust any other, it is something where the collective west has got the extremely good experience of building the consensus. and now in a global world, where you cannot take decisions only on your own, on behalf your country — when it comes to covid, to energy crisis, even to military force. we have learned how to make the consensus, and how to make collectively the decisions. but what putin hadn't learned is to be part of some consensus. broader consensus. and until he understands that he should be a player together with everybody, this could change the sit

i think her name is argued that russia us would actually go to war against russia, not just over ukraine, but, you know, take by crimea, push russia out of south. yeah. so you can't have it both ways. you can't say that brush in the future can be no threat to rush on at the same time. are you that are you that we should use force against them? also, this idea that rush should have no beat. so this is also, you know, we did over and over again as if it makes any sense. i mean, it made was going to monopolize, and security in europe that and the biggest country and you should not have any say over it. i mean, this is an absurd statement. obviously, russia will have, you know, either has it within institutions or it will have to rely on its own, on the military, in order to uphold that, you know, which is not expressed as a red line. so nothing makes any sense. and the last one is nato secretary general, explicitly saying naval does not discriminate against new and old members. well, this was the whole point of the navy, russia funding act of 1997. this very explicit promise commit is not p

host: if you say that russia is not an existential threat to us, are we an existential threat to russia? and if so, why doesn't russia seem to fear that? why don't they seem to be worried about provoking the united states and united states allies? >> both sides have a very stylized vision of the threat that each process to the and in some particular respects that is accurate. if we were having this discussion in moscow and you were a russian government spokeswoman or spokesman -- i think the immediate russian concern is the advance of native toward its borders. i want to be clear this is not the only reason for the crisis nor is that the only item separating us on the russians. there is question that the march of native torts russia's border has created tension between ourselves and russia and by the way, while these objections are chalked up to mr. putin, his predecessor boris yeltsin was no less critical as was the last president of the soviet union, gorbachev. so it is not purely a putin phenomenon. it has certainly been ratcheted up under mr. putin. unlike the 1990's, russia opted -

so i don't think russia wants to do it. and obviously the west doesn't want it to happen, but i mean, the 1st, once i got that is that even if russia does invade ukraine, it's pretty clear that nato would not get involved militarily. there would be very strong terms and so on. but the idea about the europe wide war between nature and russia as a result of what's going on in ukraine, very like going back to ukraine itself. russia's been very clear on its determination that ukraine will never join nato. nato has been equally clear on the principle. countries can join whatever alliances. they like. both sides have spent a series of meetings this week saying those things to each other. so i think is the question for mr. rob costs it today. the talk so far have failed and it's an interesting question where things go now, but i wouldn't, i mean, there's a solution to this which, which is pretty obvious one. everybody knows that ukraine, it whether or not it joins next. in the, in the term, the future is certainly not going to do

move without consulting and russia. but obviously, the russia comes from the past, then there's a certain similarities between them. the direction that you estimate are moving, which should be a part not to germany. and obviously, all this rhetoric that nato, it's about, you know, only including and embracing congress wants to join it's, it is primarily an alliance to contain russia and the 3rd tension on it in europe. so i so i did this on the final point to have to point out when natal offered and nato member creating only approximately 20 percent of the police actually wanted it, which suggest that it's not the nato that pressure to take, you know, this congress wants to join it's, it's natural that's pushing for expansion. so again that the rest of it gets very much skewed. ok. puzzle. falcon how. what happens if nature goes to the so called trip wire scenario, which is and there are apparently, according to this vehicle to day, there are people high up in nato saying we should do this. we should build our military

you must support russia. you must actively support russia, and you ould defend russia. sean: boikov has led groups of australian cossacks to russia where they fired guns and visited a military training facility. [gunshots] sean: in 2018, simeon boikov told a russian media outlet, "we have a unique opportunity to support russia from within an enemy state." he was referring to australia. he said cossacks in australia could "pursue a pro-russian position, lobby politicians and members of parliament, oppose anyone who lies about russia, attacks russia, or imposes sanctions. basically, they can wage an information war." sean: why do you regard australia as an enemy state? simeon: no, australia, in this context, a state which is placing sanctions against russia and behaving in an anti-russian manner, you know, in that way could be perceived that the activities are not the activities of an ally. the main thing to know is we're not against australia at all. we love australia. we will defend australia, and we'll try to defend it, and we wanna facilitate the rehabilitation of aus

