wouldral be handed over to the soviet union. agreement went on to state the soviet union stood ready to conclude a treaty of friendship and alliance with china to legalize these concessions. finally, f.d.r. also said he would gain his concurrence. the secret agreement reflected in part an ingenious solution to a fundamental conflict of interest between the united states and soviet union over china. long-term soviet strategy had been to establish buffer zones around the borders of the states, as was then occurring in eastern europe. and asia, the buffer zones -- in asia, the buffer zones were outer mongolia, manchuria, korea, and the islands. the soviets had long ago established estate in outer mongolia, exerted substantial influence, and were poised to take a page from japan's book in seizing manchuria and korea. states for close to half a century had espoused a strategy of the open door which meant undeserved support for china's territorial integrity. american and russia strategies were indirect conflict, particularly over manc

the soviet union israel by communists. this has a huge -- soviet union is ruled by communist. -- communists. had to be threat that eradicated so all this comes together to make the war in the east a particularly savage affair. interviewer: how did it affect the general population and the soviets him a house of you it's? jeff: at least the units i looked at, the advance and they go through the baltic states. these people have been forcibly incorporated into the soviet union in 19 30, 1940. as liberators. going to get rid of the communists. as the germans pushed deeper into -- out of the baltic states and out of russia toward leningrad there are some russians who greet them in a welcoming manner. the germans are opening up, the soviets see them as allowing them to practice their religion. there are many people who were not thrilled with stalin's policies. as the year advances we see that this initial support of the germans dissipates. this is most noteworthy in the town where there is a small city, large town that sits outsi

first of all this is not the soviet union. russia certainly not a democracy but as the soft authoritarianism and people are on line and they can still say what they think even if this guy has wiped out the organizations of democracy and he certainly has completely removed all the oxygen from competition. he is now the number one and there is no number two. there is a lot of bad behavior but i would say if somebody goes to russia periodically and cares about it we shouldn't confuse putin. there's an ente middle class that benefited for the last 20 years from the amount of open as they did have. it's been the most open time in a thousand years of russian history and i think we can hope that even with a strongman leader the influences that we the americans and western europeans have helped spread will prevail over time. >> i have a question. did the cia take care of natasha and her son after he was executed? >> i tell the story in the book and i don't want to spoil this for you but it's a sad story. i would urge you to read it. i

we currently work at about 45 covering the reagan administration from everything such as the soviet union to central america to policy also towards south africa. and it's a very exciting project to be working on. we're hopeful to have the first volume come out later this year on the falklands crisis of 1982. >> let's talk about ronald reagan's foreign policy. we are a generation removed. kind of look back and see what worked and what didn't. your book is is based on one of the most high-profile sum mitts that took place with gorbachev in raikkonen. what was the goal? and why that location? >> the summit was going to be a nonsummit. there will be a prelude at the end of 1986 for gorbachev coming to the united states. compromised country between the east and west. we will have an informal conversation it turned into is a dramatic few days in which they spoke about getting involved in nuclear weapons. and the stumbling block right at the end was gorbachev's asking reagan to limit testing on sdi, something that was very dear to reagan and to the people around him. and so this encounter ended

but you have to remember were the first leaders of the soviet union ever to live in the soviet union. all the others are in special cocoons. they didn't know what life was like in the soviet union. both grew up and they made by way the bureaucracy and so on. they lived there. they understood. and i believe it's correct, i'm not absolutely -- it must have been a shock to him to contrast with the so -- soviet union. so he was different without a doubt. he was a very bright observant guy, but he actually lived in his own country. he went back home and would go to a special place and so on. >> last question. yes. yeah. >> i mean lisa anderson in hoo, -- hoover institution, is there any evidence that what was happening in united states in terms of the success and builtup of the economy and the other efforts that have been discussed, that they decide that this led to the selection of a younger more vital open leader in gorbashev? >> i think that during the first reagan presidency they tried their upmost to cope with the sort of threat, the sort of pressure that you're talking about in inter

