that the relationship is very bad, that there is a crisis of trust and that some kind of shake-up may be needed, well, let’s say that the martians landed, or an epidemic began, or there was some kind of major terrorist attack, well, the martians have not landed yet, there was an epidemic, and this only led to further mutual suspicions and accusations, and now there was

a terrible terrorist attack in the moscow region in krasnogorsk, again somehow this led to the fact that moscow and washington have new claims against each other, washington is trying in every possible way to prove that it was only isis and no one other than isis is responsible for the terrorist attack in krasnogorsk. here i must immediately say that i did not hear from the russian leadership, from president putin from foreign minister lavov, that only isis did this, i simply did not hear such a thing, i can assure you that i never said such a thing on our program , all the people who have been arrested so far in connection with this terrorist act are not ukrainians.

not americans, these are people from central asia and they are all muslims, there is an opinion of the russians intelligence services among unofficial experts that this does not look like a typical isis operation, that most likely there were some other organizers and sponsors, but so far these organizers and sponsors have not been arrested.

consent of both sides, but from the russian side i heard many times, and foreign minister sergei lavrov said many times, and president putin repeated many times, that russia, for its part, is ready for dialogue, and from the us side, we hear that they should talk they say there is no one, and that russia is not interested in negotiations, it turns out some kind of surrealism, president putin. says: we are open to negotiations, the next day in the white house they say: russia is not interested in dialogue, it turns out that they deny what was said literally yesterday and are moving forward, and the american version is propaganda, and this is completely obvious

propaganda, not some kind of clever, secretive propaganda, but this kind of overt propaganda, and unfortunately, the media are not trying to expose this propaganda, they have taken such a helpful position. we see what the new york times says washington post, wall street journal and major tv channels. they simply read the official statements that come from the white house. and they write with reference to some anonymous high-ranking officials of the american administration. this is the problem, that there is no communication. we don’t know what the american authorities actually told the russians, what information they conveyed, because they don’t say anything, after what happened in crocus cityhole, naturally the united states had to openly declare, explain

everything, including to the american people, so we had such information, so we said this and that, and we need to take action together with the russians.

but it can be assumed that in this case ukraine could have something to do with this, because ukrainians regularly organize some kind of terrorist attacks on russian territory, and one could admit this, and the ukrainians themselves say: yes, we organize terrorist attacks, we we blow up innocent people. we plant explosive devices and so on and so forth, this cannot be done, this should not happen when you do something like that, there must be consequences when

some kind of military operations take place on the russian border, on the russian-ukrainian border, there are also questions, one way or another, it is quite obvious that the cia had contacts with various. and led jihadist cells in syria, for example, because obama gave such an order to the cia, to overthrow the government of syria, again, this is an absolutely idiotic act, an illegal act, all this was done by the hands

of jihadists, therefore, we have reason to think that in kosovo, in serbia, bosnia, caucasus. american intelligence agencies led jihadist groups. naturally, the american authorities deny everything, but one way or another, if you dig, you can find some evidence, so a lot of questions arise, we don’t have answers yet. and this is due to the fact that diplomacy does not work. and i want to say that overall, this is a very dangerous situation. this is dangerous for the whole world, that the united states has lost the ability, lost interest, lost knowledge and they have already forgotten that if you don’t want war, you need to talk with the opposite country, it is necessary to conduct a dialogue, the united states refuses this every

day, and this is the biggest mistake of american foreign policy at the moment. unfortunately, i completely agree with you, i think. that it is precisely the refusal of diplomacy that is largely responsible for the war in ukraine, they often say in the united states. and this kind of decision, of course, he had to make, but there was another reason, i

am deeply convinced of this now, the reason is that a large number of people could not know about this decision in advance, because it was adopted very close to the time of the operation, because in moscow there was hope that the proposals that russia made. it was enough to say that we are ready to discuss the issue of how to ensure that ukraine does not

become a member of nato. instead, it’s not for me to tell you, it was said that even this topic cannot be discussed, you wrote recently that they are starting, if they don’t like someone because of the foreign countries with which the united states is dealing, then they declare.

that this war would not have happened if the united states had been open to discussing the project with russia agreements that russia put on the table, which president putin spoke about in december of twenty-one. because these were constructive, serious proposals, there was something to discuss, it was said that it was necessary to stop the expansion of nato, and in any case this was a mistake, initially, the essence of the proposals was this, other concerns were expressed there, but completely legitimate , this was due to the fact that the us was unilateral.

