all who are who suffered or did not adhere to log down. and therefore the pandemic had much greater effect in these countries. and richard countries, that's $12.00 and a one percent i believe i, we may differ but lot downs have a lot to do with why it's stopped on one percent. hm. well, i mean, again, i guess what we have to do is check the official statistics for the johns hopkins to run a virus institute that was by the way, to meet you to the, on a who's a, a spokesperson for these thoughts out or foremost, democratic function joining us as dimitry on the right screen, right this fall last is i called the political analysts from south to down. and in the middle, the big thought, all kind of global defense, i'm list from nigeria to all 3 of you gentlemen. it's been a pleasure. thank you so much for joining us here. thank you. thank you. thank you for joining us as well for this program life and the mother ship and must go we all back soon. with the

take a fresh look around. there's a life kaleidoscopic, isn't just a shifted reality distortion by power, tired vision with no real opinions. fixtures designed to simplify will confuse really one say better wills. and is it just as a chosen for you? fractured images, presented as 1st. can you see through their allusions, going underground can the, what's the, what's about the special that here's a direct quote from your address of the west is trying to drag us into

a new arms are easy to wear us down and repeat the tread is that they successfully used in the 1982 in the ussr says, how much margin of safety do we have here and made an arms race clinic? one of these is up, us pushed this message to get the maximum return on every rouble invested in defense. indeed, the soviet union was not thrifty about military spending. and unfortunately, she efficiency was not the top priority in defense spending offices was about 13 percent of the g d. i will not cite already of the quote, i stuck on international peace research institute for last year. or defendable of them the last 4 percent especially i'm so i'm this year i'm going it is 6.8 percent on us. so then we have gone up by twos point bites, percentage points. in principle, this is a noticeable increase, but it is absolutely not critical. thanks well done. the soviet union was 13 percent. and we are now at 6.8 percent for science consumables. i must say that

defense spending to reinvigorate, so we economy. and of course, there are many schools and we are aware of that this goes back to the guns versus butte a dilemma. although i repeat that our modern, the defense industry is a boon for the is new support from an implicit impact on civilian industries at honda service for innovation is needed for defense to produce civilian products. so crucial. what 1st of all our spending of course, is just to draw compared to that of the united media. 800000000000. we sent. so to $900000000000.00. yes. would you be 900 to 8? 6870. yeah, yes. it's absolutely not terrible to have kind of the simplest that you most nation that's cool thing for me. cause a lot of investment and kickbacks going on there because they don't have hypersonic weapons or whatever. they left him feeling if this is or not out to you, they spend a huge amount of money on maintaining their military and not only on pay in that's

but also $1.00 of the maintenance of bases around the world. it's like a black hole, really. you kind of account how much you spend actually, that's where the bulk of the money is. what siphoned off criteria, right? although the production of lethal weapons and arguments, some general take so much money that is difficult to estimate social take, for example, they're widely advertised missile defense and our inter continental missile oven garbage should. one of the main components that we may use to overcome their missile defense. so certainly schedule the costs are simply not comparable. and we have essentially neutralized their advantages and investment of the file in a sense if this is how we need to add this. but of course, without any doubt at the economics of our armed forces deficient must meet the requirements of industry. at least studies can a, historically, it's quite obvious that nazi regimes do not disappear on their own. it is but as a result of military festival, this was the case in germany in italy, in advance does the same way. obviously it be true of depend there and not see

regime and non cream your point, and now we're advancing all along the front line. so, judging by the records from both the ministry of defense and not in a war, correspondent still hasn't been possible to find that by these have particularly where we can sustain fewer losses on the offensive rather than in dfcs. i admitted this quite a non trivial task for the worst strategist, but it always hold on back. defensive shame. i mean spar in our her road soldiers. how can we advance like the minimum casualty? because that's so many my memory is a valid and legit the question is but the, the answer is also simply we need to increase the destructive power of our weapons as well as which number and the efficiency of our personnel and assets. it also involves a technical and army aviation, even our strategic areas. so certainly it shall apply to those components that are suitable for armed conflicts of this kind of companies are ground based weapons including high precision weapons artillery and armored vehicles in the us. and we

are enhancing our capabilities and by leaps and bounds, which in this area. if that is exactly what is happening, that is the answer to your question. the more powerful and the greater amount of weapons we have to see where the casualties his boundary dimension, style products don't match the question of what price we are willing to pay for the whole project for me as well. maybe the word does not fit in here, but for this historic challenges that we have been forced to face up. so we have to remember every human life is priceless. every single one and the loss of a loved one for a family, for any family, is a tremendous grief. it's a girl. but the question boils down to our mission and how we define it smokeless. what is our mission was done? during our meeting earlier, one of the participants talked about the surprise that they experienced when they learned that the standard stories at home to russians just like us. if we came to

