GAZA: hiltzaileen eta esperantzaren artean (9)

Lord Bebo@MyLordBebo

Bideoa: https://x.com/i/status/1869421994778714279

oooooo

PalMedia@PalBint

oooooo

ooo

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsyNQqvGAc4)

[Part 1 of 2] BRICS does not oppose the West, it opposes Block-Mentality. That’s where this movement is the largest threat to the “with us or against us” mindset of NATO since the Nonaligned Movement. BRICS doesn’t play along in this game of friends and enemies and is willing to cooperate with anyone, as the Turkish example shows. Hence the game of the West of trying to build up an external bogieman won’t work. Listen to Professor Glenn Diesen explain this fundamental shift in the way the international system is working.

Glenn’s Video with Vladimir Putin:    • Professor Glenn Diesen speaking with …  

Dr. Glenn Diesen is a professor at the University of Southeast Norway and an associate editor at the Journal “Russia in Global Affairs”.

Transkripzioa:

0:00

it’s very hard for us to be honest about this in the west because the reason why we didn’t finish block politics is us

0:06

it’s uh you know they say you can put the blame on both sides but no on this it’s 100% the West the Russians did want

0:13

to overcome this and they to have inclusive an inclusive European security architecture and we’re the one who said

0:19

no we’d rather go with Liberal Liberal hedge money which requires expansion of NATO and cutting out the largest country

0:26

in Europe from Europe and somehow this was going to be our recipe for

0:39

stability hello everybody this is Pascal from neutrality studies and my guest today is once more Dr Glenn dies who’s a

0:46

professor at the University of Southeast Norway and an associate editor at the journal Russia in global Affairs I am

0:53

pretty sure most of you know his work he’s he also has a YouTube channel on

0:59

which he publishes a lot of discussions that he held uh with people or

1:05

interviews that were done with him uh Glenn is always giving wonderful insights and he recently was at the

1:12

valai club uh conference where he even got to ask a question to Vladimir Putin

1:19

and then get his answer on that I will link that in the description Glenn um

1:24

welcome to the show and congratulations to um having spoken to Vladimir Putin in

1:30

in that conference oh thank you no no it was a very interesting conference very well I

1:36

go to it every year and he’s um he tends to have a lot of energy I I make the

1:42

point you know some people hate him some people like him but irrespective he he does engage with the public with the

1:48

media and he sits there for four hours uh speaking and taking questions so I think this is uh again irres of what

1:56

people think of his policies I think this is uh yeah important for State leaders to do I think so too

2:03

and also this this discussion which I want to um get your sense for today the

2:09

the entire episode is going to be just about what you’ve learned there that this valdi club is quite an important

2:16

forum for Russia and Russian foreign policy and so on um before we get to

2:22

what you did there can you maybe tell us a little bit about the conference itself how old it is and and what usually how

2:29

how it how it um goes what kind of people do you meet

2:34

there well the valdi club it began just over 20 years ago uh at that point the

2:40

main the main format the main purpose and also by those people invited was um

2:46

to well improve relations between the United States and Russia again early

2:51

2000s the objective was to get to close to the as close as possible with the

2:56

United States Russia still pursued this ambition for great Europe to have this

3:01

common security architecture again a very Western Centric foreign policy um but of course we see yeah

3:10

valai has changed over time as well but it’s a it’s an interesting way to uh

3:16

yeah a club if you will to to discuss once a year because you you go there you have about uh four full days of U of of

3:25

speaking so Putin of course comes at the last day but the other day we have this panels it’s only like about 100 120

3:32

people attending so every year so it’s a very more small informal group and you

3:38

have uh everyone from ambassadors to generals from

3:43

yeah many countries the most important partners of Russia so you really get in

3:49

both at the panels but also when you sit and have meals uh you yeah you get a

3:54

good um impression of the of the different consideration of the different countries different challenges they have

4:00

and again you get it from the Ambassador level the military you get the politicians you get some academics so

4:06

it’s quite interesting anyway it’s very short I think it shifted from us Focus to now valai is seen as a the main thing

4:14

they discuss is how to build a post American World if you will so how do you address Iran security how do you develop

4:21

uh a new economic architecture with the Chinese the Indians and the global South

4:26

uh how do you uh try to constru construct a new world order which isn’t based on um

4:33

universalism essentially in which the US gets to claim the right to interfere in the domestic Affair of all countries by

4:40

yeah under the guise of representing International or Universal values so

4:46

there there’s a lot of things they discussing and with all these countries coming together it is quite fascinating

4:51

uh and it’s also great to get leads if you’re working on different things uh a lot of conversations from morning to

4:58

evening with uh yeah ambassador generals whoever you speak to starts you know well off the off the Record you know we

5:04

would like this this this so it is quite interesting you can’t always site this stuff but it’s still a very interesting

5:11

uh in terms of leads it’s an interesting format I mean I don’t know of a lot of a lot of conferences that work work like