russia. but a 3rd of that passes through ukraine. moscow has already reduced the amount flowing into europe, causing shortages and pushing prices to record levels. now rushes that threatened to cut supplies further if sanctions are imposed and they're not just on gas, but also on oil and metals. some countries depend on russia more than others. germany gets more than half of its gas supplies from russia. and that dependency would increase if the german government gives its final approval to the north stream to pipeline. ah, let's bring our guests in moscow. pavel failed in our a defense and military analyst in burn, cornelia mayor, seo of mayor resource, and especially in oil and gas, and in berlin. o, rick brooklyn, a professor of political science at stanford university in berlin. welcome to the program. let's begin. inborn with a colina maya calling. this is not as easy as russia, switching off the gas pipeline. and america coming to rescue with lots of new natural gas is it's a lot more c

russia. it really is and should be a global concern because there are some basic principles of international security at stake that has helped keep the peace and security in europe for the last decades. and it goes to very basic principles -- >> brennan: exactly, but vladimir putin obviously has no regard for those principles in the past eight years that he has been invading and taking parts of ukraine. when you get to that bigger "what is this all about" question, the state department said they were concerned about the possibility of russia moving nuclear weapons back into belarus. you have high precision equipment being used towards ukraine. is this about something more than just that country? >> this is exactly why even as we're engaged in diplomacy, we are very much focused on building up defense, building up deterrents for both ukraine and nato itself. nato itself will be enforced if russia commits acts of aggression. all of that is on the table. but, again, when it comes to these princi

s. severing ties with russia. so there is a sense that there is this rhetoric being built and this narrative that is a being conducted against russia. all in the hopes of trying to pressure this country from backing down from their demands of nato. that is not to expand any further eastwards which russia believes to be a threat to their security. they've asked that they no longer accept new members into nato. they want to go back to the 997 membership numbers. and at that time, there were 14 countries less than what there is now in the 30 member alliance, and the russians say they can't continue to expand because it threatens their security. all right, thanks so much. joseph jabar that update here from the perspective from moscow. we've been following developments in the un security council, which is holding this me preventive diplomacy attentions on the ukrainian border with russia.

we call on russia. madam president, despite all diplomatic efforts, russian troops are deployed in belarus. this adds up to the current escalation and is of direct concern to us. it is russia who is threatening ukraine and other neighbors by positioning 100,000 troops. it is the aggressor strengthening its security at the expense of others. actions -- russia has contributed to a significant deterioration of the security environment in europe. we reaffirm full commitment to the core principles of international security enshrined in the u.n. charter, founding documents. this includes territorial integrity of states and viability of frontiers. the evaluation by russia as an obstacle and threatens stability. times of limited sovereignty are long gone. states have freedom to choose or change their own security arrangements. no country has a veto right over the sovereign choices area madam president, in response to the recent tensions, any further military aggression against ukraine will have massive conseque

let's remember is traditionally very russia friendly. the former spd chancellor sits in the board of directors of gazprom and one of the leading proponents of north stream two and this project. um should it be canceled should the german government openly declare that it will be void if russia invades ukraine. this will have a real domestic political fallout for t the spd for chancellor schulz party. and these are the issues right now. unfortunately in the internal debates in germany that are being placed over our international obligations to lead on security and peace in europe. michel, you say it's all about the showdown between russia and the us. so does anything germany could do actually matter, would it make a difference. oh yes it would make a huge difference simply because if we do actually matter, would it make a difference. oh yes talk about all the possible measures the west could take if there was any conflict between russia and ukraine or a russian invasion. in in this case it is above and formal of it is germany in the first

