yeltsin, being groomed by boris yeltsin in order to cover for boris yeltsin and his family. and. and you know, the allegations, the criminal allegations that were being made against members of wars, yelton's family, not just in russia, but in western europe and so forth. and to, to provide the yelton family that kind of cover. and one of the 1st things vladimir putin was assigned by president yeltsin was the pacification program. the russians undertook in the north caucasus, and chechnya, which was cruel and brutal. so what am i worried about? i'm worried about a repeat of that pacification program in ukraine. what is it that we can do, steve? we can supply, and we can sanction, and we can support. we can supply the ukrainian fighters and what fighters, they are showing the world. they are these people who are literally coming out of their day jobs, who many of whom haven't been in the military for a while, are protecting their homeland with the guts and with support from the west. it is important that we continue to do that 2nd sanction. we sanctions take a while, steve, to

. >> narrator: by the late '90s, he'd earned the confidence of russia's first president, boris yeltsin. they were an odd couple-- the former spy and a progressive politician who was trying to bring democracy to russia. >> boris yeltsin decided to break totalitarianism, to crush what was left of communism, with a simple idea, which is maximum freedom first. >> narrator: before long, yeltsin promoted putin to lead the kgb's successor, the fsb. >> he undertakes this remarkable rise, basically having nothing to do with the center of power in moscow to running its most important security agency, working in the kremlin. >> narrator: putin convinced yeltsin that he shared the president's democratic goals. >> he's a professional liar. to lie is what he was taught in the intelligence school. he was pretending that he was going to pursue the same development of russia as yeltsin did. but that's all is just one big lie. >> another major shakeup in the kremlin-- yeltsin fires his entire cabinet again. who's in charge? >> (speaking russian) >> narrator: putin rose to become yeltsin's prime minister

yeltsin and his family, and in gratitude, or at least in payback, boris yeltsin decided that he would name as the next prime minister of russia, and the next president of russia, that fsb guy who helped him out, vladimir putin. that's how vladimir putin rose to power in the first place in russia. that's how he got control of the russian government. by generating effectively a false pedophilia claim against just the right guy at just the right moment, that's how he got into power. pedophilia, of course, is the most repulsive of all human behavior. it is so repulsive, it is so evil, that it makes us see red. it is almost literally unthinkable. and it there understandably can make us stop seeing anybody who is even accused of it as our fellow human. anybody abetting it or or even abiding it, basically the same thing, your brain instantly goes to monster, right? understandably. it is the most repulsive of all human evil and when confronted it, we almost can't process it. and it is a deep dark thing to recognize that about human nature, the capacity of some people for that behavior, for th

volodymyr putin, as head of the fsb, to care of that problem for boris yeltsin. putin arranged for a videos of your broadcast on on gentle television. the show the prosecutor or somebody who maybe looked like the prosecutor in bed with not one but two, very young females. the video is low enough quality and was shot from sort of a angle that you couldn't necessarily tell with the naked eye with those granolas with these girls in this about. but, putin stepped up. and his authority as the head of the fsb. vladimir putin assured lotion public that he could guarantee that the man in the video was in fact that prosecutor. and so that was the end of that prosecutor. and that was the end of the corruption investigation into boris yeltsin and his family. and in gratitude, or at least in payback, boris yeltsin decided that he would name, as an ex prime minister of russia, and then the next president of russia, that fsb guy well tomorrow, vladimir putin. that's how vladimir putin rose to power in the first place and russia. that's how he got control of the russian governm

>> he came in to replace a man named boris yeltsin. boris yeltsin was the original president after the fall of the soviet union. boris yeltsin was a crazy guy, sort of drunk, and he allowed the oligarchs, these 22 oligarchs, to steal 40% of the country. the rest of the russians were living in destitute property. i and everybody else in the country were desperate for somebody to restore order. putin presents himself as a modern technocrat. he wasn't drunk, he was slim, he spoke english. he remembered things from meeting to meeting. for the first couple of years, he behaved kind of like a boring technocrat, no personal charisma at all, and we thought he was going to be getting rid of the oligarchs. it turned out he wasn't interested in getting rid of the oligarchs, he wanted to become the biggest oligarch himself. there is an expression that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely and that was the story of putin. he became immensely corrupt and powerful and it got worse and worse until 22 years later, he is the richest man