5:17

that where you even get to have like four-hour Talks by and or with the uh the the the leader of the state right

5:26

it’s um it’s it’s quite well integrated actually into the foreign policy um

5:32

Circles of Russia but they also extend invitations to Norwegians like like you

5:39

to there was a Swiss uh publisher Roger coupple attending who I who I saw that

5:44

he also spoke to so it’s it’s both it’s it’s a national discussion Club of

5:49

foreign policy but it’s also an international networking event um is it

5:54

comparable to anything that you know that we’ve got in the west otherwise

6:00

uh nothing to come to mind but because the Russians are in a minority there that is uh the guests are mostly

6:07

foreigners there’s a few Russians as well of course uh but also the speakers they bring in every year for example

6:13

Sergey lavro would come you have people like Maria saharova um yeah you have Alexandra Novak like

6:21

the vice uh um uh yeah Deputy Prime Minister you so you have a lot of uh uh

6:29

various leaders is coming and there’s some changes of course Lov he comes every year and Putin of course but

6:34

sometimes you have the the mayor of Moscow to you know explain some of the challenges they address uh you know some

6:41

military leaders political leaders so there is uh you you do get yeah some

6:47

different um inputs and it’s also interesting how to see the the Russians

6:53

uh engage or the issues they address with other parts of the world now U but

6:59

the do we have something similar I don’t know the West is Big it’s I’m I’m sure

7:04

there’s something along this line but it’s um not that I’m familiar with at least

7:10

no it’s it’s it’s interesting because I also get the impression looking at the videos that come out from there that this is just as much an opportunity for

7:18

the for Russia to uh to communicate its foreign policy strategy as it is an

7:24

opportunity to learn and to ex to have like genuine exchange about what should

7:29

be done is that impression correct or is it more of a um pushing down the agenda

7:35

to to the participants kind of situation oh not not at all I think it

7:41

goes both ways again um it’s not mainly academics so there so because it also uh

7:47

politicians you end up with um yeah um the conversation going both ways so

7:54

obviously when you have uh people from you know China from the finance industry

7:59

from uh you have people coming in from the tech sector from you know working on artificial intelligence you have

8:05

military leaders you have ambassadors uh they come with a lot of interesting input so it would be quite foolish if

8:13

the Russians just use this a format to to you know preach their their views and

8:18

then walk away so there is a nice again the whole point is a discussion Club but

8:24

of course that being said uh it’s also being used often to give um yeah some

8:29

statements uh as we know Putin’s annual speech there usually gets a lot of media attention because it is used as a way

8:36

to uh yeah to get a sense for uh yeah the direction of Russia so so it is um

8:44

no it has many functions I I it’s I think some

8:52

yeah many countries should emulate more or less this model to some extent it’s um yeah it’s uh it’s very interesting

8:58

format yeah and it’s smaller than let’s say the world economic Forum or the Munich security conference which are

9:04

huge events so the valdi is still a bit uh keeps it probably makes it easier to

9:10

also have discussions again with with different people I suppose yeah because well sometimes or

9:16

usually I also attend the St Petersburg International economic Forum which is every year around June in St Petersburg

9:24

and sometimes also the Eastern economic Forum which is in vlasto where they focus more on Asia but these are huge

9:32

events with thousands of people so it becomes um yeah very very big after a while uh

9:40

my preference is this valai meeting given that it usually wouldn’t uh go

9:45

above 120 people and what have you learned there from the people that you’ve met and um maybe we talk about

9:53

the Vladimir Putin’s answer to your question later but from the other discussions that you had and the impressions of how Russia is now trying

10:00

to build up its relationship with the global South what’s what are you taking

10:06

away uh yeah it’s a big question uh well uh the global South again it’s uh not

10:13

it’s a lot of countries indeed that was one of the uh comments I also got that

10:18

this uh you know Global South is not necessarily a great terminology because

10:23

usually we say you know the west and versus global South but if you see all the diversity within the West uh yeah

10:30

the rest of the world of course is is very very different but uh um but but

10:35

there are some commonalities I think um uh a lot of countries uh at least for my

10:42

impression would like to build um a post American world that is uh not without

10:49

the United States uh with the United States but one that isn’t to American Centric uh simply because of necessity

10:56

the the world which was constructed after 45 in nintend ified after 91 it’s more or less gone it’s the the

11:03

distribution of power the legitimacy of the entire liberal hedony for the US to

11:09

police the world a lot of this there a yeah very widespread um desire to

11:15

overcome this uh but um my my question to put in which is also something I got

11:22

feedback from other um people participating from around the world is that they what they really welcome

11:28

organiz such as bricks simply because they bring in often adversarial countries so you have China and India

11:34

you know you have United Arab Emirates and Iran you have the Ethiopians and the Egyptians so they would like it to be

11:39

they would like to overcome block politics uh so they’re also concerned that you know bricks should not become

