the, the, [000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to worlds, of course, especially reading on your 8th and the russian president is making his 1st official visit to china. as the world view contestation between vista nations and the west

gifts evermore canals with all sides having passed their points of no return. whereas history having now well to discuss that now joined by. so that'll a piano editor in chief of a restaurant in foreign affairs magazines, and research director of develop the discussion club. so account of it's always a great pleasure for me to talk to you. thank you very much for your time. thank you very much. then for me now the choice of china as the destination out for blinding and put in the visit after renewing his term is not really surprising. and the other thing there is some point in 6, and i've given the nature of the historical moment. how is the russian chinese relationship now different from, let's say, 6 years ago. the 1st of all the visit is not the surprise of you right to the said a and this is uh, which is response to last year's visit of uh, the chairman's isn't been to to,

to moscow. and that was his 1st visit after the official integration as the head of state. so put you in the base of the return as for a relationship compared to 6 years ago, 6 years ago, russia had much more diversified picture of international partners. now for all those reasons, this picture has been strength or, and shrinking to the lice, crystallized um, no, no, not necessarily crystalized. because 6 years ago it was a much, much broader scope of, uh, international partners. uh, how much to see are the where these are the rush. so that's another question bucks in terms of economy. russia was 6 years ago or 5 years ago,

or even 3 years ago. integral part of international global economic system, which is not the case now because of western actions to uh, to remove the russian from international economy. and this is the most important change that russia has to rely on the other very important partners. and so there are many, but china is by default, the most important because of size, because over control make potential. and because china is the biggest neighbors. now you mentioned the previous visit of president she to russia. and that time he was overheard telling, pretend that the 2 nations, or perhaps the 2 liters as pure, had and changes their lives so which the world hasn't seen in the last 100 years. and it's already been reported that on this visit, put in is going to present she with a sort of historical manuscript by russian writer in the college and the shasky

under the title of what to do, how much history plays into one big countries decide to do in coming going into the future. or you're not sure. necessity is not the most popular right to nowadays in the russia. but apparently he is one of the favorites by a few. uh, maybe maybe, but uh, this is, this is quite an interesting distinction. uh, interesting difference because and the subsidy was part of, uh, um, any, uh, uh, necessary readings during the soviet time. because certainly ask you with a disadvantage during the service to russia. and he was glorified by the soviet uh, the, the theory science. uh no, i wouldn't say that the russian moved, especially the move the rest of that issue is there a loose and that one in terms of how to organize the country. and it's rather of

the very conservative approach to uh, to uh, values to uh means how to govern how to organize the site and then disregard that. yes indeed, i think for china, which is still officially a communist country, ruled by the communist volunteer. shouldn't shift, you might be still a real event while in russia we are now in a different phase. as far as the history is concerned, a yes or no on the one hand, of course, any decision made by any state any. and it had those state uh, is being determined by culture. and the culture is determined by a historical experience history. in this regard, yes, of course, put in is very much aware of russian history. and we know that in almost any

conversation, it has with the russian audience or for an audience like a couple of months ago with tucker carlson. she a loss to refer to history. and this is very important because uh, in the very durable, in town to a disruptive world, you need to have some kind of fundamentally, but this is a very interesting point because as you mentioned, both are russia in china despite their political and governing conservatism. a sort of moving practically moving into the future. they're not afraid of the future. but when we take, for example, the united states despise despite its supposedly progressive his values. if you look at the slogans of presidential campaigns, regardless of whether they come from democrats, of the republicans. if usually about the return to the glorious past, the united states seems to be somewhat nope solid, but very much apprehensive of the future. how do you explain this better adults?