who didn’t deny this, what kind of missiles are installed in these silos, interceptor missiles or some other strike missiles, no one knows, and this directly threatens the security of russia, this is the result of unilateral actions by the united states, so this was also mentioned in the proposals that russia put forward in december of twenty-one, the root of this problem is this, i remember, this is all. ..

as soon as the soviet union collapsed in 1991, the pentagon, the cia, and the state department all immediately got down to business and began to do the opposite of what they had promised, to create a unipolar us hegemony in the world, to expand nato to the east and

approaching russia, with bignia brzyzinski all this. explained in colorful terms in 1997, he published an article in affairs magazine, a new eurasian strategy, i think that’s what the article was called, and he said that nato should expand, even to the point of encircling russia in the black sea region too, this idea, it's old, it existed. just proposed using the same approach, encircling russia in the black sea area, he especially spoke about sevastopol, if russia is deprived of sevastopol, russia will cease to be a great sea

power, nothing has changed since then, this is the policy pursued. then there was the bombing of belgrade in 1999, then there was the invasion of afghanistan in 2001, then there was the withdrawal from the poprow treaty in 2002, then there was the illegal invasion of iraq in 2003, then there was the unilateral recognition of kosovo in 2008, then there was the summit nato in bucharest, a promise was made.

related to the minsk-2 agreements, then there was a refusal of any negotiations with russia on security guarantees in the twenty-first year, so this is a very sad story, but this story is very consistent, the same principle always applies, no matter what happens, you don’t need to talk to the russians, we are, we are the united states, and who are they, they are some kind of russia, why talk to them, that’s the attitude. why do we need to negotiate, why do we need diplomacy? we don’t need to negotiate with anyone, we are the united states. naturally, this is a very stupid, self-confident approach. people just live in their bubble in washington, but that's the mentality they have. and it didn't start today, not yesterday, not a year ago, not two, not 3 years ago, it did not start with the beginning of the svo.

this was the mood in the usa. all us security officials believe that the us is an omnipotent country, it can do anything, they are causing one disaster after another in the world, they are not able to solve a single problem of military force in bosnia, kosovo, afghanistan and iraq .

russia voiced a number of real problems regarding the deployment of missiles, regarding the unilateral actions of the united states to withdraw from various international treaties and undermine the entire security system in the field of nuclear weapons, and regarding the expansion of nato, and so on and so forth.

and the united states even offered him assistance in this evacuation, that is, it turns out that in washington in the

biden administration they thought that if negotiations were not started, then russia would lead troops, that biden would suffer, as it seems to me, a serious defeat then, because zelensky should run away and the united states, very good question, dmitry. you know, i addressed representatives of the white house at the end of december 2121. i just i wanted to give my 5 cents, i said that what

president putin is proposing as a topic for negotiations is a very good theses. and i told them, don’t consider the refusal to expand nato a concession, it’s not a concession. this is the only sensible, logical step. if ukraine is a neutral state.

they believed a lot of things that actually turned out to be untrue, these are gamblers,

gamblers, they are used to playing with the lives of other people, playing with the future of other countries, this is the essence of american politics, american the policy has never been sound, logical, consistent, i'm trying to remember now for the rest of my life i can't. they seriously believed in these absolutely

naive things. let's go to advertising. new speculations around zaporozhye aest. the plan is to say that russia is an irresponsible player. how dangerous are such stuffings? ukraine shot. they were the ones who tried to provoke a nuclear disaster. new fakes about how the russians allegedly stole everything. ukrainians should not see like russia.