. nato enlargement is not directed against russia. over the last 20 years old nato coalition potential has been amassed on its east and frank. the lance is expansion towards russian borders is accompanied by the creation earned modernization of military infrastructure. russia has 60 neighbors in the ninety's. only one of those was the nato state that it became to poland joint. then it became 5 with ukraine and ga, potentially joining that would be 7 with all the perks that carries like us bases and troops. pray tell how is that not the dictionary definition of encirclement russia is use a statement from high level officials as well as disinformation and propaganda outlets to intentionally spread outright falsehoods, to attempt to create a pretext for military action. we all know how the u. s. uses differ information to create a pretext for invading independence states. the irony seems lost entirely on the us state department. we still remember collin bow right. sadam. hussein has not. verifiably accounted for even one teaspoonful of t

troops towards russia. this isn't, this isn't an issue of where russia is coming out and saying, oh, we don't like that the united states as station so many troops and in her texas, for example, on the border with mexico, the united states coming out and saying that it's concerned with russian troop movements inside russia. there are passages full of inhuman force, his hand stupidity, for example. they call fake mosque a statement that the re positioning of russian trips in russian territory means repositioning of russian troops on russian territory. brilliant. what is there more hair lies or illiteracy? i did not even want to deal with it. i know one thing for sure. this could only be published by the ministry of truth. the document is full of obfuscation and misleading statements. for example, it says that this is fiction that the nato isn't surrounding russia as, as moscow has claimed in recent years. well, the, the facts of it is earth said, says russia has 14 neighbors. only 5 of them are nato members.

up to russia how to respond. we are ready either way. here are his full comments. unfortunately -- sec. blinken: we met to discuss the crisis and steps to de-escalate tensions and pursue diplomacy. russia had previously outlined its concerns and proposals in writing and last week i told the foreign minister that the united states would do the same. today, ambassador sullivan delivered our britain response in moscow. all totaled it sets out a serious medic path forward should russia choose it. the document was delivered and includes concerns of the united states and our allies and partners about russia's actions that undermine security and a principal and pragmatic evaluation of what russia has been raised and our own proposals where we might find common ground. we made clear that there are core principles that we are committed to uphold and defend including ukraine sovereignty and territorial integrity and the right of states to choose our own security arrangements and alliances. we addressed the possibility of r

the de escalation talks with russia. other nathan members are also ramping up weapons supplies to key if it is enough to scroll through a couple of random pages to be sure. none of the provisions stand up.

and western officials have been reporting that russia is massing troops on the border to ukraine. russia, meanwhile denies planning and attack. analysts say the true build up could be vladimir putin way of flexing his muscles to get what he wants, and then your what, what was important for putin to go down in history. he wants to be able to say, i created the foundations for russia national development and resolved the main foreign policy problem. i stopped nato eastern expansion and returned russia to its former glory. you believe it is sure put in his hoping russia can come out on top in the latest tug of war with nato even to day cold war divisions into east and west, still shaped the thinking in the kremlin. while those talks are taking place to day and our brussels bureau chief alexander phenomena is covering them for us. hi, alexandra. we saw the russian perspective on these talks there. what is nato's response to that view? nato officials have rejected sta, gremlins claims, dad's name toys, posing a threat to, to russia. there are saying need to isn't defensive alliance, whose mai

listen also to russia argument. it's interest and security. objections are threatened by a further nato expansion. germans have their own net term for those who's who sympathize with russia and with its president vladimir putin. they call this put in festa. nonetheless, few people here would have supposed that such sentiments would manifest themselves at the highest levels of the german military. ah, the german admiral and faraway, india fired these words like gunshots, striking mini ukrainians. right in the heart. russia he can do it, knows if east is bliss. oh, he really lost this respect. ah, we russia against charter economy opens. rose is gone. no come. but this is this effect the ukrainian response was swift with ukrainian ambassador firing back on twitter. german arrogance and megalomania. the german government has to change its course towards key f and q has major vitaly could go even complained that germany had committed treason against ukraine. is germany, still a trustworthy ally to ukraine? i wanna put t

they didn't want to listen. russia, security comes 1st for russia, and russia will take action some military chemical reaction or reaction to what could be deemed as a potential offensive missile system, for example. and it will be dealt with and then nato has this quandary. i mean, do we go to war over this missile system? they didn't actually invade the country. i mean, what they're doing make us putting everything in. i mean, this is like one big bet, and it's going to play out very, very badly from not that it's going to play out well for russia, either your thoughts, right? i will, i think the, what, what we're seeing now is a 3rd attempt for throughout his presidency to negotiate this pan european security infrastructure. the 1st was in 2007 during the prudence, many a speech where he was talking about the dangers of the unit poor world, and draw and clearly russia's ledger read lines on ukraine in georgia. and that speech was actually seen as russia's own revenge just emissions. and what happens at the end of the day, year after soccer shrilly adventurous strike south of santia and th

if russia.

