Skip to main content

tv   Worlds Apart  RT  October 25, 2022 2:30pm-3:01pm EDT

2:30 pm
injures have been more and more extreme in terms of global nuclear war. and we see just in this year that in the 10 months or so since they both made this last assessment, which was quite dire, the worst and decades it's gotten even more dangerous situation. so subjectively, we've all, i think grown up with these fears if we're paying attention, but in terms of expertise. and those who assess with great background and professional knowledge, were now at an extreme danger point, perhaps even more dangerous than 60 years ago during the cuban missile crisis. you know, i was looking through some of the letters that nikita khrushchev and john f kennedy exchanged at that time. and i was struck by the sense of shared responsibility that were in those letters. for example, president kennedy is track that the united states is very interested in diffusing
2:31 pm
tensions and limiting the arms raised general secretary khrushchev was calling for . stayed with them and suggesting that both sides need to resist as calla tory dynamics. do you think that mutual sense of both impending danger and shared beauty is present today? one of the most disturbing aspects of what we're facing now here in the autumn of 2022 is the absence of exchange of information and any semblance of authentic diplomatic dialogue where there are great differences of opinion. i have great differences of opinion with our team, for example. and yet i think some discussion about the overarching dangers of nuclear war are absolutely crucial because let me just to step back for a moment in terms of overall perspective. the best scientific information says that a thermonuclear exchange, for instance, between and i, the states in russia,
2:32 pm
would result in nuclear winter as its been called. and as a consequence, 99 percent of the human beings on this planet would die within a year. so if we step back and we say only one percent of the human beings on this planet would be alive after a few months of nuclear exchange. that helps us put in perspective, what does it steak right now? and so when we share talk list, talk coming from the kremlin about use of nuclear weapons, that is absolutely important. and i say this as somebody who has worked very strongly for decades now to oppose us. no, it's risk to oppose the us for escalation of nuclear war. and so for so let me put in to say that hiroshi and naga saki are precedents, is an absolutely unhinged and extremely dangerous statement to make. there is one
2:33 pm
of the precedents of the united states using nuclear weapons, the only country in history to do that. and when you say that, oh, do you mean? what does that mean? that means that the united states is own record of using nuclear weapons. and what you describe as he's loose talk, he never said, let's last one i gave all that ball washington. he said that russia, if pressed, will use nuclear weapons to defend its security. interesting that, that's established doctrine, but also to say in this current crisis that corrosion and nagasaki our presidents for using today. i think this is a historical i said, and then do we want to say that this, excuse me, do we want to say that the 3rd right is a precedence to we? there is precedent for all sorts of atrocities on a massive scale in this crisis. for president putin to say that her roshan, nagasaki, or precedence is a way to terrorize the world that is absolutely unacceptable. now,
2:34 pm
in addition to making that statement, present, put in repeatedly called for negotiations with keith with washington. but i didn't hear anything of the source from the bite and administration. in fact, all we are hearing from the american administration is that they're ready to support the ukraine, kill the and whatever that and actually means i would like to ask you, what's the, what's your sounds of this conflict dynamics do you think we can actually wish to point when not only moscow, but also washington would be interested in not only pursuing its geopolitical gains, but actually cutting losses, including losses, where you crane and for humanity which you're so concerned about. well, what we have to have is diplomacy. but we have to have is negotiations. when we look at the reference to the cuban missile crisis, what prevented the world from perhaps being essentially blown up was authentic dialogue,
2:35 pm
authentic diplomacy. and that has been absolutely lacking for all of this year in terms of the current crisis. now the crane war, so certainly and routes action dot org were supporting absolute dialogue. and that 1st begins with a cease fire. and i'm not hearing any reference to support for a cease fire coming from either side. and i have to say, when we have the russian forces bombing kids and other cities, that is a war crime. and i say that as somebody who has opposed us war crimes, if you look at the bombing of electrical grids, for instance, that directly affect the livelihood and the lives and the existence of civilians. how can we support that in the context of nuclear war? we cannot support bombing and terrorizing civilian areas and then say that has nothing to do with escalation because it towards war because it does and would
2:36 pm
actually want to join your in your call for diplomacy. and i don't know if you've seen it, one of the former advisors to richard nixon. richard science recently published an article in their national interest in which he also called for, quote unquote, a diplomatic wheel, which i think is a striking statement in and of itself. because even in the most racing moments of the cold war, we had back channel diplomacy going on between the 2 capitals. we have nothing of this sort anymore. do you think the, the bite and administration can even afford any negotiations with the credit because they come in, according to put in is ready, can divide an administration, afford any negotiations with put in. and they put in administration after all the regime change statements that mr. biden has made well, i hope that both sides will be willing to engage in genuine diplomacy, both back channel and in public problem is that when you have major