uh, you know, the big specialist on the domestic situation in the united states. but i would say the current mood is even more complicated because yes, indeed, we see every here, many politicians and united states referring to the glorious past, ronald reagan, whatever. well, even the democrats build battery, i mean the, the, the, how much forward has you can, we also have so much more forward. there can be at the same time, you know, uh, my feeling moving from far away is that the society in the united states or probable establishment to do much space. they are rather very much afraid of the past because they change the past all the time. the new approach to history is still appropriate is to, to make it compatible to uh, 2 principals are more um, more, oh uh,

stance is more points uh, as they are and this through today. not historically see. and for me, it's a very strange demand because you, you basically undermine your past in order to make the contemporary situation more gathering the bo, if i understand correctly what the american politicians are doing. now i think one of the biggest challenges of our times, both on individual and collective levels is to move fast, but also at the same time to stay grounded then this is what history allows you to do and also to be picky about to your priorities and i think in the past the west in the united states in particular weren't rather considerate and deliberate about um, you know, the risks or the implants, but nowadays they sort of moved to america to us and emissions of the same time. well, having little grounding, as you pointed out how to explain that the willingness to be sort of on top of

everything while dire resources are clearly not there. it's quite understandable because we leave as chairman, she told fortune a year ago, relief in the period of unprecedented and pretty rare changes a profound changes. it's not like cosmetic that does formation, i'd updates and of our life. this is a profound change of how the world is functioning. it's not even jewel politics. there's nothing about the struggle between great bowers, which is a state that in the us national security concepts. there's just a little part of that. because in effect, we see a norm of changes in how society is being corbin. so losing. but when that, when you sit and then assess the dates, you have a strategy about, you know,

which battles you, you pick up whether you fight with the geneticist or does this, how, how strategy would share from my point to you is a substitute. when you don't know how to address real challenges to real problems, then you need to find problems which you believe you can address and then uh, a rush. i try and i are on the manageable problem to address more manageable them them than the societal ones. i wonder if history and historical knowledge at the end of the day is not just the fascination of the leaders, but something that allows letters to have grounding and how to manage their own societies. oh absolutely. it's 63 of the difficult um, the, in this regard, united states as they will have its own problems. russia is not immune from enormous challenges either. we see that i'm the one hand

a history and the tradition are absolutely indispensable to keep, to keep going to, to, to have this ground for development at the same time. of course, if you try to implement a tradition, as you understand the past for the present and the future, it will not work because the edition should be adapted to edition is a setup of, of values not set that police are most how to address issues. got current issues and then disregard a each nation. each country tries to find uh, their own set, top of, of, of instruments. a rather unsuccessful the, they would say, not speaking about different instruments. your role with recently the most convincing and not only aligned and our role to you, but also quite distinct about how they approach their intentions with, with the west, at least on a tactical level. what are some of the main differences between most current vision

or the main difference is very clear, a china is not just a barcode global economy, it's one of the low. so i've been global economy rationally is not at this point because russia is struggling to, to nothing to regain but to keep the place which it occupies. and the russia, because of our conflict, i'll say, can afford to be to be more flexible and more creative. these are the new rules imposed by, by the links a group of countries that will link you can or cannot, can. yeah. because who the who can go exactly where i live in my shoes anymore. they, they, they, they, they, i mean, the west, the, the almost able to sing, they cool it in terms of economics, of located sanctions and vargas and so china isn't

a completely different position at china needs a pretty smooth economic development to address domestic issues which are which are meeks, we drop huge. and in this regard, we see that the political level, a chinese and russian approaches are 3 to a similar, not completely similar, but pretty similar. but when it comes to the economy, of course, china thinks about its own interest. and not about the russian interest in the 1st time. and that means in practical terms just now for example, and but i think it will be discussed when food jim comes to badging that the chinese companies, especially changes banks are extremely cautious to put it mildly when it comes to business with russia, because they don't want to become subjects or for become all the object sofa. you are 2nd,

there was sanctions. and this is not because they dislike russia or they don't share russian exploration, but they think about their own interest, which are different. now. uh so again, every have to be a little bit different at this point of time because we need to take a short break, but we will be back in just a few moments extension the the welcome back to one of the parts vis federal account that the editor in chief of russia in global affairs magazines is to look at them before the break. you