and the soviet union. there's a map that they used with the dividing line north of the islandes and so on. but the details are in here. and the problem was that that affected or was checked or was trumped by subsequent negotiations. this is a general list of items. i'm going to quote them because they're interesting if i can find them in here. 15th ooh august, the soviets actually they sent it the day before. they sent an operational group where the general staff is any sort of group of senior officers who have a specific mission to perform. this is -- this group of officers is headed by lieutenant general kn derivienko. but now we have a lot of his correspondence and reports back to the u.s. subsequent to his arrival on the 15th of august. he is sent over with instructions on what he should do. the instructions on the 15th of august are fairley clear. on the 16th of august, he's told to get there as fast as possible and he's told to submit the very same things to mcarthur that stalin's 16 august message t

for people who are my age, they were kids when the soviet union was a superpower. and they hear a lot of these things from their parents and they look at a world in which the country does not have the same status. that really has nothing to do with what our proper policies should be in terms of russia more broadly but i do think if we go into a presidential cycle, and people are reading about the topic, it is something to keep in mind, the very recent history in this part of the world. >> why is this an area of study for you? james graham wilson: i got very interested -- as everyone my age is -- the formative events in our lives were the attacks of september 11. i was in vassar college. i was sitting in the library. in the months after that and as we went to iraq in 2003, i became interested in several levels in trying to get at what were these situations that led to this conflict. why did i get to grow up, be a teenager, and not have to worry about getting under the desk for nuclear drills? i never had to deal with it and my parents did. i think i was very lucky t

and the handover to the soviet union according to the yalta agreement. the results from a strategic point of view are with us still. japan remains a staunch ally of the united states. korea remains divided but the republic of korea remains a staunch ally. the northern territories remain in russian hands and continue to be an impediment to full japan-russian relations. but finally the united states remains the dominant power in the pacific although there are signs that might be changing. thank you. [applause] [speaking in other language] >> yes, sir? >> if you don't mind, are you arguing that truman felt or was briefed that conventional bombing was as horrendous as it was, the naval blockade, would swiftly save lives and therefore the decision to use the nukes was only about the soviets? >> it was about ending the war quickly before the russians to be fully prepared exercise their interests. >> so the use of the nukes in truman's mind was to end the war quickly and save lives? >> i agree with that. >> oh, okay. >> but it was also -- >> oh, sure. what the

it was ronald reagan in his negotiations with the soviet union. it took fiveing month -- it took 5 months to agree. because of that agreement, more than 2,000 missiles were destroyed. our relationship with the soviet union didn't improve overnight and we still have our problems with them today. going back to what i said earlier, the russian's sat on the same side of the table in this negotiation, to end or delay the threat of nuclear power in iran. imagine if 47 senators with reagan had written, in the middle of those negotiations and said, ignore president reagan. don't negotiate with him because we're not going to accept it here in congress. there would have been cries of treason for sending that kind of letter. there was a bipartisan approach to form policy in the united states. today, we have a chance and an opportunity with iran that hasn't presented itself for more than 30 years, to prevent iran from developing nuclear weapons. it's not going to solve all the problems with iran overnight, but it does solve, i believe, one critical one, actio

the soviet union had been called russia, soviet russia. this was greater russia. all of a sudden, the ussr collapsed, overnight, in fact, right? it has turned out that in former soviet republics, there were russian people numbering 25 million. they had been living in a single country. all of a sudden, they turned out to be a broad. you can imagine how many problems arose. first of all, there were everyday problems, economic problems, social problems, the separation of families. you cannot list them all. do you think it is normal that 25 million russian people were abroad all of a sudden? russia turned out to be the largest divided nation in the world today. is that not a problem? well, not for you, but it is for me. charlie: what are you going to do about it? pres. putin: we want to preserve the common humanitarian space. to make it so that these borders do not get in the way, so that people can communicate freely among themselves, so we can develop our economies jointly. we want to take advantage of those benefits of the former ussr. joint infrastructure, unified