2:37 pm
cities and towns being bombed by russian forces, that hardly is an incentive for science to say there is a basis for negotiations, therefore, we need to cease fire. we absolutely need a cease fire in ukraine. well, i agree with you or do you think americans are ready to support your call or if you think so can you side any single statement from the by the administration that will actually call for cease fire in the ukraine over the last couple of months? well, if, if you agree that the us and russia should have to pharmacy and we're on the same page, if you also agree that the russian government should stop bombing ukraine, cities and towns, then we would also be in agreement. i think that is absolutely essential. well, mr. solomon, i think the one the russian and military is doing in the ukraine, is fighting not only with the ukraine, but with nato,
2:38 pm
which keeps pumping your crane with weapons, with military advisors, which is, which is continuing to use the land of ukraine for its own very aggressive policy, so if you want to russian military operation to stop, which i actually want because i have relatives in ukraine than i think the united states needs to stop writing a proxy war with russia. don't you agree with that? well, the 1st step is that the invading force stop making war on the country that it invaded . i speak as somebody who went to jail a, posing the number by gone to jail, a, posing us know, a tourism. i'm somebody who denounced us bombing of civilian grids in belgrade in 1909 days were all work crimes. just as now the kremlin is committing were crimes inside ukraine. so we have to say stop to work crime so we can have a c, fire and negotiation. well, i agree with you,
2:39 pm
but i don't think you can hold my country to a higher moral standard than you hold your country. i think this is fundamentally unfair. international law only works when it's ubiquitous and universal, when only one country can afford not to apply it. then it means that the international law becomes a tool for oppression of weaponized rather than what it's supposed to be. it reaches the protection for the civilians. well, if you want to have a race, the bottom of barbarism center talley, we can certainly have a race to the bottom. and the end of that is nuclear war. so if we're going to have a single standard of international law, that means that one country doesn't invade another and bomb civilian areas. you mentioned that there are the lines of communication between the kremlin and the white house. i fairly poor and i heard for me, president obama, the other day voice, the same concern. he also said that the united states has to be very mindful about
2:40 pm
the kind of weapon read sense to ukraine and think about where defense stop, stop being a defense and becomes an offense. do you think the divide and administration would take any ques from it's for my associate because present president obama doesn't often break his silence if he does it. at this point of time, it means that he can off is concerned not only the war in ukraine and the potential of a nuclear populates, but also the actions of his former colleague. well, you remind me of something that martin luther king jr, spoke of. this is a phrase, here's the madness of militarism, and that madness is fully in place in moscow right now, i'm afraid that the kremlin has made a decision that it's ok to subject enormous suffering for enormous people of ukraine. normal numbers of people and our organization rejection dot org has been
2:41 pm
on record opposing nato expansion for years or so. we can certainly do a back story analysis and see how the tensions have been exacerbated by nato, as well as by russia. the question is now, what do we do now? and what we do now is we de escalate. we have to close, see, we have a cease fire, and i think it's certainly within the power of the invading country, russia to declare a ceasefire, then you can have better opportunities for genuine diplomacy. well, what we also think we'll have to do now is to take a short break, but it will be back to this very important conversation in a while. please stay tuned. ah, for
2:42 pm
a ah no one, no, no, no, no, no. what was the limitation of ah, unit 731 was a unique organization in the history of the world. what they were trying to do was to simply do nothing short and build the most powerful and most deadly biological weapons program that the world had ever known. real
2:43 pm
enough to build on it. so new looking to keep the model to model this no more. no, no, no, got the sale. i understood enough about julie who knew you didn't want to know. i had to put all of this call on all buddy bill. you know, nice little want to on this one. she might new on it and all. i isn't more more good but you know, put them out to pick your boss. oh, nice
2:44 pm
a russian state. never. i've gone in the northland scheme. again. the 50000. anyone else with we will fan in the european union, the kremlin media machine, the state on russia today, ortiz, that even our video agency, roughly all band on youtube with . mm hm. mm
2:45 pm
hm. welcome back to engine portsmouth, norman solomon, executive director of the institute for public accuracy. also, war made easy. how presidents and pundits keep spinning us to death. now, mr. solomon are going back to the nature of the style of the russian military operation in ukraine. in describing, if you use such terms as, quote de motors from peach barbaric, my slaughter a killing spree. and you essentially equate the russian style of war to the way americans bought that wars in afghanistan and iraq and indirectly in syria and libyan as a, as a form, a work order. i absolutely reject this comparison because i think there's a massive difference in
2:46 pm