11:46

an anti-western grouping so but they would like it to be anti-hegemonic so

11:52

counter America’s efforts to dominate um the high ends of uh Global value chains

11:58

to dominate the Finance to control all physical Transportation corridors so

12:03

they would all like to overcome this but they don’t want to become anti-American so so this um IRAs formats there should

12:10

be a way of overcoming block politics not become a block itself so this is

12:16

why uh yeah it’s it’s important to draw a distinction and uh yeah that’s kind of

12:22

the direction I was going with my question as well let’s talk about the question you asked Vladimir Putin if he

12:28

sees the future uh between Russia and the the rest of Europe in a nutshell at

12:35

least that’s how I remember it and he answered this in a quite positive way actually can you maybe lay out what you

12:42

what you took away from that well my my um my point was that

12:49

when we because well the panel I moderated um I was ask to give a brief

12:54

summary of the issues we discussed of course discussed things but I wanted to

13:00

break down to three points and the first was that when you talk about uraan security historically you know people

13:07

looking at the ideas of mackinder or from the Russian side savitz the main

13:13

idea was you know the maritime Powers tend to rule the uran continent from the maritime periphery you know you make

13:19

sure there’s divisions among the main powers so Germany Russia Russia China and uh if there’s enough divisions then

13:26

you can dominate from the maritime periphery this has been very infuential for American and British policy before

13:31

them anyways my point was uh the main shift we see today is effectively not uh Russia

13:38

trying to dominate Eurasia from the center and uh the Americans trying to dominate from the periphery because well

13:45

obviously Russia doesn’t have the capabilities or the intentions to dominate even the Chinese don’t really

13:51

have this so it is a multipolar system and that makes the euras format uh more

13:57

appealing um simply because it’s not living under the dominance of Moscow or

14:03

Washington so this again this um ability in a multipolar system to Pro to pursue

14:10

a multiv vector foreign policy that is to link yourself with many centers of power this is where the main attraction

14:15

is uh this is why I always use the example of turkey because it seems to perplex people in the west how can it be

14:21

part of NATO and Bricks like why why are you going this way well they’re not they’re not looking to join a Russian

14:26

Alliance they don’t want to join a Chinese Alliance they want to uh liberate thems a little bit from block

14:32

politics because on when you’re in a block and you’re a small or mediumsized country you tend to be used as a pawn uh

14:41

so but if you connect to many centers of power not excessively reliant on any state or region then you can have more

14:48

independent foreign policy and this is what even allies or friends of United States would like to pursue so it’s

14:55

they’re not anti-American the fact that the Indians are pushing this very hard you know they’re not anti-American by

15:00

any stretch of the imagination they simply don’t want to fall into this Us Versus Them block politics I mean look

15:07

what it’s done in Europe and um and uh I think the multipolarity is solving many

15:14

problems it’s incentivizing more peace between the Iranians and the Arabs between China and India this is by the

15:21

way something I’m very optimistic about and it could also ideally do something about India Pakistan relations so my

15:28

question there was if this multipolar system can be extended to Europe I guess

15:34

not necessarily in the form of bricks membership for European countries but uh but it could include this as well

15:41

because uh the way I see the problems after the cold war is we didn’t give up on block politics we by this by

15:49

expanding NATO and thus abandoning all this pan European security agreements what did we do well we revived the whole

15:55

logic of of block politics of the Cold War so it’s a we committed to

16:01

indivisible security but we don’t do that anymore we expanding our security at the expense of the other we’re moving

16:06

dividing lines further to worst Russian borders and calling it European integration this is uh um I make the

16:15

point that this was very uncontroversial in the ’90s we’ve spoken about this as well this is uh this was obviously going

16:21

to start another cold war and it has so our pursuing Security in Europe shouldn’t be you know that we try to

16:28

defeat the Russian or Russians try to defeat us this is uh yeah Madness that is what we’re doing now by the way uh it

16:35

should be to overcome block politics because we have to be honest we didn’t do this after the Cold War it’s very

16:41

hard for us to be honest about this in the west because the reason why we didn’t finish block politics is us it’s

16:47

uh you know they say you can put the blame on both sides but no on this it’s 100% the West the Russians did want to

16:54

overcome this and they to have inclusive an inclusive European security architect and we’re the one who said no we’d

17:00

rather go with Liberal Liberal hedge money which requires expansion of NATO and cutting out the largest country in

17:07

Europe from Europe and somehow this was going to be our recipe for stability so

17:12

anyways I would I would like to see something alternative uh and instead of looking for a greater European format

17:19

which see seems to be out the window I thought um something along a greater EUR because Europe should be a part of it is

17:25

a part of eura and um and that yeah I I was thought there was some

17:32

reason for optimism from Putin’s answer because he did seem to leave the door open to Europe that we can you know we

17:39

don’t have to go fighting each other for decades in another cold war we can uh we