union had been called russia, soviet russia. well, this was greater russia. then all of a sudden the u.s.s.r. collapsed, overnight, in fact, right? and it's turned out that, in former soviet republics, there were people, russian people numbering 25 million. they had been living in a single country and, all of a sudden, we turned out to be abroad. you can imagine how many problems arose. first of all, there were everyday problems, economic problems, social problems, the separation of families. you can't list them all. do you think it's normal that 25 million people, russian people wound up abroad all of a sudden? russia turned out to be the largest divided nation in the world today. is that not a problem? well, not for you, but it's a problem for me. >> rose: and what do you intend to do about it? >> what we want to do is use modern civilized processes to preserve at least, at a minimum, the common humanitarian space to make it so that these state borders do not get in the way so that people can communicate freely among themselve

the fact is the soviet union took one look at the economic capacity in the united states to build up its military capacity come and gorbachev coming into office understood that there was absolutely no way they could compete that what he wanted to do was to begin to interact with the u.s. and western allies. ronald reagan built up and bush understood the opportunity had after a half-century post-world war ii with two superpowers with tremendous nuclear capability. bush understood the opportunity was there. and in his own style, he began to build the western coalition of is necessary to take advantage of it and the relationship of trust and cooperation is necessary between the united states and the soviet union. >> dot european allies were not as eager as george bush to move quickly. but bush with a series was able to convince them that the nato allies should make a significant step in terms of announcing a reduction of u.s. troops and armor in europe and invite by that act an equivalent reduction or greater reduction of the soviet union with their occupation forces in eastern europe,

you felt a kind of tone of regret that those were the good ol' days when the soviet union was on top of the world, and we had a state-based order. >> he has said many times something that he finds very regretful is the break up of the soviet union. he has said that many times. >> yes, more than the dominance of the soviet union, when you hear the talk at the u.n. that speech was not an exception because it's the general assembly, but they often talk of that, and the united states seems to be their reference point. it's an interesting tone to hear. it was something interesting and sad in preference to russian efforts. you talked about the eurasia community and the silk road, no one is picking up on these suggestions, even the china who is supposed to be their allies didn't talk about this. so you have these almost like he was talking to an empty hall, people are not that interested. >> going back to what you were saying before that russia is not the global power that it was before, not the global leader, they can't set the agenda the way they used to. >> i think that is very true. whe

she returned a hero from the soviet union, and is the only woman to fly a solo mission into space. several years original, the soviets kick started with a series of first. the first satellites sputnik one. and then the first man in space. in 1965, amexy carried out a space walk and summer assault. many of these artefacts never left russia, some needed to be declassified before they travelled. the soviet union's earlier achievement is san as beating moscow, in putting a man on the moon. >> it may be a legacy of cold war tensions that here in the west sees major achievements eclipse the bid n.a.s.a.'s moon landings, when it comes to the space race, there's a winner, the soviet union. >> russians landed the first probe on the moon, and on venus. when you think about it calmly, they are incredible scientific achievements. just as important as the loner lander. it's sexy and has p.r. other things are important. >> with a space race over, tensions have been replaced by cooperation and joint missions. after the u.s. grounded the shuttle fleet in 2011, it pays russia 63 million per astrona

the first salt treaty with the soviet union lasted five years. the first start treaty lasted 15 years. and in our current situation, if 15 or 20 years from now, iran tries to build a bomb, this deal ensures that the united states will have better tools to detect it, a stronger basis under international law to respond, and the same options available to stop a weapons program as we have today, including, if necessary, military options. on the other hand, without this deal, the scenarios that critics warn about happening in 15 years could happen six months from now. by killing this deal, congress would not merely pave iran's pathway to a bomb, it would accelerate it. third, a number of critics say the deal isn't worth it because iran will get billions of dollars in sanctions relief. now, let's be clear, the international sanctions were put in place precisely to get iran to agree to constraints on its program. that's the point of sanctions. any negotiated agreement with iran would involve sanctions relief. so, an argument against sanctions relief is