this is right at russia border. and we don't even have to ask ourselves how the united states was react, that there was a military build up on its border. everybody remembers in the united states, 1960, to the cuban missile crisis. when there was a build up soviet ballistic missiles in cuba, and now was that described in the near a cataclysmic event that could have ended the world. why is it that we in the west or especially in washington, don't see. russia has a legitimate national security interest and not have a weapon build up on its border with the border with ukraine, where most of the russian population lives in striking distance in moscow. how is it that we can sit here in the united states? american diplomats can look at russia situation and not even understand that they have a legitimate national security interest when we're militarized around its border, especially caucasus right in eastern europe, going right to russia's doorstep. for me, i haven't trouble seeing this as diploma. so we have tried and sai

everybody can do it except for russia. i mean, it is, there is no self reflection here, or is this dis, the institution is fighting to continue to exist and waste billions and billions of dollars a year on generating a threat. that is it really there? well, it is now your are up to the border. you know, somebody's gotta do something. the status quo will not stand alexei well, i think, yeah, i think you're right in the, in the way that really surprised me when secretary of lincoln said that like every, every country has the freedom to its own alliances. but when russia expressed an idea of maybe try trying to deploy military assets to cube or venezuela, he reacted by saying that the u. s. will react decisively react swiftly or something along those lines. so what i think it's happening is the native is trying to justify its own existence because nato, as we know, it was created for 3 purposes. depending western europe against soviet aggression. there is no soviet union anymore. it was created to bring together rival powers

except that russia has invaded ga, russia has taken over crimea. russia has invaded dunbar. russia has installed iskander, a nuclear tipped missiles with arranged to reach you in berlin. and russia has shot down that malaysian airliner with citizens on it. so actually, it should be us that should be asking russia for security guarantees. i to ask you, mr. sure. course you actually, as we mentioned at the beginning, worked hard to bring ukraine closer to the european union when you, with a polish foreign minister. how did you expect russia to respond to that? well, why should that russia respond to it at all? countries have the right to choose which should trade, which customs areas they belong to. we were negotiating a similar arrangement with russia herself. it's none of russia's business. so you creighton is an independent country. in the face of what you say is very clear aggression here from russia. what do you think the european union should be doing now? well, decisions to supply defensive equipment or national decisions. but if you are against war, you should be helping ukraine

k, ukraine and russia. there was one last week, but there were at that quite a low level of representation. so we have to see if there's going to be a higher level of representation in that one. but we did hear from the ukraine and ambassador saying that as long as the diplomacy was going on, ukraine was on board. however, he was also sounding a bit alarming. he said, you know, look up my country, it is surrounded by old from all sides by russian truth. he was referring to no ones along the eastern border of ukraine. but then he also pointed the finger, the ones that are currently in bella. russo heading to bella ruse. dot's officially, according to both moscow and barrows, are because of some joint exercises that will happen next week at the end of next week. and then he also pointed to the fact that there was more russian troops in the annex peninsula of crimea. so he said to put all of this together, according to our intelligency grinning intel, it is about a $130000.00 or russian troops or surrounding r

and russia have suck. in fact, it hasn't been this bad since the cold war ended some 30 years ago, and called right in the middle europe and ukraine. here is ukraine's un ambassador . ukraine strongly rejects any attempt to use the threat of force as an instrument of pressure to make a crane and our partners except illegitimate demands. there is no room for compromise. on principle is use the most principal position of for ukraine that we have inherent, sobering right? to choose our own security arrangements, including treaties of alliance, which cannot be questioned by russia. more although, these ride is enshrined in many international legal instruments. the thrush itself, a body to my 1st gets to 9, says this crisis over ukraine is about more than the threat of a russian invasion. it is about the trans atlantic security order, as we know it, and rushes determination to change it. in her latest book putin's world russia against the west and with the rest, professor angela stent analyzes what is motivated