why are you painfully oppressing me, dad? what kind of dad am i to you? my god, i’m only now beginning to understand what can come out of our ball, and now do we understand what kind of shining nonsense this is? why am i visiting people? well, i was married, i don’t care, azina, an innocent girl, it’s good that i woke up, take everything and divide it, as i thought, a dog’s heart, the famous film adaptation of mikhail bulgakov’s story on saturday on the first. he's still dancing and dancing. testament of zhenya belausov. the battle for the inheritance of the stars of the nineties is reaching the finish line. all parties to the conflict our studio. have you filed a lawsuit? why does a person write a will at 30 years old? roman is sure that the entire inheritance was once unfairly given to sister christina. if i wanted to cheat, i would have come from the very beginning, formalized everything about myself. why is the singer’s son sure that the star’s widow is deceiving him, and the document

could be a fake, i want to know the truth, you know the dad’s handwriting, jerome, to be honest, no, and you were getting an official divorce, it turned out that the court divorced us, can you imagine, for i had such a blow after 26 years, exclusive with dmitry borisov, premiere, saturday on first, when you entered into an inheritance, you told the notary that there were still potential heirs, you see, i was in such a state, the person i loved, probably the only one, died. my life, on the air of a special analysis edition of the big game, as we move from the past to the present to the future, i am very worried that incompetence is the tendency to be overly optimistic

about one's capabilities.

in washington on the national security council cannot help but understand that such ukrainian acts, with such a presence of the cia on the territory of ukraine that moscow will inevitably believe that this is not only kiev, but that it is also...

the cia, since its creation in 1947, they always say: “we will do , whatever, people will die" and so on. nothing will happen to us, this impunity, it is in their blood, it is built into the system, it is part of the system, secondly, when you fight wars with the wrong hands, as, for example, in this case, in fact

this is a war between the usa and russia, but it is underway by the hands of ukrainians. so, those people, ah, with the hands whom you fight, they commit many different actions, and you do not fully control them. i understand that sometimes ukrainians do some terrible things, probably the americans and even the tsarushki would not like it very much, they do not fully support it, but they do not control their puppets, this is what is happening now, for example, in israel, israelis are killing thousands of civilians, palestinian civilians, and innocent people.

us abandons diplomacy, excludes the possibility of diplomatic contacts, conducts secret, so-called covert operations, and i think this is the most dangerous, the most terrible, because they destabilize the situation not only in other countries. they use lies, this generally destabilizes all world diplomacy, world politics, but we understand the consequences of all this very well, at least in russia,

the russian leadership clearly understands what is happening, but we see that this irresponsible approach is being passed on to others, ukrainians are now saying we can do whatever you want, there are no boundaries, the leader is already... given the state of american diplomacy now, everything that is happening now, any catastrophe, all this is starting to happen, because you find yourself

in a room where there is no not a single adult, everyone does whatever they please, which is why this is especially dangerous.

what i fear is that washington will confuse strategic restraint with weakness, and will not understand that russia, that they are pushing russia, they are pushing russia, to go to very drastic steps that would not be in the interests of the united states. all i can say at the end of our conversation is,

firstly, thank you very much for your time, for the fact that you explained to us so well everything that is happening in russian-american relations, well, then, we’ll see from there , what you said, i don’t see much reason for optimism, but at least it is very important to understand, most of them are shocked by what is

happening today, i really hope that the russian leadership, the chinese leadership, other countries will take a pause and understand that the whole world is now saying that we do not want nato expansion, we do not want one giant to reign in the world, we do not want anyone to change regimes in other countries. the united states is increasingly finding itself in diplomatic isolation, it is not russia that has found itself in isolation, it is the united states that has found itself in isolation, it is accustomed to consider itself the rulers of the world, now it turns out that no one at the un supports or shares the position of the united states, so i hope that the united states will over time, they will come to their senses and reconsider their position. russia is not alone; russia

enjoys the support of the world community. many countries say: “we also don’t want the whole world to be divided into military blocs, we don’t want nato to expand, we don’t want the cia to organize secret operations to change the regime in other countries. we don’t want to live in such a situation.” situation. so, yes, it's a faint hope, but still a hope. thanks for this. optimistic saw - these are really serious circumstances, which, firstly, of course, give hope to moscow, and which i hope. will give at least some dose of realism to the white house in washington. thank you again, i hope to see you again on our air soon. let's go to advertising. agreed. thank you, dmitry. i am

the grandson of a manufacturer, i can do everything. but all i have to do is come to any group, perform there, and everyone else goes down. through the night on saturday at first, the snow is still white in the fields, and the waters are already rustling in the spring, running, waking up the sleepy shore, running, shining and shouting, they shout to

all ends, spring is coming, spring is coming, we are young spring messengers, she's on... words ahead, what, where, when, the spring series of games, on sunday on the first, the big game is on the air, we continue to discuss.