after all, remember, all this property was soviet property. the soviet union hadn't fallen yet. so how was a company going to get access to property to set up a branch in st. petersburg? putin would have to assign it. >> narrator: even as his star rose, there was an early example of his ambition. he commissioned a documentary about himself. it was called "power," made by igor shadkhan. >> (translated): putin had an agenda. he wanted to admit that he had been a kgb agent in foreign reconnaissance. >> narrator: for putin, it was an effective way to "out" himself as a former member of the reviled kgb. but for mayor sobchak, putin's past would prove useful. after all, he was running a city with a notorious criminal history, and according to prominent political analyst stanislav belkovsky, he needed someone who could work in its shadows. >> st. petersburg, called the bandit capital of russia, gangster capital of russia at that moment, and the mayor's office should communicate with those groups in some way. but of course anatoly sobchak could not be involved in such contacts, and it w

there was reportedly a big map of the soviet union with precious stones. here we have big ceremonies and display some gifts which we are getting. they are gifts for the anniversary, they have been displayed here. >> rose: so vladimir putin gave the museum -- >> yes. >> rose: two faberges. yes, one faberge egg and one big faberge clock. >> rose: he gave it to you from where? he acquired it or -- >> he acquired it. it was bought by some russian businessmen. >> rose: and presented to you? and then presented to the president to give it to the museum. this was a way to return back. >> rose: so these russian businessmen, oligarchs, very wealthy, as they travel around the world, they see art that's for sale -- >> they buy a lot for their collections. it's not easy to bring them. so this is a gift. >> rose: until vladimir putin says you're president would like for his hermitage -- >> well, it's a good thing. >> rose: yeah. usually -- >> rose: he was never sitting? always standing. >> reporter: the czar was always standing. >> always standing. the ambassadors, befo

nice bases in the soviet union but inaccessible. the central action would have been we can bring many against a few land bases with just a few planes on them. if you're going to invade japan, you bring your sea power against lots of land-based air power. not a place for happiness. overall, the requirements for invasion of japan was overwhelming air sea superiority and abundant amphibious which we and abundant amphibious which we had in '44, '45. that is among the reasons why the big pacific drive did not get started until '44, '45. we were building lots of ships. roosevelt's global strategy. although talk building the pacific war, it is evidenced that it was a two front war. roosevelt always thought about it as a global war. a lot of historians like to compartmentalize it. they anticipated post war relationship with the soviet union. now, roosevelt's strategy, there are different interpretations by it. a lot of people said he had no strategy. he just reacted to events. others say he was a prisoner of public opinion. post war critics

the soviet unions earlier achievements were seen as challenge by the u.s. who eventually beat moscow in putting a man on the moon. there may be a legacy of cold war tensions, but here in the west these achievements were later eclipsed by nasa's lunar landing. but there is one clear winner, the soviet union. >> they landed the first probe on the moon, and the first to land on another planet. those are incredible scientific achievements. the lunar landing is very sexy and has all of the pr, but all of these other things are just as important scientifically. >> reporter: with the space race long over, tensions have been replaced by cooperation and joint missions. after the u.s. grounded its shutter fleet in 2011, it now pays russia $63 million per astronaut, per trip. this charts man's early cosmic achievements from the spacecraft to the space toilet, meaningful moments in humanity's journey into the unknown. neave barker, al jazeera, at london's science museum. >>> stay with the news stunning images of pluto taken by nasa's new horizon's spacecraft have been

between nazi germany and the soviet union's i went to look for my dissertation topic, i knew i wanted to do something on that conflict. i was interested not just in a military confrontation but also the ideological struggle that the nazis were waging against the soviet union. hitler's dream was to create this racial empire in the east and the german army was his primary means of creating this empire. i wanted to look at how the german army fought the war, not just a military struggle but the ideological struggle. there's not a lot written in english about the military struggle and there is a lot written in german about the ideological struggle. what it wanted to do is combine the two narratives and come up with one overarching view of the war. three divisions that i believe had been under-studied. there has been a lot of wartime delete time -- allete german divisions or answered divisions or waffen ss divisions. i wanted to look at three

american intelligence reported repeatedly that the entry of the soviet union into the war will convince all japanese that complete defeat is inevitable. it will lead to the end of the war.