17:45

not kiss and make up but we can try to overcome some of these issues yeah I mean if I if I remember it correctly he

17:51

was saying uh if the Europeans come around to actually want to participate in the multi-polar world and they and

17:58

Cooperative framework then that would actually be in the interest of Russia as well so not at all adversarial and not

18:06

at all the idea that uh a new Cold War and a new hard contact line is is

18:11

inevitable it’s more like okay we’re like as we said in other in other

18:16

discussions Russia China India and so on are now working on building this post

18:22

hegemonic world but without shutting the door to the other ones because as you said uh the block idea is not is not

18:31

their idea anymore and in this sense and I just would like to get your opinion on this um what we are seeing with bricks

18:38

is not really the is not the strategy of the Soviet Union at all it is actually

18:45

the strategy of the non-aligned movement uh or at least the the basic

18:51

idea just now including much more of the world as in rejecting the blocks uh whil

18:58

still having now a clearer idea of how to how to go forward without without in

19:05

automatically Falling Again in the into this dichotomy no exactly and this is why

19:12

it’s not only a European problem that we’re Reviving these blocks because we we making all the wrong lessons from the

19:18

current conflict we have uh because uh you know Reviving block politics it

19:24

would predictably result in crisis and conflict and which we have now obviously

19:30

the war in Ukraine is a result of uh returning to block politics but are in

19:36

the west our our solution is well uh what we should have done is well this

19:41

proves why we need NATO why we need an block military allines because you know we have a uh Bad actors such as Russia

19:49

trying to build Empires but this is um again this is nonsense this is not why the War Began if we were honest about

19:57

why the War Began in terms of NATO pushing a military block towards the Russian borders then we could start to

20:03

address the solution which is which again should be very uncontroversial we should aspire to overcome block politics

20:09

this is what we tried after the Cold War but we see now also this solution being applied to Asia so the you know when we

20:16

listen to well former NATO Secretary General lean stoltenberg is said you know we we were very naive about Russia

20:22

we should not be as naive about the Chinese so we should start building nato in Asia too so this is exactly the

20:29

opposite of what we should be doing we should looking to find uh formats for indivisible Security in which one does

20:36

not increase security at the expense of other where we try to avoid these block politics one where we seek security with

20:42

others not against them and um effectively try to accommodate the

20:48

security concerns of other instead of just always focusing on deterrence uh but we’re not now talking about a Asian

20:55

NATO I mean it’s it’s so beyond absurd uh so uh yeah I think it it was the

21:01

former prime minister of Australia King who made the point that uh we need nato in Asia as much as we need the plague

21:08

this is uh going to end terribly so um no so

21:14

I can you like you know one of the things that’s then usually thrown at us

21:19

who argue for this kind of inclusive um Global design is that but you cannot

21:26

have uh an inclusive structure with Russia I mean tell that to the ukrainians who are fighting the Russians

21:32

on their territory or tell that the Filipinos who are having to fend off the chines these are these are hegemonic

21:39

powers themselves that want to take over and bit by bit grow their power and their territory uh you cannot have a an

21:48

amicable relationship with them I believe that bricks is is the living

21:53

proof that yes you can and it actually does work but could you could you tell

21:58

tell me how you how you try to approach this this kind of narrative from the other

22:04

side yeah no it becomes difficult because there are two uh two arguments

22:10

in terms of why why there’s conflict uh obviously with China and Philippines uh

22:16

the the my my point of view is that for the past what almost um 70 75 years now

22:26

the Americans have had their Island chains off the coast of Asia the these

22:31

two main island chains when the Americans pursue this military containment policy the the the the the

22:39

main uh concern of the Chinese of course is yeah it much like if the Chinese

22:44

would set up in their military bases in Mexico it’s not really acceptable so

22:50

they would like to break free of this island chains again when you read people like brazinski or other American

22:56

strategists they make very clear that well we have all this choke points we have these Island chains if we have a

23:01

conflict with the Chinese we can you know this is used to to crush them so

23:06

the Chinese don’t want uh this off their borders their main goal is to push through these Island chains now uh but

23:14

the Americans then argue no no we need this here because of Chinese aggression but once the Chinese begin to push back

23:21

then the whole security architecture begins to justify itself um but again

23:26

you can argue that this is a security d both sides looking to protect themselves from the other side and the security

23:32

dilemma is a key issue in the International System we’re competing for security um but you have to accommodate

23:39

the security concern of the opponent if you want to mitigate the security competition and I guess the same applies

23:44

for Europe but uh uh I think uh I think in in in Europe it

23:52

becomes even easier to explain why this assumption is wrong because we kind of we ran a a uh social experiment after

24:00

the cold war that is the the Russians they abandoned they walked away from an Empire their main goal was to integrate