help these people see if this comes up, that's basically the answer to the question. if we abandon these people today, our losses would increase many times over tomorrow and our children you'll have no future thoughts because we will feel insecure. we will be a 3rd or 4th last country, and no one will respect us if we cannot defend ourselves. and the consequences could be catastrophic for the russian state. that's the language mister putting on to the american seem to talk about negotiations about strategic stability. but at the same time, they declare the need causal to inflict a strategic defeat on ruddy or nearby our position is that we're also good negotiations. but at the same time, the time for goodwill gestures has passed to go with them. so will there be no negotiations? with me because we have never refused to negotiate without goodwill gestures, without compromise. what will it look like that, but as previously to that, i will try to explain and we have negotiations in the system will talk. you have

already said this many times, i have to repeat it again. i will do it. what's more, we negotiate this from the other side, which means we came up with a sick volume for now a document. i'm actually a 3 to a draft and figure out where to go and the extract from this treaty it is available we did with the initial by the head of the negotiating group from the ukranian side . mr. or how many i see the one that he did it took, it has his signature going on the group here. we have it in the executive officer, but then it is known as mr. how many of himself told the world publicly. also at a meeting with journalists, including foreign journalists, accept the former british prime minister. mister johnson came and dissuaded them to finally simon respectively execute disagreement and raised a topic that you have just mentioned. that the russian needs to be, defi, it, on the battlefield, states that are we really think negotiations? yes, we are ready, but only ready for negotiation. that is not all based on some of the desires, after the use of psycho tropic drugs. but based on the realities that have evolved,

as they say, in such cases on the ground, i see that as a 1st, i think secondly, we have been promised many times that the nato will not expand to the east. and then we see them at a lower speed. they promised us to, if we do not go too deep into history, that the internal conflict in ukraine would be resolved peacefully in yes, not with the, as we remember, 3 foreign ministers came to keith from poland, germany, and france york. they promised that they would be guarantors of these agreements. it looks like it's a day later, there was included the whole and then they promised to fulfill the minutes agreements different and then publicly announced that they were not going to fulfill these promises, but only took a pause to arm the band direct regime. we were promised a lot of things, so from us, this alone are not enough in between associate now only because they are running out of ammunition is somehow ridiculous on our part. nevertheless,

we are ready for a serious conversation and we want to resolve all conflicts and particularly this conflict by peaceful nation. but we must clearly and distinctly understand that this is not the cause of the enemy wants you to take for rearmament . but a serious conversation with guarantees for the security of the russian federation. and we are aware of the various options that are being discussed. we know the carrots that are going to be shown to us in order to convince us that the right moment has come. we want these, i repeat once again to resolve all disputes, and this dispute is a conflict in particular of why peaceful means and we are ready for that. just be sure you want to do that. but it should be a serious conversation with security assurances for the warrant party. in this case, we are primarily interested in the security of the russian federation. we will proceed from this premise, jewish mr. prudence and i think we are looking

a little too noble or good. will it turn out that they will once again to see of us and we will console ourselves with a factor? we are honest and then we have received us. that is our destiny to remain fools all the time. what she has, when ever since the americans mentioned metals in the 90s, for winning the cold war, all these decades have been decades of fig lives. so how can we even hope that they will go? and finally, make an honest deal with us that they will honor and with guarantees for us. how do you even deal with them stuff? do you really believe that this is possible? yeah, i hate to say who else are the lead on it once, but we need that and the some of the guarantees must be spells. that would be good us. they must be guarantees that would suit us and that they wouldn't believe in. this is what we are talking about, but now it is probably pretty much or doesn't have to be told publicly about what it could be for. absolutely, we're not buying any kind of just empty messages. yeah, place to us. i'm afraid you're going to be quoted in an expansive way and you're

willing to trust no one at all. but where are you referring to western partners in this case, when you say you trust? no one. no, i prefer to be guided by fact. so rather than by well meaning statements and talk about trusting everyone like individual se when you make a decision at this level, the degree of responsibility for the consequence of the decision is very high and showed you where that is why we will not do anything that is not in the interest of our country nationwide by the way, what is wrong with president across the road? i see completely lost his mind. he said he is going to send the french troops to fight us, but i was. and now we looks like a gaelic rooster getting ready for an glock by scaring the daylights out of europeans. how do we even respond to? so the thing is right in the western military, so i haven't been present in ukraine for years now. going back as early as every go ukraine. although after the cool, the numbers have grown exponentially. each of these days, westerners get involved in the conflict, both openly. as military advisors,

