the. sergeant of the israeli defense forces. during his service scorched the street fight. to fly in from the colonel of the chilean armed forces participated in keeping down a military revolt. camila mischa

a sergeant in the us army. tried to become an american my gigging part in the. ranks and reasons differ but one thing brings them together once they disobey. more news today violence has once again flared up. these are the images cobol has been seeing from the streets of canada. giant corporations are today. every month we give you the future we help you understand how we'll get there and what tomorrow brings the best in science and technology from across russia and

around the world. join us for technology update on our g. if you knew me about someone from feinstein christians. he's from stunts on t.v. dot com.

it's now seven thirty pm here in the russian capital here with r.t. your headlines moscow calls on poland to extradite a notorious terrorist suspect detained in the country. to house political asylum in the u.k. is wanted by russia over atrocities in the north caucasus. a landmark russia u.s. strategic arms treaty passes a key test as a senate panel approves it for a full upper house vote there are fears however that stiff opposition on the part of some republicans could. find an attempt on the life of an alleged top mafia boss right in the city center puts him in hospital investigators point to a blood feud and a tough house possible motives behind the attack. well my colleague will be here in about half an hour's time but for the meanwhile it's the debate show cross talk next on r.t. and today people love ellen is guest discuss the resetting of international

relations and just how will russia china and the u.s. in particular interact in such a changing world stay with us. hungry for the full story we've got. the biggest issues get a human voice face to face with the news makers. and . hello welcome to cross talk about the politics of reset beijing in washington and the rise of the multilateral world. to discuss the reset of relations in many different countries and parts of the world i'm joined by thomas graham he's senior director at kissinger associates also

we have john nesbitt he is the co-author of the bestselling book china megatrends eight pillars of a new society and we also have doris nesbitt she's the director of the nesbitt china institute i want to go to you first. we hear the term reset people obviously go to the united states in russia but i'd like to pose before we get to that reset if it's real or not we know the greatest reset in international relations in the last twenty years since the end of the cold war is the new engagement that russia and china have which is quite remarkable ok so i want to talk about this triad a little bit here but first you know let's let's look at the reset is real and then we'll put china into it is the reset real or is it just a media event just for both sides to say it can't go on like this we really do have to talk to each other and we have to have some kind of moment and it was

a change of administration it's a change of administration and even if it only were a formula that allowed the two countries to talk together after a very difficult period in the relationship it would be important. that's what the reset has been about the countries are talking together now in a way they haven't in the past four or five years there's an intensity of engagement the senior levels that we haven't seen at least since the early years of the bush administration question is what are these two countries going to do going forward the first year and a half i think it's been promising in changing the tone in the relationship there's been a start agreement that signed i believe will be ratified in both the united states and russia the question going forward is where do these two countries do to get in the future to straighten this relation would have a duty other john if i can go to you here i mean again the reset to really focus on the united states and russia i don't see a lot of evidence of reset i think that they are still working they're still working on issues that they were before and just

a different stress the tone ok and we'll see what the results are but let's let's let's china into the cards here because relations are here to reset. but if it be the change in relations between china and russia are is very important and signify . for the world the gauge went of the united states and china and china has a lot of cards on the table now and people say it's the group of two now ok we'll throw russian who makes a little bit later the chinese don't like that very much but i do want to be one you know they don't they don't want to get involved in that game and they don't like the responsibility or the attention being one of two when they're really trying to join the world and be part of the world they really they don't they don't even like you know the eight and the twenty to begin where they were when a lot. so but i think this got to be a huge reset on the part mostly of the united states to accommodate.