like me would refer to as this bad tool in 1993 and boris yeltsin many people believe by turning his tax on the white house, he himself was dealing a blow to russia's halting effort to become a democracy and you were there for the election of 1996 in russia where there was a corrupt bargain to purchase the election on his behalf. just decided by many people in washington as a way to avoid a return the communists to power. was that an original sin of russian democracy? was at the moment when something like putin became inevitable? >> i don't know is the short answer. i would just say that the intelligence services had always wanted more power and obviously that's where that comes from. there was a choice. yeltsin had a choice in 1999 who he was going to set up as his successor and there were a number of prime ministers e tried out and failed for one ed reason or another and put in was as as the case officer managed to get back. i would like to add one thing which is that there's plenty to criticize about what the us did or didn't do with regard to russia but the first thing i'd say is

i went to play this clip because we have talked about boris yeltsin and bill clinton. how many times to the meat? guest: there were 18 summits. host: this clip is from march 21, 1997. >> yes, indeed, we do maintain our positions. we believe that the eastward expansion of nato is a mistake. >> you are not attempting to draw a different dividing line in your. what we are trying to do is develop structures that can grow and evolve over time so that there will be a united effort by free people to join their resources together, to reinforce each other's security and common interdependence, and i believe we will succeed in that. guest: mary sarotte is the author of "not one inch." the strengths and weaknesses and worldviews and domestic events happening under the watch of world leaders in the united states and russia have such a significance in the outcome of events. can you comment about that specifically with clinton and yeltsin? guest: that is a great clip, that summit was a particularly contentious one, and you can see yeltsin saying clearly we do not want this to happen

and boris yeltsin, many people believe by turning his tanks on the white house, he himself was dealing a blow to russia's halting efforts to becoming a democracy and you were there through 1996 in russia, there was basically a corrupt bargain to purchase that election on yeltsin's above, justified by some in washington. >> and russian democracy, is that a moment when putin became inevitable, in your view? >> i don't know is the short answer. i would just say that the intelligence services had always wanted more power and obviously, that's where it comes from, and you know, there was a choice. yeltsin m a choice in 1999 who would he sort of set up as his successor and as you recall, there were a number of prime ministers that were tried out and failed for one reason or another, and putin, a case officer, managed to get that. i would like to add one thing though, which is that you know, there's plenty to criticize what the u.s. did or didn't do in 1990's with regard to russia, but the first thing i'd say is, we manage our foreign policy based on the information we have, the choices that

in the 1990's, it was difficult for boris yeltsin as president of russia to negotiate with ukrainian leadership and except this was a separate country, but he did. what happened was, first of all, in 1994, he has a beautiful memorandum. -- you to pass memorandum -- budapest memorandum. ukraine give up its nuclear weapons. so many of the soviet nuclear weapons had been stationed there. the united states and russia and great britain and ukraine got together and they signed a memorandum where ukraine said we are giving up our nuclear weapons and we are going to have assurances are territorial integrity and sovereignty will be respected by the signatories. russia signed a memorandum giving the security assurances. they were not guaranteeing various diplomatic reasons but they were assurances. in 1997, after a lot of bargaining, russia and ukraine signed a friendship treaty with boris yeltsin still in power, again guaranteeing territorial integrity and sovereignty. basalt a lot of border disputes. it had been difficult for them to agree on the status of parts of the border between ukraine

after such a statement, it was a blessing that president clinton and boris yeltsin had enough will and determination to make ukraine eliminate their nuclear weapons. but it wasn't for free. with 1st, the united states offered ukraine $350000000.00 in aid by black mailing and a reversal towards russia. ukraine was able to bargain for another 175000000 to dismantle the nuclear weapons. and 155000000 in economic aid from the united states . but the ukrainian politicians clearly made about deal cost on the perceived $2000000000.00 for the elimination of a nuclear potential 4 times smaller. and they received a 50 percent stake in the joint cossack us oil company tank, ease chevron but neither the economic aid nor the nationalist car helped crowd shook under strong public pressure. early presidential elections were demanded. in 1994, he was defeated by his former prime minister, landed, which muh landed coachman born in august 9th, 1938 in 1960. he graduated from the physics and technology faculty of nepa petrosky state university. with a degree in mechanical engineering. he worked as an eng

yeltsin. and the suite also has experience in ukraine. he was appointed to the supervisory board of one of kias major banks in 2016 while professor at the institute of european studies in belgrade, stephen gach believes the tweets written a lot about the views of political elites in the west. these calls are above everything dangerous. they are irresponsible, and the they are just saying a lot about the state of spirits in the, among the political wester, especially about the we are speaking about the elite. ah, because what i see here is this duration. i don't expect things to think his whole series the at this stage, but it certainly sounds volumes about the way that people that some people in a 2 are thinking this faith and the whole course reminds me and everybody i'm say not only in serbia in the countries of former yugoslavia over a brutally colonial approach was us. one, the lot is calling for is actually war crimes against civilians. now among the most vocal globally against the u. s.