i haven't had time to read it yet. vladi nikolaevich, nato was created 75 years ago, and many say that nothing has changed since then, as nato was created against, but then not russia, but the soviet union, so it remains today, an extremely anti-russian organization. on the other hand, in the world there is... as always, some kind of duration, some elements of the legacy of what happened before, and well, they happen change. if you look at what happened when the nato organization was created, it included 12 states, today nato includes 32

states, then nato.

deprived the united states of its monopoly on nuclear weapons, the collapse of the soviet union gave nato, it seems to me, a certain illusion that the situation in the world had changed radically, and a new... russia, which, so to speak, no one was ever going to let into nato, regardless of the illusions that

the then russian leadership had, or maybe they didn’t have them, it’s hard to say, but the new russia is a much weaker substance that can be crushed in the end, including by approaching its borders an infinite number of times and actually forcing it to capitulate, well, not in the military sense, but to capitulate as...

we didn’t have to deal with the soviet union at its head with stalin, they were dealing with the soviet union, which had established fairly tight control over eastern europe. one can say a lot that the soviet union had serious reasons to establish this control after the tragic lessons of the second world war, but nevertheless it was installed.

with american actions to integrate several zones, the western zones of germany against the interests of the soviet union, but nevertheless there was a blockade of berlin. and i knew some people who were then involved in the creation of nato. george cannon, his successor and harsher critic paul nitz. and they all told me that when nato was created, they were really afraid of the soviet union, you can disagree with them, but at least

you can understand their logic, it seems to me it is necessary, here is vladimir, when i look at the current situation, i don’t believe, i don’t believe that nato is afraid of the soviet union, which no longer exists, there is russia, a completely different country with different opportunities, why does nato continue to move to the east? well, by the way, you haven’t yet mentioned the enormous popularity of leftist ideas, because the left led the resistance to nazism when, in the same year forty-eight, there were parliamentary elections in italy, the americans were seriously afraid that the left would take power through parliamentary means, through elections in italy, and even, as far as i understand, consider options for, so to speak, military intervention, if suddenly the left comes to power, and you see, i think that’s the main reason. in fact, it is the same thing that underlies, well, in a certain sense , the creation of nato. you correctly said that the soviet union, of course, was more, so

to speak, powerful and caused more fears, yes, and the doctrine of the world revolution, although it was, so to speak, relegated to the background, but it was archived, it was , yes, yes, but let's look at it this way, probably the parties, because when the second world war ended, before america... what to do with the huge military-industrial complex, with the huge army that existed by that time, it had to be either radically reduced or preserved, but for this it must there was a very serious motivation, the soviet threat, which was presented as an alternative, maybe even to the nazi threat, hence, by the way, all these intellectual studios about totalitarianism, german totalization, stalinist totalitarianism and so on, here reflection... and the parallels between the soviet union and germany that were being drawn at that moment, they provided the rationale for preserving this huge military and military-industrial

potential when the soviet union collapsed in the ninety-first year.

not only their interests, but also their voice, now with the emergence of all these new countries, well , in general, the organizational principles come from washington, so nato has really become a political instrument for the united states, or is this an exaggeration? no, that's absolutely true, we're talking about that nato created 12 states, but by the time of the collapse of the soviet union. there were 16 of them, yes, well, let’s add the gdr, which in the nineties, so to speak, entered automatically, 16-17, now there are two more of them, it turns out like this, but this is a traditional scheme of diluting, that means, the votes of shareholders, yes, when small shareholders join in, who, so to speak, are ready to faithfully serve the main shareholder, against this background, of course, the voices of all the major players

are leveled out, but it must be said, at the same time, that... to express points of view that were during the creation of nato. and, as far as i understand, at that moment the task of this, this kind of total consolidation was not set. after all, the point was that nato countries, i mean, 1949, must come together at the moment when it is necessary to invoke the fifth article of the charter, that is , when it is necessary to jointly repel some kind of attack. in all other respects

, the positions were still being adjusted and the positions being created were still being adjusted. they either took a more moderate position towards the soviet union than the united states the states, or at least did not incite the united states to take a more aggressive position, are now close to the borders of russia, sometimes just on the borders of russia, as it seems to me, a whole category of nato countries has appeared that perceive this organization not

as defensive.