in. its own behavior to accommodate the new course extraordinary presence of china in the great mix of countries and politics of the world i don't think he i mean in looking at china and the. there is the sense that the chinese do remember history they remember their own history very well. emerging it's reemerging if i get the chinese narrative correct ok and that also involves its neighborhood ok the relationship between let's say pretty forty nine china. in what was the soviet union of going back to the russian empire was not always very good with the chinese would see with certainly historically that the russians were part of the carving up of china of its influence in the humiliation of china and i think that that reemergence is to

a race that but you know russia feels very much the same you think when you look at russia and i'm not asking you to be a russia expert but you know emerging on the international stage do you see it's similarities between russia and china you know matching on the internationalist. no i think that's totally totally different if we use well the west as a reference point is a reference point because we have an international system that was designed and controlled in benefits the west now it's being very much challenging the biggest challenge of course is china yes but china has never. wanted to be part of the west russia has wanted to be part of the rest of the west you mention china's history china is very much aware of its own history people are very proud of their history and if we look back to the history in the in the twentieth century of course they have been very much linked to russia in their thinking russia was part

of model of course russia pour out a lot of moxie and it was we were saying so yes ok yes the soviet union so now the chinese have a little bit the problem too they drifted away from the communists thinking they still call it communism but it's a completely different way of communism so i think that you cannot really compare the two countries because their thinking is very different as we experience it regularly you. will what are they what is the chinese russian relationship trying to achieve here is it because together they have more clout in challenging western institutions they believe in western values as the world changes we've seen we heard earlier this for their delicate problems with democracies in the west as well i mean it's everyone has their problems and some can say they have their

achievements what's the relationship between russia and what do they want to get from each other and maybe pursue on the international age particular from the russian standpoint this is a way of increasing one's weight in the world aligning with china. is that are important to challenge the way the west the united states has to try to control the international system to insert a new set of if ideas ways of doing things making a point that countries that are increasing economic weight should have a voice in the governance of the global economic system that's equivalent to their increasing weight so i think the russians are tactical advantage kind of out of this where this leads over the long run is a big question mark russia and trying to do come from two different perspectives on international affairs two different histories two different credit traditions russia much more obviously a european country thinks of itself as a european country so why i think there's a certain tactical advantage at this point as each country china and russia tries

to assert itself on the international stage it's worth watching where this will take take both countries over the next ten years and then go to you joe what does china want as it is certainly asserts itself on the international space is we're getting kind of a division here you know they like the economic clout they want to be able to pursue their economic and agenda part of the communist party is the party of expectations ok you have to meet those expectations but does that match the same on the international stage of responsibility as being a global citizen is it that can they have the same thing because the west thinks very much in those terms it is always a package deal it's a package deal you know that. they want. you know it's like it's like you know say gee you got to create the value that because that will help our exports in us well china is now the chair of you know china you've got you can tell to do what

is best for china and. in all these regards in china it is not it's so preoccupied with its own growth. it's not it's not spending very much time thinking about you know does it connects you with joining the world and also in connection with natural resources of africa and has been doing really when when policy there versus not it was ready when an african would say that well a lot versus what the rest is done with if they are now fair government to government although we know what's happening there but china doesn't also spend too much of its time worrying about russia. there is the you know we have the new one because it doesn't have to worry about radio it doesn't have to worry about russia it doesn't worry that much about the u.s. china is preoccupied with with developing china and they've got

a long way to go and it's so interesting to us that the people who are articulate the problems of china most fervently are the chinese i mean they talk and the biggest problem in china by far is the growing and the leadership always says the growing gap between the between the income between the rural and the urban and fifty percent are still rural the energy that's going into that is far greater than the energy that is going into international considerations all of a attend to those feelings or do you mean the we always tend to think you know when a country is rising you know with his economic might should we expect him to take on moral responsibilities on the international stage as well let's say there's a humanitarian crisis let's say like like haiti should and should make a rich country we can talk about what rich means ok quantitatively atlas and least

should the chinese be also there as a footstep there and helping out people here because it is a major player and it wants to be respected as a major player should they be equal you know with their economic point what of course. and they are beginning to to to feel that responsibility and to react to that responsibility and of course they are in a position where they need to to increase to to make their reputation much better than it is because they are still a they will they're so concerned with internal development well it all goes to all the other side we just said you know there is really focusing on that ok i mean do they really care what the outside world. yes i don't think that he meant they don't care about the outside world just invited out i nama and you will have. you know there are certain points where the chinese have

a strong sense ability about they say they want the acknowledgement of the world and on one way they are very careful in stepping on the stage of the world because they don't want to be pushed back on the other hand of course they want to have a share a share in their responsibility and their share in the in the voice they want their voice to be heard as well and they're in this in this gap between internal needs for example when we said to chinese politician well why do you care if the dalai lama so big attention just don't say anything then of course they have they're the people who expect them to react in certain ways to certain things so as john said that's what what i want to underscore by that you have what is it like you know you see white after we take a short break when we come back we'll continue our discussion on resetting international relations stable started.