at the same country by the way that my predecessor, boris yeltsin provided security assurances to in return for giving back, security assurances that its territorial integrity and national sovereignty would be respected. do i want to be that guy? do i want to find myself in the lowest rung of dante's inferno? i think he's capable of making the right decision. i could be wrong. but whether i am right or wrong, we continue to help ukraine with military assistance, economic assistance and humanitarianal assistance. it's the right thing to do, it's the moral thing to do, and it's the thing on which the architecture of arms-control can be rebuilt. >> iul think that is a wonderful and hopefully optimistic note to end on. i have one final appeal for all of you which is to please by the book winning and losing the nuclear piece, the rise, demise and revival of arms-control. as i said, a wonderful read and education in just a few pages. we make it easy for you. you can walk to the back of the room and buy a copy. michael will be available for signing books immediately after the event. but ple

yeltsin on the suite also has experience in ukraine. he was appointed to the supervisory board of one of kias major banks in 2016. while europe historian stefan got judge, believes the tweet reveals a lot about the views of political elites in the west. are these calls are above everything dangerous. they are irresponsible and the they are a thing a lot about the state of spirits in the, among the political ah wessa, especially about the what we are speaking about the elite. ah, because at what i see here is this duration. i don't expect people to think his whole series the at this stage, but it certainly sounds volumes about the way that people that some people in nato are thinking this faith. and the whole course reminds me when everybody, i'm say not only in serbia, but in the countries are former yugoslavia over a brutally colonial approach towards us. what the law is calling for is actually war crimes against civilians. ah, social media on big tech is in desperate need of more regulatory oversight, se that is the view of former u.

i still harken back to the story about 30-something years ago when boris yeltsin, president of russia, came to this country along with president bush at the time and he visited the johnson space center in houston. on the way out they stopped at a grocery store there in texas. yeltsin wanted to see that, i guess. he was amazed by what was on the shelves of american stores. the bounty we have. i think it moved him to become emotional about it. it also moved him to give up his role in the communist party in russia and try to start reforming his country. indeed, he was quoted as saying if the russian people could see what's on the shelves here, there would be a revolution. that's pretty amazing. so what are we doing here in this country? the regulatory agencies, policies come out of this administration and the state one in california, are basically running agriculture off the map. taking the water away from farmers in california is a big example. people around the country may be watching, why does that affect me? bunch of california problems. they are all messed up out there, anyway. what

that my predecessor boris yeltsin provided a security assurances to in return for giving back those nuclear security assurances that its territorial integrity and national sovereignty would be expected. do i want to be that guy? do i want to find myself? in the lowest run of dante's inferno. i think is capable of making the right decision. that could be wrong. but whether i'm or i am wrong. we continue to help you create. with military assistance economic assistance and humanitarian assistance the right thing to do it's the moral thing to do. and it's the thing on which the architecture. of arms control can be rebuilt. well, i think that's a wonderful and hopefully optimistic note to end on i have one final appeal for all of you. which is to please buy the book. winning and losing the nuclear piece the rise demise and revival of arms control as i said a wonderful read in education in just a few pages. we make it easy for you. you can just walk to the back of the room and buy a copy michael will be available for signing books immediately after our event, but please join me in thanking michae

you were in russia, a couple times in your career but you were there in 1983 in boris yeltsin not standing on n the tank noble steering down the two from 1991. what later generations of moscow correspondence would refer to as a bad to one —- to in 1991 but by turning the tanks on himself he was blowing the whistle to democracy and then there through the election of 1996 and that was a corrupt bargain to purchase that election to be justified by many people here in washington as a way to avoid a return. was that an original sin russian democracy? is at the moment when putin became inevitable? >> i don't know is the short answer and i will just say that the intelligence services had always wanted more power and that's for he comes from. and there was a choice and he had a choice in 1999 there were a number of prime minister's who failed one way or another but yelton managed to get that but i would like to adddd one thing. but there is plenty to criticize but the us did or did not do with regard to russia. but the first thing i say is we manage our foreign-policy based on the information th