mentioned that the the chinese are far more cautious about how they deal with the west and both sides. and they live service to responsibly managing their competition. but on the other hand, it's pretty visible that mutual irritation is growing and there has been, you know, a succession of the american leaders visiting china. and it's pretty clear that their reception is sometimes it's not what they expect to guess. my question to you is looking at the same american relationship. how much of it is due to the objective nature of the differences and how much of it is due to the communicative style that uh, both beijing or washington choose to practice is every one. another cute, communicative style is important, and in this regard, i thing that uh, american style and chinese style are 2 extremes. so to say the,

we can see collision of 2 completely different approaches to how into nursing, a release and should be conducted as far as the american style. american way of diplomacy is concerned. of course it as it sounds. and it looks a little bit strange when the american high were presented to be, it's a secretary of state or even president of the united states meets the chinese consul part. and the little this wish the old us agenda used to improve relationship to stabilize. what was the old risk for new or part of your not the, you know, the oldest of them for americans because they say that we need, we need to normalize. we need to stabilize, maybe not to improve but to stabilize. with this intention they come. but the same time,

the start to talk about start to see the changes. but we once do it to have better relationship, but you should not do this. you should know that you should be aware that if you do this, we will. so it's not that very much friendly approach. secondly, uh that's uh like, like a joke already. that for example, secretary of state has meeting with chinese which got smaller or less. okay. same day or the next day president by them speak somewhere and says that the presidency is a dictator and we know this. so it's very difficult to comprehend. actually for do you think that matters for the chinese? i mean, do they, uh, uh, pay any attention to that or does it affect substantive politics? because, i mean, they may express outrage and public, but does, it doesn't affect the way they deal with america. i think it does affect how they

deal, but chinese are very much different from us. for example, from russians, they are very patient and they accumulate, they accumulate and they, they make notes. and of course it before. and so long term approach and the long term agenda for change. so i think the chinese are very much aware that the legal term perspective or the long term perspective of their relationship with the united states is a very harsh concept. maybe not necessarily war, but the very harsh competition. they know that now they, they didn't. uh, they were not that sure say 5 years ago, but now the noise. but at the same time, yes, they are very keen to look is if they these regard because yes, they want,

they really want to stabilize relationship at this point. and the yeah they, they are in the way much more sophisticated. they indicate that they not this, but they do as if they can, so to say, communicate and corporate to any way. but again, that's a very, a very visible and old is a discrepancy in the approaches cultural approach is not just about diplomacy. and there are many other countries who are watching this interaction. i think this is a new phenomenon of recent years. have sort of sitting on defense in many countries and do it in very in different ways. the way, let's say united arab emirates balance is very different from the way turkey balances and many other countries. can you talk a little bit more about this proactive form of diploma seals sitting on the fence and what of the risks and the opportunities that it allows you know,

i wouldn't call it soothing and the sense because sitting on the fence is a passive approach. what is happening in international relations nowadays, how actors behave and bills ask those are multiple we see much more much more active of countries middle sized countries which have a real influence on the international relations much more than before. because years ago we have okay, couple of countries are those where the my to the gold was yours, it was a rather silent. now the global majority is not silent anymore with the global majority says that we have our interest there see thing on defense in, in, in one sense they,

they don't want to join any sides in competitions or wars on conflicts which they don't believe are the or so okay, now are there many countries who don't want to be at from both under these great power rivalry, but there's one particular exception, which is ukraine that wants to be a ride in the midst of the, of the fire 2 years into the conflict in the country, how do you understand the current ukrainian calculus and the how those changed in any way given the, the loss of the last 2 years. i don't think the go go's changed and one of them that i don't believe that this, particularly the issue uh can afford to change the go calculus because they made the ones they, they, they, they put everything on one state to when uh, honestly, they cannot do it the what's the create, the august, the read,

the whole situation. i mean, idea logically, political, economic only in military terms, evidencing in the weight which doesn't allow them to back doesn't allow them to, to change the position. because now initial point, not, not even by the landscape by ukrainian presidents, i would say, you know, the gates ago, the initial point was that we have to break with russia and to join and other than that. so now the discussion whether it was wise or not, or thoughtful in reckless whatever, or even possible or even possible. but this happens. and then during the uh, the $22000.00 pounds and that escalated all the time. and that led to, to the conflict which we witnessed now. and since this idea prevailed,