24:05

with the West throughout the ’90s uh to abandon all block politics block Empire

24:12

everything just to integrate with the west and we’re the one who said no um

24:19

and no one really when the Russians took Crimea did anyone ever suggest that anyone in Moscow laid claim to Crimea

24:26

before 2014 of course not they didn’t ask for this uh um they they did this as a response

24:34

to to what the West did it’s very hard to argue this in Europe because then you say you’re justifying what they did but

24:41

this is a fact they they reacted to western expansion um and also we if if

24:48

you look at why we did it we you know like the ukrainians they they wish they

24:54

they should have been in NATO because obviously this proves why we need NATO but we also know that ukrainians didn’t want

25:00

NATO uh even after the Russians took Crimea hardly anyone wanted wanted to join NATO so this idea um is false it’s

25:09

based on U yeah not fake news but it’s a so the

25:14

entire premise is false but it is a but this is the main the main argument we

25:20

have which is why we’re saying it was unprovoked because once you say it’s unprovoked the war then everything is uh

25:27

um simply russan imperialism once you recognize the war was provoked uh then

25:33

that discredits the entire Alliance system which we have built and based our security on which is why this lie about

25:40

unprovoked war is really at the core which is why it’s so important there’s so many of these of

25:46

these War justifying and War supporting narratives right one that Russia did an

25:54

unprovoked war of aggression um and one while I would still say it there was

26:00

definitely aggression but it was definitely not unprovoked and these kind of security Dynamics usually have a back

26:07

and forth a ping-pong effect right a spiral that gets worse and worse the other one is of course that uh Israel is

26:13

defending itself in the Middle East while Exterminating an an entire population that is that is basically

26:20

defends less itself and we have but these narratives are essential in order to justify very very highly aggressive

26:29

uh political action which doesn’t necessarily need to be military but it always has a military component and the

26:36

proxy war that is going on is a very is an actually a very sophisticated way of

26:42

the United ways of fighting a uh a significant other with the troops of a

26:49

third state right which is what’s so sick and so sad about this entire situation um but when we then look at

26:56

the way that now the bricks are trying to form and and create these these institutions that can handle conflict on

27:03

a level below um actually going to war you know how as you said how China and India are

27:09

able to to um try to create discussion fora in order to resolve their border

27:16

conflicts um and how also now uh Iran and even Saudi Arabia were taken into

27:21

the same club and now now are actually improving their security ties that’s a

27:27

different model this is going to be now a contest of the models right of of how to run the

27:33

world yeah and I well at Val was speaking a bit with this um Pakistani

27:40

two star general for a while as well and he was also making the point that as the Russians do this International north

27:46

south Transportation corridors connecting Russia with Iran and India

27:52

that this could actually help relations between India and Pakistan uh because uh

27:58

well if you look at a simple map this Transportation Corridor it requires Iranian ports to connect with Indian

28:04

ports simply because they have to circumvent all of Pakistan so you know that everything could be much more

28:11

efficient uh if they couldn’t just run through Pakistan and uh and this would

28:16

also be perhaps good for India because then the north south Corridor will be more competitive EUR Asia would be less

28:24

uh China Centric so you would have other also competitive uh physical Transportation corridors connecting

28:30

other centers of power uh so both the Indians and the pakistanis have now a

28:35

huge economic incentives to try to sort out their differences because if you can now cut through Iran into Pakistan and

28:43

down to India you will have uh uh you all of these countries will benefit much

28:48

more and um and the great benefit is that because the Chinese aren’t calling

28:54

for dominance or hedony then they wouldn’t oppose any of this if anything they would see more stability in their

28:59

neighborhood as being to their advantage now this is the benefit if you will of this multi-polar system now um in the

29:07

contrast if you have this block politics uh again if the United States want to dominate all this connectivity

29:14

undermines it because uh you want to avoid all these other great Powers coming together and cooperating so you

29:20

want to have some divisions between Pakistan in India you want to have some divisions between India and Iran you

29:25

want to split the Russians from Iran and split Russians from the Chinese he would like to keep some tensions between India

29:32

and uh China this way we can contain the Chinese militarily we can make sure the Indians become a bit more dependent

29:39

maybe uh put them into a American Le block so it is this um yeah this

29:46

alliance system which is what of course our Global uh hemon is based upon it’s

29:52

very very very disruptive and especially as we enter into this new technological changes where the

29:58

new weapons and uh yeah both in the economic and Military sphere will take uh introduce a lot of new risks it

30:05

should be a um a priority to elevate security instead of power and uh

30:12

whatever the argument was in the ’90s I just don’t feel there’s any convincing argument anymore that the best framework

30:17

or format for security anymore is hemony uh that one Center of power dominates

30:23

the planet to have a final say it’s an absurd notion now so [Music]

oooooo

ooo

Transkripzioa:

0:00

give the floor to our friend from nor

0:01

Norway Glen de he’s going to uh share

0:04

the summary with

0:06

you my name is Glenn dies I’m a

0:09

professor of political economy from

0:11

Norway and uh yeah as our panel was on

0:15

IRAs security I just like to uh Outline

0:18

Three main points uh the first was that

0:21

the source of conflict today appears to

0:24

be a conflict between unipolarity and

0:28

multipolarity now to large extent this

0:30

represents a new phenomenon in

0:33

international Affairs as in the 19th

0:35

century we had United States as a

0:37

dominant Maritime power in conflict with

0:41

the the Russian Empire as the dominant

0:43

land power in the 20th century we had

0:46

United States as the dominant Maritime

0:48

power against the Soviet Union and uh in

0:52

the present time it’s it’s some of

0:54

different as we have United States again

0:56

as dominant Maritime power but on the

0:58

Eurasian continent we’re now seeing the

1:00

emergence of

1:01

multipolarity uh which also presents a

1:04

lot of new opportunities because even

1:05

the largest economy China uh doesn’t

1:08

really have the capability or it doesn’t

1:10

even display the intention of attempting

1:12

to dominate this continent instead we

1:15

see initiatives being put in place for a

1:17

multi-polar Eurasia so this puts us

1:20

therefore in a conflict between uh

1:22

unipolar system attempted to be restored

1:25

by the United States versus a multipolar

1:27

system uh and the global majority seems

1:31

to obviously prefer the multipolarity

1:33

which is why I think bricks has been

1:35

such a great uh attraction to many

1:38

countries

1:40

um uh however in our discussions we also

1:43

discovered a consensus that there was

1:45

some concerns or at least a a desire for

1:48

Ura to be a um anti-hegemonic movement

1:53

as opposed to being

1:55

anti-western uh as the objective should

1:57

be to harmonize interest and

2:00

this era of block Politics as opposed to

2:02

EUR Asia merely becoming a block and

2:05

again the attraction of brics countries

2:07

towards this uran format uh largely

2:09

rested on this idea that we could

2:11

overcome the block politics rather than

2:13

succumbing to it uh the second point we

2:16

had was uh that the appeal of Eurasia is

2:18

also to a large extent U the multiv

2:21

vector foreign policy this is the

2:23

ability to diversify economic

2:25

connectivity with all the major uh poles

2:28

of power uh and this is uh seen as a

2:32

necessity to um or a requirement to have

2:35

more political Independence to have more

2:38

autonomy in foreign policy and not

2:40

merely be a spectator in international

2:43

Affairs and yet again uh this is why

2:45

most countries do not want to choose

2:47

between competing blocks uh but instead

2:49

find a way of harmonizing and again the

2:52

global majority wants EUR multipolarity

2:54

as this is a requirement for genuine

2:57

multilateralism and not the false one

2:59

which is has often been promoted under

3:02

Washington uh the third and final point

3:04

was um uh that the multipolar Eurasia

3:08

has certain systemic incentives for

3:10

harmonizing interests because the great

3:13

powers in Eurasia they have somewhat

3:15

different formats for Eurasian

3:17

integration they have different interest

3:19

uh we can see this also with Russia and

3:21

China but we also see that none can

3:23

really pursue their objectives or

3:26

formats for integration without

3:28

cooperation with this other centers of

3:30

power uh so this creates incentives to

3:33

harmonize interest and it seems that

3:35

this is also what has made bricks

3:37

successful as I remember a decade ago

3:39

many people expected Central Asia to be

3:41

a clash point between China and Russia

3:44

instead we see it becoming uh area of

3:46

cooperation instead so this gives

3:49

optimism to other parts of Eurasia as

3:51

well and this is drastically different

3:53

from the alliance system which is

3:55

usually used to advance unipolarity uh

3:58

in your own speech you refer to the

4:00

the I guess the Imperial impulse of

4:02

dividing countries so under the alliance

4:05

system there’s always an interest in

4:06

having division between China and India

4:09

between um the Arabs and Iranians

4:12

between Europe and Russia simply because