an aggressive organization, and not just directed against russia, but truly russophobic, not against russian foreign policy, but against russia as a whole, well , it is, but the only thing that seems to me is that we shouldn’t delude ourselves, i think, that these are only our former partners in the warsaw pact and even the former soviet republics of the baltic and the soviet union are like pugs who happily bark an elephant, it seems to me that if there had not been political will in this regard from washington, they might have would not have acted like that, it seems to me that they are still doing a common job one way or another, after all, these

attacks perform their function in solving the common tasks set by washington, and i think that in the classic period of the cold war, americans might even have it is difficult to find countries in europe that could perform the functions of such barking people... russia must be destroyed, what does he mean, he is either, so to speak, a clown in

the political arena, yes, or he is a dangerous maniac who can provoke, maybe he is a dangerous clown, or maybe he is a dangerous clown, yes, and which can provoke very serious consequences, simply irreversible and the fact that he does not receive feedback from western countries... they very much emphasized their national independence, their sovereignty, incomplete sovereignty, naturally under the patronage of the united states, but still sovereignty.

it seems to me that now, in connection with globalization, in connection with the emergence in addition of nato, the common market of the european union, as a result of this, a new global elite has emerged and emerged.

then europe, with which the united states, of course, worked more closely for longer than with post-soviet russia in this regard, of course, received a completely new globalist elite, which, of course, practically does not think in terms of its own territories, their own countries, at least remembers them only at the time of elections and then only for a pragmatic electoral purpose, this is the evolution of nato, especially. you talked about the period after

the cold war, it was an objective process, it was something connected with, if you like, the evolution of the world economy, with globalization, or maybe there was something that russia did wrong, and russia bears some responsibility for turning nato into this arrogant russophobic organization. well, you know, it seems to me that russia at that moment did. even more than was worth doing in order to somehow get closer to the western world, including its military-political component, let's remember how in 1992 boris yeltsin, speaking in congress, declared that communism had collapsed , that now russia is completely different, that he, as the president of new russia, is ready to interact with the americans in every possible way, god bless america, he said and...

he also added russia, realizing that, so to speak, to bless america alone in his status somehow not very decent, but it turned out that despite all the disposition of the then russian elites, democrats, liberals, who came to power on the wave of the overthrow of the communist party, the communist system, it turned out that their complacent impulse towards the west, the west not needed, they are ready.

prominent political scientists, specialists in russia and more broadly in international relations, and i had just returned from moscow, and i was given the opportunity, like other participants, to express my opinion, i said, that the expansion of nato, this clearly seems to be a serious threat to russia, but i said that at least for now this expansion, if only not...

and said in a friendly manner, dmitry, this is natural, this is what they should tell you in moscow, but i am talking with russian officials, she named the name of a very responsible russian official, they, of course, are against nato expansion, they do not approve of american pressure on yugoslavia, they give...

one or another decision has been made, so to speak , not symbolic, but practical, it’s hard to even imagine, so on the one hand, you are of course right, on the other hand, it seems to me that you also need to understand that... russia at that moment was so weak and what is called military-technically and from the point of view in terms of understanding her growth, her role and place in world politics,

i honestly cannot imagine a scenario where albright would receive a harsh response from officials. well, she received a tough answer from primakov, but primakov i had my own problems with president yeltsin. we are where we are today, the situation, of course, is very very alarming, fortunately, besides nato there is china, fortunately, besides nato there is india, fortunately, besides china there is brix, and there is a completely different russia than it was

in ninety in '99. vladi nikolaevich, thank you very much for this conversation, for your time, we hope to see you soon. you on our air, thank you, it was a great game, we will be on air again next week, i’m happy when i develop every day, when i wake up and know that something new awaits me during the day, when we get together with the whole family and make dumplings with potatoes, cooking, this is my hobby, you could say my hobbies - this is travel, this is my favorite ice hockey, i have a dacha, which has turned into paradise, into a flower garden, i am proud of it,

i started going to drawing classes, and i put my paintings at an exhibition, do music, do art, this is very cool, i i love you all, i love you very much fishing, because there is a volga in rybinsk, be happy, find good in every second of your life. in a foreign land i observe religiously. native custom of antiquity, i release a bird into the wild on the bright holiday of spring, i became available for consolation, why should i grumble at god, when i could give freedom to at least one creature.