that the only way for ukraine to survive is to join the west to join florida. mother the default of the, during the listing institution. and that means that uh, at least for this rolling group, there is no other option, but to fight or whatever uh, the price for the the nation will be. so that's why i, you, you of, so to the right that to green is, it'd be the exception from the global threat. and the global defense is to be, to try to much, to, to try to maneuver and to try to even money purely but not to get the hear about self preservation for. yeah, exactly, exactly. it's not the case with you claim and unfortunately i'm, i'm afraid that the consequences for this nation will be disastrous. now, the worst is now organizing of conference in switzerland to discuss the conflict and ukraine and russia is not invited. and yeah, there is an attempt to give this a, if on some sort of,

for international representation and legitimacy. how do you understand the purpose, how, why would the other side be motivated by something like this? at this point? you know, the purpose of organize, this is absolutely clear. and it's 22 purposes. one purpose is to legitimize the landscape because we know that to formally, it has some problem. she is official term expires in may. and after that, uh that so legally bait whether she still remains the legitimate presence on not the bait, not the internationally, but to be domestic. and which is much more important because legitimacy is about domestic situation, not about international recognition. so of the, i'm sorry, this is an attempt by a friend so far as a man skin sense of care to today steve up to demonstrate that he's still the

absolutely legitimate, powerful head of state leader of the nation. second, uh, what division is the demo straight to create and that's most viewed to create an image that every body is for a peaceful solution, bought the russian. and that's why participation of this was majority of countries absolutely essential. that's why china is desperately being repeatedly invited by ukrainians by suisse, by americans. and so, and that's why chinese are so far at least very em again, very cautious whether to participate in this. uh, this is a game action. it's not the above piece. of course, i heard to say recent that a major obstacle to any substantive peace negotiations. it is that the russian, the west understand the cost of the valley for this conflict in very different terms. why would that even matter? at this point, given the, you know,

the profound changes on the ground that would matter at this point or at some later point. because of sooner or later, it should come to some kind of abuse, be stuck open, close to a secret official, whatever. and the question is about what to and this is the main difference that for the west and for do you agree they the promote it very much. this is in for always stick war by pull to well that but that's just rhetoric do things. yeah. yeah, no, no, no, no, i the, i don't believe it's just rhetoric, i think for your convenience and for meeting the west. this is a really good deals attempt to just gain the territory, destroy it. con 3 of which russian lead the many in russia sees us historical bunch

of russians so on. and so that's about you agree. so negotiation shouldn't be about to create a russian position. and i think this, this should be emphasized very much the cost was bailey was not to create the customer's bailey, was expansion on it. right. the wrong way. we can discuss it. but russia received expansion of nature as a vital existence of trapped directions, security and uh, it must be repeated once again that the russia said that many, many times since the mid $9.00 to $9.00 to sexually when, when nathan lot of them started no longer, no one cares about this, no one, no one wanted to listen. and if we believe that the, the whole issue is about to ukraine. it's one type of negotiations which russia will not be engaged in easily belief as russians think. and as i

share this view that the, the, the causes bailey and the issue was about naples, which means about security in the security arrangements in europe. that's completely another thoughtful dialogue with a completely different set up of participants. well, mr. ok let's we have to leave it there. thank you very much for your time. and thank you for watching hope to see her again on the walls of parts. the

russian states never as tired as i'm one of the most sense community. best of all sense of the speed, the one else calls question about this, even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin media mission, the state on russia to day and split the ortiz full neck. even our video agency, roughly all the band on youtube, the question, did you say stephen twist, which is the, the,

the, the bush, them visit the mission that this 32. and you see the exaggeration, your visit here has eliminated the whole world with a flurry of reports and publications. apparently, everyone understands that the future of today's rapidly changing world largely depends on the position of rushing china and based on the results of your negotiations. here in china, i wanted to find out whether most going badging have a common understanding of what this future system. i'll put your national security and international politics you'd be like. thank you just to a hutch republic related to the, to the 1st of all, i would like to think chinese president, she didn't thing and the entire chinese leadership for their invitation and for