4:15

this helps to divide the region into

4:17

dependent allies and weakened

4:19

adversaries so um yes so in the spirit

4:23

of uh harmonizing interest I also had a

4:26

question uh premised on the inability

4:30

we’ve had in Europe to establish a

4:32

mutually acceptable post Cold War

4:34

settlement uh after the Cold War and um

4:38

um I think this has been a source of

4:40

many of our tensions we never

4:42

established a system based of

4:43

indivisible security instead we returned

4:46

to block politics um and abandoned some

4:49

of the hopes we initially had in the

4:52

early ’90s by instead going with NATO

4:54

expansion so my question was if Eurasian

4:57

multipolarity can offer a different

5:00

format for cooperation between Russia

5:03

and Europe as well uh I asked this

5:06

because I had a few years ago a book

5:09

with the title uh uh Europe as the

5:12

Western peninsula of Greater Eurasia and

5:15

uh yeah I was wondering on your opinions

5:17

if you see any possibility for such a

5:20

path forward thank

5:25

you um please forgive me sorry sorry

5:31

could could you please repeat what you

5:33

were saying in the end the could you

5:34

formulate the question yet again

5:40

please sorry well my question was um

5:43

well per on the idea that across Eurasia

5:45

we’ve seen uh many countries being able

5:47

to overcome their their differences

5:50

their political differences through

5:52

economic connectivity we see this for

5:54

example the deals the Chinese were

5:57

promoting between the Arabs and the

5:58

Iranians and uh I was wondering if some

6:01

form format for greater Eurasia in which

6:04

Europe would be a part of this greater

6:06

Eurasia if there’s some ability to use

6:09

this bricks or some other institutions

6:12

to also Foster better relations with

6:15

Russia and Europe so we can overcome

6:17

this uh block politics in Europe which

6:20

we never were able to overcome after the

6:22

Cold

6:28

War was that

6:33

you know after the Cold War ended there

6:35

was a chance to overcome this block

6:37

thinking and the block politics I can

6:40

repeat it after the cold war came to an

6:43

end there was a chance to overcome the

6:45

block mentality and the block

6:51

politics however as I mentioned in my

6:56

statement I’m quite sure that the US

6:59

simp didn’t need

7:01

that it seems that they were possibly

7:03

scared that they would lose control over

7:07

Europe they wanted to maintain it and

7:09

they’re still doing so moreover they

7:11

strengthened their grip over

7:14

it but I wanted to say that at some

7:17

point it would lead to the weakening of

7:21

that principle of complete

7:25

subjugation you

7:27

know what I’m saying right now now is is

7:31

not anything bad I don’t want to um you

7:34

know blame someone or or anything God

7:36

forbid but we see that many European

7:38

countries most of European countries

7:41

that are NATO members to the detriment

7:43

of their

7:44

interest are conducting actions that

7:47

benefit the US politics and the US

7:53

economy well look the US in certain

7:56

states of the US

8:00

the energy

8:02

cost three or five times less than in

8:05

the European

8:08

Union so the decision is being made

8:10

deliberately in the the tax system the

8:14

decreasing the Revenue tax for example

8:17

they create the conditions for the

8:18

transition of a whole sectors of economy

8:21

of whole Industries towards the US and

8:24

some of them do move first that applied

8:27

to those who were dealing with primary

8:29

energy sources that is fertilizer

8:31

Productions as well as glass production

8:33

and some other

8:35

Industries they simply rolled back their

8:38

um activity because it was not

8:39

profitable anymore they’re moving over

8:41

the over the ocean now they’re doing the

8:44

secondary Industries more or less it has

8:47

to do with Metallurgy and the car

8:50

industry and so

8:53

on the governments can blame all they

8:57

want the ineffective management

9:00

of the companies of specific companies

9:02

but it has to do with the government

9:04

policy first and foremost and in those

9:07

conditions the management of the

9:08

companies had to do something to defend

9:10

to protect jobs and their companies but

9:14

it’s not always possible

9:15

[Music]