. russia thinks on the why she goes to russia. russia thinks that these, these, these are aggressive plans against a russian, i identity against russian security. so i think that on, at the end of its, i'm, a russia would like, as i said, as a friendly ukraine, not the county which will be participating in any plans which are a rush of things. so it can be in the nature of countries might good talk to you so many thanks to the to being with us. let me so think of their live in moscow. thank you. the stand off between russia and ukraine. has europeans, worried about their fuel supplies? a 3rd of europe's natural gas comes from russia. and if there is conflicts, europe would have to turn to other providers. dominic cane report some from germany . this is the am or natural gas installation in central russia. one of many such plants is product is pipe to destinations in asia and europe, all of which generates an export revenue of more than $200000000.00 a day for the provide a gas problem. the greatest single market is germany, closely followed by other european countries. cumulatively 1

the russia, u. s. talks in geneva settled basically nothing. however, the biden administration can no longer say it does not understand russia's position on pan european security. the ball is in washington's court. ah, discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess, glen beeson in oslo. he is a professor at the university of southeastern norway as well as author of the book, great power politics in the 4th industrial revolution. and in budapest, we have george samuel lee. he's a pod, castor at the goggle, which can be found on youtube and locals are a gentleman. crosstalk rules and effect. that means you can jump in any time you want, and i always appreciate it. oh, let's go to glen 1st. glen, you know, we had about 2 weeks of meetings, different formats are essentially on the same topic, at least from the russian perspective, and trying to get nato on the same page. to talk about pan european security. i watch. the presser is log off and blinking, blinking is move though, got a little bit in the right direction, but not very far in my o

s. russia relation is what it's all about in the end. so what objective could put in actually still be pursuing here? and if deterrence doesn't work, what economic sanctions would convince him to stand out? well, 1st of all, where is he up to? and i think it's not just ukraine, but it is. it is more to say about the security arrangements in europe since 30 years. it is precisely about, and you mentioned the, the question of the withdrawal of american nuclear weapons from europe. i mean, there are not that many nuclear weapons left there, just a few bombs in germany in been alex, holland, italy, and turkey. so that is very few and in fact, what putin is intending by demanding the withdrawal of these weapons is much more. he talks about control in europe. it's about had gemini, as he sees it in american hegemony, which he would like to inherit. and so this is the big picture. the other big picture is we see lots of maneuvers, military exercises by russia undertaken at this point in time all over the world. and so it indicates this global c

russia. next move after nato and the u. s. make no concessions on moscow. security demands the back and forth has ukrainians stuck in the middle. many are hoping diplomacy and dialogue can help avert war a while bracing for the worst. but it's not the only country, wary of the possibility of russian aggression. sweden, yes, sweden is bolstering its defenses on the island of god, land. i'm so me. some has gone to and this is the day ah, i am hoping for a peaceful solution. i can't even talk about this without trying them use. there is a response which gives hope for the start of a serious conversation on secondary questions. the renewal of talks in the normandy format is already a positive signal. i don't have much faith and international diplomacy always. what i do believe in russians common sense that our country does not intend to attack anyone. we consider even the thought of war between our people to be unacceptable in global. the main issues are clear position in admissibility of further

own economy to punish russia. and that's, you know, that's a significant step at least politically. certainly, emily, what's the mood like in russia does, does to, to have support for an invasion of ukraine. i think that most people here don't think that an invasion is likely. there's a sense also that actually it's the west. now that's acting hysterically. that's been the narrative in russia, at least. and i think, you know, a war against, against ukraine would be unpopular here among many people who have family ties to ukraine and see you grand, kind of as a brother nation. and of course, economically this would be a long war where people here are already worried about how much money they have. so i think that would also be unpopular among russians, corresponded emily sherman in moscow there. thank you, emily, get a quick round up of some of the other stories making headlines to day. at least 18 people have been killed in brazil, after heavy rains. the state of south palo saw landslides and flooding. authorities