a way the russians do. and the americans do it. sure any war is horrible. it's the worst possible outcome. but one of the reasons why the russians have been progressing so slow is because they actually didn't allow themselves to carpet blong cdce the way the americans do it. again, we both agree that war is horrendous. but shouldn't we also be more nuanced about the way military's doing that, about the way the war fight is proceeding? well, what she just said is reminiscent of what the us government said during the vietnam war during the afghanistan war during the invasion. and for years afterwards, many, many more than 200000. we do a humane war on life. our enemies, this is complete nonsense to terrorism from the sky. that is coming from russia into chief and other cities is absolutely indefensible. there's nothing humane about it whatsoever. it's not the military operation. there's a war, it's
2:47 pm
a war that includes a war officer williams. and we should have post that just as we are post us invasion and war on iraq. and on the canister, we need a single standard. you mentioned that you've been speaking against the madness of the u. s. military and for many decades. it left a pretty horrendous track record in the world. i just wonder what other means. russia could have used to repel nader's encroachment to what is what is something that we see as an existential danger. we've seen what happened to yugoslavia. we've seen what happened to leave it. we've seen what happened to random imagining that the united states is dangerous. and when the united states was using and this is public record, ukrainian territory to pump arms their to sunday and military advisors. what other means we, as a nation, had to put an end to it. i can tell you what it means to not exist that should have
2:48 pm
been pursued and that is to invade and then make war on your credit. that should have been off the table. and then negotiations and diplomacy would be nothing. they weren't negotiations and diplomacy put in and by didn't mad in 2001 in geneva and they talked about. 1 not pushing the situation further, but the american still continue doing that. army ukraine is using its land for its own military purposes, even not making it a member of nathan with taking any defense obligations whatsoever. how could we have put an end to that? well, i can tell you that invading and then slaughtering people in ukraine is not a solution, nor does it reduce the chances of nuclear war. in fact, it increasing the chancellor nuclear war, which is what we began talking about. a national security interest for the sake of ukrainians, some of which are supporting that government that is using that land as
2:49 pm
a essentially black arm for, for an offense against russia. well it's, it's an odd concept of national security to look at what's happened since february and think that enhances russia, nuclear security or national security. it does not. so we need other pathways. this in no way defends the expansion of nato, as i said personally, and my organization has been opposing especially of nato for many years. and we know that it was wrong. we know that it was a betrayal. the promise made when the berlin wall fell. we know that the question is, how are we going to proceed in a constructive way that will reduce the chances of nuclear war rather than increase the chances, which is what has occurred this year. you know, when i talk to a respectable a russian experts, especially those who are old enough to remember and they, and the cold war and the nuclear scare of that time. many of them are telling me that what kept the world from being destroyed at that time was the mutual sense of
2:50 pm
fear that the americans actually believed in the credibility of the russian nuclear deterrent. and russians to believe in the credibility of the american nuclear deterrent. i wonder if part of the reason or perhaps the whole reason why we are where we are, is because america total believe in it's, i mean, if a tense and it's believe in russia total in pretends to believe that russia would never, ever use the nuclear weapons to defend itself. well, certainly there is a thing that has been perceived as nuclear deterrence. if the way that we think russia can defend its interest is to threaten to use nuclear weapons explicitly. then i think that's a terribly dangerous stance to take, which threatens really the survival of almost all of humanity, of course,
2:51 pm
as reference, the survival of almost all of humanity. that's what nuclear weapons a for. and that, that's actually, again, according to the russian doctrine, at least, and according to many russian specialist, that's what the camp will save because the americans had this, this arrow fear of extinction which capt. diet policies, visit the russia or was it is this only if you know, at that time contained within the limits of sanity it. do you think that americans, at this point of time they did divide an institution? do you think they believe that russia is non blocking when it says that it will defend itself? well, i think russia is going to dissent itself, whether russia interprets or president put and interpret that to mean to, to, to actually use nuclear weapons, would be a descent into kind of global barbarism that is unimaginable in terms of, of human beings. so i can't say what i know is inside the head of president biden, but i can say that to pursue as though the implicit
2:52 pm
doctrine of both countries should now be made explicit to threaten, perhaps, imminent use of nuclear weapons should be. so beyond anything that is acceptable or imaginable that it doesn't happen. and yet, one of the horrible things that has happened this year, an ominous thing is that this threat has been made explicit for by person. i couldn't, that is simply wrong. it's hard to say how wrong that is because the consequences are potentially so catastrophic for all of humanity. that said, we know that the doctrine of the us and the russian military both accepts and embraces the option to be the 1st to use nuclear weapons. we know that's the doctrine of both countries, extremely dangerous, that's bad enough. but to threaten as the kremlin has to actually go ahead and use
2:53 pm