we remember the history of the soviet union. social experiment for exports and placing other countries of ideal preferences of tragic consequences, and to degradation rather than progress. it is that learning from other's mistakes everyone keeps repeating them. so the exper the export of evolutions, the democratic ones continues. it continues to look at the middle east and northamption africa as presented by my perimeter speaker, political problems in these regions have piled up for a long time, and people there who seek changes naturally. but how would it turn out? rather than bringing about reforms and foreign interference has resulted in a brazen destruction of national institutions and the lifestyle itself. instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, there is violence, poverty and social disaster. and no one cares a bit about human rights, including the right to life. i cannot help asking those who have caused the situation do you realize what you've done? but i'm afraid no one is going to answer that. and impunity has

it was op ronald reagan in his negotiations with the soviet union. it took five months after this agreement was reached for this chamber to vote 93-5 in favor of that treaty at a time when the democrats had a majority. i could go through the long list of democratic senators who supported president ronald reagan in his efforts to try to create a more peaceful world. ultimately, because of that agreement, more than 2,000 short, medium and intermediate-range missiles were destroyed. our relationship with the soviet union didn't improve overnight and we certainly still have our problems with them today. but going back to what i said earlier, the russians sat on the same side of the table in the united states in this negotiation for this agreement to delay the threat of nuclear power, nuclear weapons in iran. mr. president, imagine if 47 senators during the course of ronald reagan's negotiation with gorbachev, if 47 senators had written in the middle of those negotiations to mr. gorbachev and said, ignore president build ronald reagan, don't negotiate wit

and from that point of view, the break in michigan to place pressure on the soviet union. most of the big public institutions went along with the reconciliation with america for the reasons i have just described. and this is really quite striking to me. that included the general staff. when there were problems with the arms negotiations, the general staff was often very, very obstructive to gorbachev. he handled them really brilliantly. he nursed them along. they made the chief of the general staff into his own military advisor. they did a lot of things to nursed them along, but even the general staff recognize that if the ussr was going to remain a world military power, there have to be a change in the soviet economy. that had been also that concessions had to be made from the old principle that what the general staff wants, it has to get. so even the general staff was less obstructive to gorbachev then it might have been your he got into problems with eastern europe broke away in 1989 and 1990. it was then that element in the politburo and the ruling elite started to que

the arms race between the west end the soviet union would not have been very different. truman thought he had a royal flush we found out that it worked when he was in germany to go up to stolen to say i have a new weapon that will be devastating to the japanese and he shrugged and said i hope you make good use for it. and the americans thought does he know what we're talking about? but he knew exactly because he had spies in the manhattan project and he had known. so i think we would still have a lot of the cold war but some uncertainty that without the horror and shock volume of hiroshima and nagasaki maybe we would be more inclined to use those during the cuban missile crisis with one minute to midnight. >> i have the question in relation to the last question what you think would have happened had agreed not dropped the bomb and the soviet invaded the islands of japan? >> wonderful question was in just u.s. vs. japan at this point. stalin promised within three months with in the surrender of germany he would declare war on japan. so we had the big red army hovering in

there was a great story in the book, kind of the end of the soviet union, the soviets are trying to tell -- working with the cubans to pass the message to the first george bush, saying that we should bury the hatchet. we should get together. and george bush says, we're not going to talk to them. then you get this whole euro were democratic standards the band that the united states had on cuba before they would there is abargo variance of this throughout until we arrive at president obama. i have heard will answer this question before, and he may have something to add. the one thing that is important to add is that this is now inscribed in law. i expect that at some point the terms of that legislation are going to be changed, but as long as that is in place, this is really the principal obstacle in the development of a more normal relationship for cubans. economic sanctions are obviously critical and it is going to require an act of congress to an act ofm or it -- congress to change them. veryank you for a interesting address. it kept the interest of my two teenage sons. they were not dra