9:18

though therefore the conflict that

9:22

unfortunately we’re seeing today that

9:24

we’re unfortunately taking part in that

9:26

allowed the us a

9:29

to

9:30

achieve the strengthening of their

9:33

leadership to pollute

9:35

mildly have almost the colonial

9:39

dependence of the countries honestly

9:41

even I didn’t expect

9:44

that the same the same is happening to

9:47

Japan it’s

9:49

surprising what did we do to Japan

9:52

nothing not a single stab not a single

9:54

word but they introduced sanctions

9:56

against it how come where did that come

10:00

from hence the question what do we do

10:02

with that well well we didn’t do

10:04

anything the col are there colleagues

10:06

from Japan possibly there would be some

10:08

questions from them and it’s even worse

10:10

with

10:11

Europe I’ve I have already said it but I

10:15

will not refrain from the pleasure of

10:18

thinking back to

10:20

the to my conversation in 1993 with ex-

10:24

Chancellor Cole I had the chance to be

10:27

present at the conversation with a

10:29

former mayor of St Petersburg back in

10:32

the day I still had some German in me

10:35

and I acted as an interpreted between

10:38

them he let go of the interpret and he

10:40

said go and take a rest I stayed and I

10:42

interpreted for

10:44

them for me as who was a a former member

10:49

of external intelligence of the Soviet

10:51

Union it was so surprising to hear what

10:53

he was saying to be

10:55

honest I was listening to them I was

10:58

interpreting

11:00

and to put it mildly I was extremely

11:03

surprised because I still had cliches of

11:07

the Cold War mentality in my head I was

11:10

a member of intelligence of KGB of USSR

11:13

and all of a sudden Chancellor Cole

11:15

started saying that the future of Europe

11:17

if it wants to preserve itself as an

11:20

independent um Center of European

11:22

civilization the future is only with

11:24

Russia we need to bring together our

11:27

efforts I I was simply a

11:31

gape he continued in the same vein and

11:34

he spoke about his vision about the

11:36

development of situation in the on the

11:39

American

11:40

continent the way the US will continue

11:44

build its policy well I I will not give

11:46

it verbatim but he didn’t say anything

11:48

bad about the us but he simply gave his

11:52

expert opinion not just a Chancellor but

11:54

more like an

11:56

expert and in essence I think

11:59

85 or 90% what he spoke about is

12:03

happening I can see it and everyone can

12:05

see it as

12:08

well and naturally we we should try to

12:11

build a security system on Eurasian

12:14

continent it’s tremendous in

12:18

size and naturally Europe can and I

12:21

believe should be and part and parcel of

12:24

that

12:25

system I jotted it down the r c does not

12:29

have a chance and doesn’t want to play a

12:32

dominating role you said in you you

12:35

spoke about Central Asia as

12:37

well and I will mention it too I think

12:40

there’re certainly our friends from

12:42

China here the Chinese philosophy does

12:44

not have that they did not strive for

12:47

Domination that’s the

12:50

trick that’s the traction of the theory

12:54

of that proposal that has been worded by

12:57

president shei

13:01

one belt one road one belt one Common

13:07

Road this is not a Chinese Road this is

13:11

a common Road everyone’s Road at least

13:14

bilaterally that’s the way it sounds and

13:17

that’s the way we behave in the

13:19

interests of each

13:20

other what’s happening in Central Asia

13:23

everyone expected some kind of a clash

13:26

or uh collision between in Russia and

13:29

China and Central Asia well

13:31

look the thing is is that these

13:34

countries are very young in their

13:37

statehood and they have economies that

13:40

requires significant

13:42

development demographic processes are a

13:45

foot

13:46

there for example take usbekistan every

13:49

year they add another million of

13:52

population can you imagine that 27 or 28

13:56

million that’s already the population

13:58

and they have an extra million born each

14:00

year India has plus 10 as my friend

14:04

Prime Minister Modi spoke but India has

14:07

1.5 billion people living

14:10

there and usbekistan has about

14:15

37 38 now they soon have to have 40

14:19

million that that’s a lot of millions

14:21

they have plenty of issues and if the

14:23

People’s Republic of China comes over

14:25

there and helps out those economies and

14:28

that that as a result of economic

14:34

cooperation the domestic political

14:37

process is stabilized as well the

14:38

statehood stabiliz is stabilized Russia

14:41

only has an interest in that we want to

14:43

have a stable situation there stable

14:45

development it’s in our interests as

14:48

well therefore the competition is absent

14:51

there we only have

14:54

cooperation it doesn’t stand in the way

14:57

of developing development of our

14:59

traditional development of ties with

15:01

that region of the world and the

15:04

countries of this of Central Asia that

15:07

for hundreds of years have been part of

15:09

the Russian Empire and of the Soviet

15:11

Union not only remember well but they

15:14

cherish our special contexts and special

15:16

ties and it benefits

15:19

everyone and if if we create security

15:23

system in Eurasian

15:25

continent and incidentally I I see and I

15:28

hear that certain European

15:31

countries are starting to talk about the

15:34

single security system from Lisbon to

15:37

vladas yet again now they went going

15:41

back to what theal spoke about he he

15:44

talked about eurals but we need to talk

15:46

about vask as the end

15:49

point they have these ideas

15:52

again if our counterparts will go back

15:55

to that and most importantly as as you

15:58

said what I’ve mentioned

15:59

and what’s written down in the occe

16:02

documentation that the security of of of

16:06

one country does not come at the expense

16:07

of the other of security of the other

16:10

country it’s crucial if we can truly do

16:13

that you have mentioned the level of

16:16

trust that needs to be increased and I

16:19

think that the most important issue on

16:21

Eurasian content between Russia and the

16:24

European countries is the deficit of

16:26

trust

16:30

you can blame Russia for many things and

16:32

possibly we make mistakes as well but

16:34

when we’re being told that we signed the

16:38

Minsk agreement we been told that they

16:40

signed the Minsk agreements only to give

16:41

time to Ukraine to rearm and they never

16:44

intended to solve this conflict

16:46

peacefully how can we trust them look

16:49

guys what what kind of trust can we talk

16:51

about you you’ve publicly said that you

16:54

have fooled us that you’ve lied to us

16:56

and you deceived us what kind of trust

16:58

are we talking

17:00

about but we need to go back to that

17:03

system of mutual trust with time I don’t

17:06

know we can discuss it till early hours

17:09

of the morning but it’s the first step

17:12

to create a single Eurasian security

17:15

system is it possible to no Chancellor

17:20

Cole whom whom I spoke about at the

17:22

beginning said that it’s it’s not just

17:25

necessary but it’s an imperative and I

17:27

share his point of you

oooooo