it in a specific instance, i think is just beyond the pale is absolutely unacceptable. now, despite the fact that, as you say, present, put in, made that threat explicit. if you also write that after going through more than 60 presidential statements documents and communicate that the white house has released over the last couple of months. and there is a complete absence of nuclear weapons on mentioning the nuclear war. dangerous. why do you think that it's i see just there is a real effort by leaders of the united states and russia to hide the realities of nuclear weapons and nuclear war. but rather have happy talk, rather talk about our national mission and ring some jingle or stick nationalistic bells. then be honest with people. and i think what we need from,
2:54 pm
from buying them from, couldn't, is to be honest with their people in the people world of the world as gorbachev and reagan said, nuclear war cannot be one and must not be shot. it's not enough to say that that's necessary, but insufficient the posture, the behavior, the statements, and the actions of those leaders have to be in sync without understanding. and we're really not getting actions that are in sync with that attitude from either side. right? well, i think the attitude of leaders have to be in sync with reality. and i don't know if you are aware of that, but the russian cities are also being born than russia being bombed by the ukrainians. being shelled at least, and russia has offered refuge to more than 5000000 ukrainian refugees. so i like this for the united states for us. the war is very close to home, both within the russian territory. and as i sat across the border in your grand,
2:55 pm
where most of us have relatives, do you think the 2 sides have the same amount of issues at stake here? do you think this war means the same for, for russia, as it means for the united states? well, is completely unconvincing for russia to place a victim in this war. since it's russia that invaded ukraine and continues to bomb major cities from the air in ukraine. don't have any sympathy for the russian, ordinary russian people who are being killed in those strikes and that has goes with them being all right. i have tremendous sympathy for everybody who dies in a war. i have tremendous sympathy for people who are drafted, conscripted or bombed in a war. that's why we should have posed or not just an abstraction, but continue to work towards diplomatic solutions and say that it's not ok to send people in to battle to kill others. and to kill civilians. i also heard you say
2:56 pm
that the world is in a desperate need for some sort of a single standard of non aggression and human rights. and i agree with you on that and having seen a lot of war zones and, and a lot of suffering that's going on there. but i have to ask you again, not as a propagandist russian propaganda is, but as a, as a person who was it exposed to a lot of more suffering. is it possible without the united states abandoning, it stands as an indispensable and omnipotent country. because on the ground, it usually means that the united states can commit any crimes, any war crimes with totally impunity. and it doesn't matter whether it's, you know, richard nixon, black obama, joseph bite and who are in office. and when you have that kind of behavior from the self proclaimed leader of the free world, can you expect anything different from other countries?
2:57 pm
the united states has been in this century, the biggest profit gator of violence and killing and warfare in the world. and it seems now this year that russia is trying to catch up, that doesn't mean that what russia is doing is in any way justify, well, it's not justified in the moral sense. it is justified in the military sense. and when i talk to my guest from all around the world, nobody supports the war action, but many of them say that this is a time when at least one country to woodson and to this absolutely unrestrained behavior of the united states. and i have to be honest with you, that one of the reasons why so many countries are trying to remain neutral to the u . s. pressure to sanction russia is precisely because of that because they're fed
2:58 pm
up with american hegemony. do you think the united states will abandon it's superficial? rise to command the world without trying to burn it down? well in a military sense. alas, so often it seems to make sense to attack other countries and slaughter people, including civilians. i think whether we can move forward as you allude to as a possibility, whether we can move forward to a more rational, decent, humane world, depends on the people of the world. we need anti war protesters in the united states and in russia, when russian antiwar protesters are put in prison, that is indefensible. it has happened to thousands in the last few months just as elsewhere in the world when people challenge non violently. the madness of no watchers them are thrown in prison. that must be understood as a struggle between people at the grassroots who suffer from war and who understand
2:59 pm
and empathize towards those who suffer from war. rather than going along to get along with the war makers anywhere, i am greatly appreciative of your time with us today. thank you very much for expressing your thoughts. thank you. thank you for watching hope to syria again. well, to part with ah. so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy even foundation, let it be an arms race is very dramatic,
3:00 pm
that development only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successfully, very critical. i'm time to sit a ah, ukraine's latest shell, the residential areas in the russian city of don't. yes. can leave 6 people wounded . so this, our ukraine wants to draw nato into a direct conflict with russia. that's according to moscow's envoy to be un caller id meeting at the security council over rushes warnings that key f could to use a so called to see where she's not k practicing handy becomes britain's, me prime minister with some people in india as being his appointment and that was to britain's colonial history and indian leading the whole.

41 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on