c worked as a senior adviser to the russian government under then president boris yeltsin. and the suite also has experience in ukraine as he was appointed to the supervisory board of one of the major banks in 2016. well, let's discuss this further. now with steven gadgets. c for professor at the institute of european studies in belgrade, thank you for joining us on the program. it's good to see what are your thoughts on, on this as lends radical proposal and how except people are such cause to violence like this. these calls are all very dangerous, they are irresponsible, and they are saying a lot about the state of spirits in the, among the political wise, especially about the we're speaking about the elite because when i see here is this peroration, this kind of a scenario. speech is really not something that we are not used to hearing from experienced diplomats. and this is exactly what what this readers implement was expressing. so i would say irresponsible and dangerous about that. that's exactly it isn't. it is not some guy off the street. he's the guy with extensive

we've soon these stirring images of prime minister boris yeltsin walking through the streets of kyiv, yesterday president duda of poland and other baltic letters in kyiv, a capital city vladimir putin, thought he'd be holding right now. how high level are we talking? >> le mere and alex ward, a colleague at politico, have scooped basically the administration is having conversations about like you said sending a top-level administration official over there. we're not talking, you know, people from ns d'or anything like that, but possibly the names most obvious here, president biden, vice president kamala harris, the secretary of defense and the secretary of state. the last two there i will say, there's a lot of security if they were to go to kyiv and meet with zelenskyy, so that is something that the white house and administration has to weigh here. either way it's huge because this is an administration as they watch, like you said, boris johnson walking the streets of kyiv with president zelenskyy e. they feel pressure to do so because this is a coalition of european nations and nato

yeltsin up front of the tank he was at a great democrat. we create more opportunities to manage contingency today. in essence it's a way of thinking about that question of inevitability is using the theory of the opinion of my students in the audience are have grown they heard me refer to this before like it is a theory so mention again here. evolutionary biologist said i do not actually see gradualism and the fossil record. i don't see a steadyec pattern f evolutionary change. i see a really long period ofib spaces or equilibrium with relatively little changes and i see dramatic change dramatic punctuation such as an asteroid striking the earth. the asteroid is so large that throws a cloud of dust into the atmosphere thatdu cools the earh and the dinosaurs can survive they die out and the mammals come down. that asteroid dies but it's his theory the idea you have long periods of spaces areut equilibrium in this dramatic punctual station event and then a new equilibrium is when a man becomes dominant the reason i mention that and answered y

yeltsin in the 90s. and he later prosper it in the air of putin. abramovich was arrested the governor of -- in a desolate northwestern russian province near 2000. the same year that putin took power. he remains part of putin's elite inner circle. although he denies any financial ties to the russian leader. he has largely phone under the radar of international politics, until russia invaded ukraine in late february. the wall street journal reports, quote, early on the morning that -- began his invasion of ukraine, russian trillionaire roman abramovich was children from asleep by a cell phone from a ukrainian movie producer within hours or across. was he willing to stop the fighting? and quote. according to the wall street journal, ukrainian government officials were worried that russian counterparts were not accurately relaying their messages to the man in charge, putin. in the saw a broader reaches a direct line to vladimir putin. over the last few months, abramovich has gone from all of dark to wartime

yeltsin's not his standing on the tank noble staring down the coup boris yelton 1991, but you know what later generations of moscow correspondence like me would referred to as the sort of bad coup in 1993 and and boris shelton many people believe by turning his tanks on the white house. he he himself was dealing a blow to russia's. halting nation efforts to become a democracy and then you were there through the election of 1996 in russian, which there was basically a corrupt bargain. yes to purchase that election on yeltsin's behalf. justified by many people here in washington as a way to avoid a return the communists to power with that an original sin, you know of russian democracy was at the moment when something like putin became inevitable in your view. i don't know is the short is the short answer. i would just say that. the intelligence services had always wanted more power and obviously that's where he comes from and you know there there was a choice yeltsin had a choice in 1999 who he would sort of set up as his successor. and as you recall, there were a number of prime minister

well, boris yeltsin, then president, was very close to clinton. in fact, clinton had intervened to have him elected in 1996. yeltsin bitterly objected to this. sorted gorbachev. so did every russian leader. u.s. statesman george kennan, jake matlock and former ambassador to russia under reagan, leading russian specialists in the government, numerous others. henry kissinger. numerous others pointed out to washington they are making a terrible mistake. i should say that includes the current cia director william burns. and former cia director stansfield turner. william perry from secretary of defense under clinton, was so outraged he practically resigned in protest. 50 specialists in russia wrote a warning later -- warning letter to clinton saying, this is extremely dangerous and you should not be doing it. you are just calling on russia to become militant and aggressive instead of accommodating and a common european home. well, clinton went ahead. george w. bush later tore it to shreds. 2008, he invited ukraine to join -- that was actually vitord --