and as for and mercenary, see they are suffering losses. but if we talk about foreign troops being sent there officially by foreign countries, i am convinced that it will not change the reality on the battlefield. and that is what matters. just like arms deliveries and we use the change that age by your form . my 2nd point is it size can lead to major geo political consequences. say polish troops enter the territory of ukraine, use the stated. so we're creating another route in border or take positions and other areas to give you credit into the reason for this to engage in combat operations on the miles content. and should that happen? i don't think that told us troops whatever, want to leave the human to go to the lecture to my gosh, this way because they will want to recover their october. and that's their dream of something. i don't know if you see us to recover the land that they consider, historically polish lands that were once taken from the matter of nations. the

royalty for joseph style, interest and handed over to ukraine target. that's of course they want them back and then a whole ish military unit to enter these areas. they are never going to leave. but then other countries could follow safety to those that lost some of their territories as a result of world war 2. and i think that ukraine would have to face a very serious geo political consequence of a few things, including some that could threaten its state, holding its current generation, the going back to manual. i'm a crown, which could it be that he decided to take revenge on russia after we step on his toes in africa. so instead of just sitting there and taking it like good little boys, probably didn't expect us to be so sort of didn't the youngster. i think it will be some grudge on his part because by the different when we were in direct contact with him, we spoke quite openly about this subject. i mean, we didn't go to africa and we didn't try to drive friends out of the content and the problem lies and elsewhere. it has to do with the famous wagner. at 1st i've

carried out a number of economic operations in syria and then it moved to other countries in afternoon. when i, the defense ministry, assisted them in some way, but only based on the fact that it was a russian group. nothing more in the model. we never pushed anyone out of africa. good. he's going to story and simply the matter of african leaders signing contracts with russian authorized economic operators. and you can, when you were wanting to do business with them, and not wanting to do business with differentiate. in fact, it wasn't even our own initiative. you know, what i said was our african friends who brought it back to me. why would any one hold a grudge against us for that? i have no idea sunday, if an independent state wants to develop relations with its foreign partners, including russia. if it wants to build ties with russia, we didn't touch any of the former french colonizers in these african countries. and i'm being completely serious here because in many former french colonies just now, people don't really enjoy doing business with their, their former masters. and it has nothing to do with us, nothing whatsoever. and you know, it must be convenient to take offense at someone. and i'll also let you know,

or in your own thoughts. perhaps this acute and rather emotional reaction on the part of the french president has to do with the ongoing development and some of the african countries. although i do know that some african states see the percents of the french as completely normal and say that yes, they are ready to work with the french. and while some countries don't want to do it, it has nothing to do with russia. we're not in sitting anything or fitting anyone against france. that's never been a goal for us. and the goal is to be honest, we don't even have a specific state level policy to develop stronger ties with africa. we're just friends focused on that's all. they want to build deeper relations with us, and we welcome that and we're always ready to meet them halfway. there is nothing to be upset about. now they say in france that there are no more red lines left with regard to russia that nothing is on the table isn't every thing as an altima. we hear how they want to speak with us in terms of a balance of power. and we hear a lot of weird things coming from france from the west. in general, from lithuania,

the voices are somewhat distant. but overall, of the course, sounds hostile or perhaps we too could go for an unconventional option and invite say, the $2000000.00 strong north korean army in exchange for our new cars or umbrella, over half the korean peninsula. why not? and what to look for one thing, the democratic people's republic of korea has its own nuclear umbrella. they haven't asked for our health in that respect. secondly, as we see it today, based on the progress we've made on the battlefield, we are quite capable of accomplishing the tasks that we sent for 76. as for the countries that claim, they have no red lines in dealing with russia. i suggest that they should realize that russia likewise will not have any red lines of dealing with my tests for the smaller states in europe. first off, we treat them all with respect, no matter what. and secondly, when these smaller nations called for a tougher policies, awards, russia, and demand other, please take extreme measures against us, including the deployment of troops and so on. they only do that because they know