union is about. we need judgment, judgment. if you know all the details of a train and you are telling people we're going to boston but in fact the train is going to miami, you know, the fact that you know the details of the engine don't really help very

after the rev luelings, it was demolished and the big map of soviet union was put here. a beautiful map from precious stone. then soviet union finished, that was taken out in another museum and we begin to restore the throne. we found details of the throne in different places in the museum. unnoticed. hidden system of we found everything to restore it. charlie: what happened in the throne room? mikhail: the throne room, it was part of the museum. here was -- they put a big map of soviet union from precious stones and there have been different things displayed. here we usually display, use it for different big ceremonies. here we display some gifts which we are getting. putin gave us -- for our anniversary. charlie: he gave toyota you from where? he acquired it or it was -- mikhail: he acquired. it was bought by some russian businessman. and presented to the president to give it to the museum. charlie: that's how it happened. mikhail: that's how it works. that's how we got these things which have been brought by russian businessmen who have been abroad. it was returned ba

hates the history of the soviet union's intelligence service. william mccance, a felisiow loos at the rise of the islamic state in the apocalypse. john noris explores the life of the first woman to win the nelfl prdrie for commentar@ the isiook for these titles at bookstores this coming week. watch for the authors in the near future on book t th. >> pulitzer prize winning reporter john markoff whose work appears in the new york times tar, hs about the current and future relationship between humans and robots. >> john marar@ff has been seen around the corners of the future as one of the nation's top technology writers since he es ined the naÃyork times in 1988's. in 2013 he won the pulitzer prize for his reporting as part of a team of naÃyork times reporters. is a frequent houston martyr raider for a revolutionary series and we love john for a revolutionary series and we lfor ae jlitzn for all of those reasons. we have a special affection of john for other reasons as welhaa he is a grew up and went to hs. hh school here he started covering tech

the right has always been exercised by the united states, united kingdom, france, soviet union, and europe alike. it is so diverse, and representative of the organization. when the u.n. was established, its found founders did not beli there would be unanimity, and it believed they would find compromise, and taking different views into consideration, and that the issues debated within the u.n. are either taken as resolutions or not. and as diplomats, they say they are the pass or do not pass. whatever actions any state might take by passing this procedure are illegitimate. they run counter to the charter, and defy international law. we all know that after the end of the cold war, everyone is aware of that, and a single s center of domination emerged in the world, and then those who found themselves at the top of the pyramid were were attempted to think that if they were so strong and exceptional then they knew better and they do not have to reck conn with the u.n. instead of automat cal and legitimatize the decisions, and in other wise tense the decisions. a and it is now common place to sa

and the soviet union and this agreement, which is that this is a multilateral agreement between the united states, its allies, and iran. and it is iran taking on all of the responsibilities. we are not giving up our nuclear weapons. what we are doing in this arrangement is if iran does the thing it is supposed to do, cut its uranium enrichment capacity by over half, reduce its enriched uranium stockpile, dismantle its reactor, allow the inspections we need to check for cheating, then the p5+1 will lift the un security council sanctions. and the u.s. and european union will waive some of their national sanctions on nuclear related activities. we are not giving up nuclear capacity. iran is taking on these additional accoutrements for an extended period of time. host: sandra wants to know more about the arms control association. guest: we formed when i was still a young boy in the 1950's by some of the men who put together the arms control agreements from the 1960's into the 1970's. it has been our mission since then to provide information about these agreements. diplomacy to deal with the mo