they won't have to face the consequences of their provocative rental purchase. as for the ones who do, they behave in a much more restrained manner. and rightly so, let's and all that plastic of germany's tourist missiles, the german chancellor hold off, schultz said they won't supply much with our forces that insist on supply and taurus to crane. the british came up with the initiative to supply tours missiles through the u. k. they are ready to arrange the transit. the target is the crime in britain. that's a german generals are already planning operations. they are, as we for not only against the crime in bridge, but against military base is deeper inside of the russian territory. so if somebody already says that those missiles may be used to strike the kremlin, are they getting the carried away in their dreams each time? from the 1st it's pipe dreams center and wishful thinking on their own heart seconds. they are trying to communicate us out, especially as for germany way to get them to me. there are constitutional implications for them that are in this as well. they are asking quite the right to

the place, but what if those notices just get them to part of the crime in bridge? and that is undoubtedly even in their own books, russian territory. that would be a violation of the constitution of the federal republic of germany. the thing is, the opposition of germany is even more aggressive. let's see where their mouth gets . and they're just sufficient. we are keeping an eye on that. they already use those british and us made missiles, but that doesn't change the situation on the battlefield much. i'm please, yes, they inflict a certain damage, obviously with that doesn't change the course of the facilities and the consequences that inevitably befall the opposing party. so we've been hearing a lot on russian channels, international channels in german channels as well. how many assets in germany are out of order or require update repairs and so on. let them work a couple appointments because as you rightly said, there are things they must think he should stop in front of me and then think about

smarter ones among them will stop and then start thinking i was know which can and then what about the new natal members, finland suite and what is their bargain to your political swedish for administer tobias bill storage. the recently told that purchased the waiting list, that opposed to having no faces on its territory. didn't they know the kind of club they were joining? what's happening to them or the rest of the 20th? you should ask them, i have no idea. we used to have selling it and measuring this process in the stable relations with these 2 countries in here. and i think that they gain more from being neutral. so we did it because it gave them certain advantages to meet you at the very least they could offer and negotiate any platform that was in your complex shift could be used to have an ideal relationship with finland. nice things, right? simply, ideally, we never had a single dispute, not territorial, not otherwise. we didn't even have any troops at the border with finland, and we moved them all out today. why did they choose to do what they did? and in my opinion, purely for political reason that they probably wanted to become members of the

western club to get under some kind of umbrella for the big games from the mountain and was just, frankly speaking, i don't know so, but i think it is an absolutely nonsense of a move from the viewpoint of insuring their own national interest. anyway, it's up to them yet. it was their decision when you might, we didn't have troops on that board or before, but now we will. we didn't have leap on systems there and, but now we will send for what we can nama calisha. we were on very good terms. they tapped into our market in any turn, we bought a lot of goods from dentistry. once wrong with that. but now things are going to change. many of their goods getting actually aren't really sought after another mark. and when our markets have to compensate as well, i don't understand, you know, which basic, that's a trivial thing. and that was the last thing recently is both in helsinki and especially in the border areas of finland. they accepted russian rubles, yes. even in helsinki and major supermarkets, i would,

i could buy whatever goods you wanted for. rubles, there were advertisements and russian all over the place. now there were no regions are going bankruptcy. yes, yes. but i wanted to make a different point or wisdom. let's look at the side of the comically, instead of doing very well, real estate prices were solid. economically they were doing great, but apparently there were forces in finland that were well. overly right wing, overly conservative nationally steven that didn't like that. so they dislike building these closer ties with russia. some thought it was going to far, why are these russians buying houses on our land buying apartments? and why is everything now suddenly, in russian? so i think, no, i know there was this nascent anti russian sentiment growing at the individual level. it could be that some political forces inside the country decided to take advantage of that bias and very well couldn't be all these factors some combined,

let defend one's decision. that's what i think, but i'm not a 100 percent. sure, of course. in any case, that portion of their decision certainly does not help in terms of security, both militarily, between russia and finland and in europe as a whole. in the meantime, the presidential campaign is in full swing in the united states and you seem to be a factor there, indivisible, you are there. as every canada, on the democrat or republican alike mentioned you and their speeches and arguments . in fact, the impression is your everywhere a newspaper in tv news headlines there, an argument in everyone's electoral campaign. besides, it seems like you are adding to the will to that fire sheet with i've seen that one of the candidates is preferable for us. well, if the president of a foreign country uses that in canada, in another country is preferable and then is it a classic case of election meddling? to what degree you think you're in fluency and america's elections? by saying that by the end is more desirable to you,

is it trolling or something else thrown in? can you just let me tell you one thing that will show that my preferences here haven't changed. we are not interfering in any election such as i have said many times we will work with any leader and the american people american voters elect. what is curious, know is that in the last year, tenure, president trump, now a presidential candidate, reproached me for sympathizing with vitamin over 4 years ago. he told me during one of our conversations, but excuse me, but i'm quoting him directly here. you want sleepy joe to when he told me that when he was president, later though much to my surprise, he was prosecuted because we had allegedly supported him as a candidate. well, that's utter nonsense. that was for today's election situation, that's getting more and more uncivilized. i'd like to refrain from giving any comments on the matter. i think it's obvious to anyone now that the us political system can not claim to be democratic in all senses of the word. as actually to be

honest, your preference for by and look strange to me after all in 2011. but i find food in moscow to try and talk to out of running for another presidency. or do you remember what he told her about that during his meeting with rushes opposition in the spots o house garret cost brock wrote about that later. good by and had come to the vin prime minister putting in his moscow whitehouse office to talk to him, out of running for president, threatening to stage an airbus bring in russia. otherwise, that is why i didn't wasn't a big fan of years, even back then. it's like a historical and in missing between you to write honestly, i didn't pay much attention. there was a westcott who didn't even pay much attention. there was no admitting from a customer, so it was serious to him but not to you. well, this exactly testifies this intervention in our domestics. is there another policy matters? and as we have said many times, and i said many times,

we will not allow anyone to do that. and i shall sketch. well, if we step away from election metal a lot, the escalation still continues. it looks as if the terms and per powers rush. it in the us are playing what is called chicken game in america. it's a game when 2 guys put their cars in the collision doors, and the 1st one is the square of loses. it looks like nobody swerving 1st. this time store is collision inevitable. so usa announced recently the defense of the, of us something we know what the american troops on the russian territory means. it means intervention muslims. and this is how we're going to treat it, even if they show up on the territory of ukraine. that they understand that. i said that right? and it was a man of the traditional school politics. and we see proof for that just signed by them. they have plenty of other experts in russian american relations and strategic deterrence. so i don't think we're on a collision course, but we are ready for that as well. i'm going to be birds, and i've said many times that to us it's a matter of life and death to them. it's

a matter of improving their technical standing globally and in europe in particular . so it's a matter of retaining this data among their allies. it's important but not as important as it is to us. if you say we are ready for this, for loss, for alexander, duke and an expert, and you hope all, is it a sort of directly calls for everyone to prepare for a nuclear war? saying that the more prepared we are, the lower the chances of it happening. if someone can one be prepared for it at all . are we really ready for a new to their war? so we have a differential in the military and political standpoint. we are, of course, our nuclear assets are always on constant alert us the yeah, that's one thing sustained. but the 2nd thing is that our nuclear triad is more advanced than any other ones. in fact, there are only 2 such tribes and the powers that americans and we are more advanced in this respect. our nuclear component is more advanced. while we are more or less, that's a possibility. and in terms of warhead and missile numbers, i think ours are more advanced. it is a known fact in the expert community. that doesn't mean we have to compete who has

more missiles and warheads, those who need to know when to so it experts, specialist, the military, say no to the americans now strive to advance their weapons and make new ones. there is a plan in place for that, and we know that they are updating all of their components. and so are we have to resolve? it doesn't mean though, that they are ready to unleash a nuclear war tomorrow or took well if they are. and what can we do because we already know maybe russia should conduct a nuclear test to some moment just to drive the point to these little after all, there are no international restrictions against that. there is a 3 digit book of adding such a test. but sadly, united states never ratified it. so to insure parity in this regard as we revoked our ratification as well. since the treaty was never ratified by the us, and it never came into effect due to an insufficient number of ratification. although we still adhere to its terms, we know however, that the united states contemplates the possibility of conducting such

a task. the reason for that, the reason is that when you were heads or develop new opinions, testing them and computer simulations is not enough. and the experts think that's the and there. so a real test explosion is required for things, certain circles in the us. such ideas simply do have a place that we know about that we are watching. if they conduct such a such test, i don't rule out, not necessarily as we still have to think whether we need it or not. i'm just for sure. i don't rule out the possibility of us doing the same. are we ready for that? technically, we always on this, i want to make it clear, especially as the bullet point, and those are not your conventional limits. and that's a branch of our armed forces. we have some permanent combat alert. it's the the, the

ukrainian forces attempt to reach the russian border. but i fought back in mid heavy losses with a 195 of their troops killed at times destroyed. also a head. when you wake up with, i am sure that you recognize just helps their lives. this time is for our country and what difficult challenges lie ahead of us in almost every direction. it's core, meaning is that you only use the citizens of russia can decide the future of your home. on the eve of the election, the president of ross of calls on the nations people to unite in crossville votes. and us food come limited, the volunteer spaces numerous accusations of assault rates and monday at the facilities in k. yet we're here from the rights to.