with this as background, we can now take a look at the individual proposals and plans of the soviet union, the united states and imperial japan. first, the americans. u.s. planning for the 1945 and 1946 invasions of japan was begun in 1944. early scheme of operations was released for comment on the very day that allied forces fought their with a ashore on normandy and was approved for the joint chiefs of staff on june 30, 1944. it offered four possible areas that might be seized and subsequently serve as the required stepping stone that would bring ground-based fighter aircraft within striking distance of, quote, the industrial heart of japan, which was tokyo and can'to and surrounding can'to plain. the 12 division force -- the 12 division assault on kyushu operation olympic was quickly chosen as the best option since it was in line with the central pacific drive of admiral chester nimitz and the swing up from new guinea into the philippines. one of the areas briefly considered as a stepping stone to tokyo was the northern most japanese home island of hokkaido. whoops. i'm just buzzing th

union was focused on the soviet abm program. with the russian offense in her forces grew during the course of those negotiation, limiting soviet offense of power became more important in those negotiations. so the agreements themselves are not going to fundamentally change the realities of where iran is and that to be clearly understood. secondly, there is something different about the agreement and other arms control agreement because in the past we haven't had a tremendous pressure brought about by sanctions which actually played an role in bringing the iranians to the negotiating table and this leads to a real difference in how the supporters and critics of the agreement interpret the agreement. supporters see it as a traditional arms control agreement and they see and recognize both side interests have to be served, adobe criticism from both sides about features or facets of the agreement. many critics saw the negotiation not so much as diplomacy as getting redder for a surrender ceremony on the battleship missouri. in other

the soviet union that in a market economy is difficult to sustain. if some of the settlements in the far north, the bases can acquire a strategic significance, so much the better. with 13% of the world's undiscovered oil and a third of natural gas, many here think russia is holding on to barons berg to keep the russia over. >> the politics, the being here is very important for them. >> that means supporting settlements even if a few lived there. >> if there's a settlements, if it had been a flag in the snow that is something the kremlin would seek to explore. >> today only a hardy crop of 400 russians and ukrainians are left. after conflict in ukraine, new tensions merge here. locals feared fist fights could break outs between russians and ukrainians, deep inside the mines. >> it's difficult for me. my parents are in ukraine. that's why it's difficult. >> this new cold war is putting strains on those like constantine, a cold miner who game to barons berg learning he could make four times as much as he earnt in ukraine. and like the chinese business t

we established normal relations with the soviet union years ago. and again, that, i would say, and i've served there, is a more repressive regime than this one. and we engaged, because we believed that engagement will gain us more than isolation. >> how can history not continue to matter, as the people who have repressed the cuban people for past five and a half decades continue to be in power? >> have we accomplished anything in the past five decades by refusing to talk to them? have we made any changes in cuba? not a one, nothing. we haven't accomplished a thing. >> does the cuban government need to do more in order for the embargo to be lifted for there to be a full normalization? >> let me ask you by saying we have been saying that for 50 years. hasn't had any affect at all. now moving to engage. we will talk to you. even though you haven't perhaps improved human rights to the extent we would have wished, perhaps you haven't improved human rights at all. our policy has not brought that about. maybe we better try something new. >> the flag raisi

we must also remember episodes from the history of the soviet union, social experiments and attempts to push changes and other countries based on ideological preferences, often leading to tragic consequences. into degradation rather than progress. however, from learning from others mistakes, everybody just keeps repeating them. so-called democratic revolutions continued. the situation in the middle east such politicala, and social problems have been piling up for a long time. people wished for changes, naturally. rather thanurn out? , there has been a brazen destruction of national institutions and set of the triumph of democracy, we have violence, poverty. nobody cares a bit about human rights including the right to life. those, doelp asking you realize what you have done? i'm afraid nobody is going to answer that. policies based on punitively have been abandoned. that the power has been filled with extremists and terrorists. tens of thousands of militants are fighting under the banner of the so-called islamic state. servicemen who were thrown out into the street after -- in 2003. l

she returned a hero of the soviet union and remains to this day the only woman to fly a solo mission into space. several years earlier the soviets kick started the space age with a series of pioneering firsts. the first satellite, sputnik 1. and then the first man in space. in 1965, there was the first space walk with the first space somersault. many of these artifacts never left russia. some needed to be declassified. they were seen as a challenge by the u.s. who eventually beat moscow in putting a man on the moon. these are sometimes eclipsed by nasa. but when it comes to the space race, there is one clear winner, the soviet union. >> they landed on venus, the first probe to land on another planet. if you think about it, those are incredible scientific achievements. they are just as important as the lunar landing. that was sexy and has pr. but all these other things are just as important scientifically. >> with the space race long over, tensions have been replaced by cooperation and joint missions. after the u.s. grounded its shuttle fleet in 2011, it now pays russia $63 million pe

she return as hero of the soviet union, and remains to this day the only woman to fly a solo mission into space. several years earlier they kick started the space age with a series of pioneering firsts. the first satellite, and then the first man in space. and in 1965, carries out the first space walk, together with the first space somersault. many of these artifacts have never left, some needed to be declassifies before they could travel. the early achievements were seen as a challenge by the u.s., who beat moscow in putting a man on the moon. >> often here in the west, these major achievements are sometimes eclinted by nasa's later landings. when it comes to the space race there is one clear winner, the soviet union. >> the first probe on the moon, they also landed on visa. the first to land on another planet, if you think about it those are incredible achievements. they are just as important as the lunar landing. it is very sexy and has the p.r., but all of these others are just as important scientifically. >> with the space race over, tensions have been replaced by cooperation an

she returned to hero of the soviet union and remains to this day the only woman to fly a solo mission into space. several years earlier the soviets kicked started this with pioneering first, the first satellite sputnik one and then the first man in space garin and in 1965 they carried out the first space walk together with the first space summersault and many artifacts never left russia and some needed to be declassified before they could travel and the early achievements were seen as a challenge by the u.s. who eventually beat moscow in putting a man on the moon. it may be a legacy of cold war tensions but here in the west these major achieve -- achievements are talking about moon landings and when it comes to space there is one winner soviet union. >> the first probe and venus and the first to land on another planet and thinking about it those are incredible scientific achievements and just as important as the lu nar landing and it's sexy and the pr and all the other things are just as important scientifically. >> reporter: with the space race long over tensions replaced by cooperat

someone who had defected to the soviet union in 1959 before returning. it seemed plain that kennedy, given the evidence, was a victim or casualty of the cold war. that would seem to be the that would seem to be the interpretation that would be placed on the event. this was not the case. very quickly, this event was interpreted by liberals, by political leaders, even political leaders across the spectrum, as an event in the civil rights crusade. kennedy is a victim of the nation's culture of the radical right. this is a copy, you can't see it. i will hold it up. the front page of "the new york times," november 23 the day after kennedy was killed by snipers is the headline. there is a long story on oswald. "leftist accused." the article details oswald's communist background. this article, you can see it below the photo, is titled "why america weeps." kennedy is a victim of a violent streak he sought to curb in the nation. he interprets kennedy's death as an event arising from the violent streak in america. "america wept for itself. the worst in the nation

this capsul is a close friend and she returned a hero of the soviet union and the only woman to fly an solo mission in space and they kick started it with the first, the first satellite sputnik one and the first man in space garin and 1965 they carried out the first space walk together with the first space summer salt and many artifacts never left russia and some needed to be declassified before they can travel and early achievements were a challenge by the u.s. who eventually beat moscow in putting a man on the moon. it may be a legacy of cold war tensions that often here in the west these major achievements are sometimes eclipsed by nasa moon landings but when it comes to the space race there is one winner, soviet union. >> they landed on venus and the first probe to land on another planet and if you think about it calmly they are important as the lunar landing which is sexy and pr but all these other things are just as important scientifically. >> reporter: with the space race long over, tensions have been replaced by cooperation and joint missions. after the u.s. grounded its shutt