in. wealthy british style. marget why not. find out what's really happening to the global economy. and. welcome back to cross talk about three months you were talking about the resetting of relations on on the international arena including beijing washington in moscow ok before we went to the break you were one of the jump in go at it well it's not

so much the chinese want to be thought. the chinese want to be humiliated you know they speak of the hundred years of humiliation the japanese invasion the opium wars you know from the outside world and they just are so sensitive about this this kind of humiliation that they want to move through and get on the other side of it that's what drives them in here rather than want to be well thought of which they do two or another level but deep down it's no more humiliation ok movement at least on the international stage and i can go into me. and and if again you know we have seen democracy promotion expression during the the bush admin the bush administration bush jr which was thought of very badly here and that's an understatement here i mean that the democracy card is always being

played with noise but also pointed out you know the dalai lama that's what they would be people know the red buttons to press when it comes to the chinese but how much should we expect of that i mean we have an international system financial. it's very much in crisis and a lot of people will say look in your country florida two thousand you know you had an election problem you know i mean why should you be telling everybody else what to do i mean how sensitive should the chinese be about that i mean to say it's irrelevant it's not part of our tradition but there are elements within china itself that say that needs more democratization look i mean democracy is part of the international game at this point it's not only the united states that thinks in these terms we had a discussion at the forum today about democracy every country wants to think of itself as democracy at its ability because it's an inherent good it's because it's seen as a way of legitimate government at this point. but at the same time going to loot

anything with democracy no absolutely but but the fact that it's become part of an accurate that everybody talks in the street in those terms means that it does have some some significance in international affairs in the way we talk about these issues. you know democracy will always be a part of american foreign policy the question is how you go about promoting that would you take a very aggressive approach the way the bush administration did take another approach that is more in line with our tradition in line with our traditions to proscribe think the bombing ministration is taking you make your own country a success demonstration effect absolutely that other countries want to emulate as opposed to trying to impose your values on others but that always be part of the discussion and people writing about china people writing about russia at some point will raise the question of how democratic it is just part of the game and it's inevitable and it's i think it's very good how democratic it is in who's terms the west its position of the united states thinks that democracy can only be one way

and if you're not doing it are where you're not doing democracy means the reign of the people that's so the greeks said that's how it started the greeks who had slavery themselves the reign of the people and how you do that can be done in many . ways but the west and particularly the united states who says its system unless you doing it are where you're not really doing it and we are both in our research we did we talk about the beginnings. of a new kind of method station with of the markets the rate of the people as a vertical democracy dynamic in a place interplay bottom up and top top it's really starting to reshape china. in the democratic way in a way that results rated the people but no one's going to buy it in the west unless it's just like the west which is a conceit really doesn't hold water when you look at the history and it's very

interesting in this part of the world where in russia and we look at the post soviet space you know. two decades on a lot of people will say and i'd like to ask this of doris in reference to china is it people say what is it produced ok we look at ukraine ok for a period over years and tom this is very well. it's democracy didn't bring you anything except for chaos or if you could prove that you could possibly pull off an election but that's all it did ok you got political deadlock you didn't get any progress on the economy tanked and the ukrainian economy tanked before the economic crisis so you can imagine how bad it is being is that way the chinese will look at it to say you know we will take this element because it's fish and it works for us ok at a certain level where decision making can we can change and i agree with john made say well that's not democracy but it's as we maybe a weapon western discourse i mean is that how the chinese will look at it i mean it

has to be there has to be participation but it can be done and enter in terms that fit their model of traditions for its well. yes as you said they want to know what well some what doesn't and they have a very clear goal. one modest wealth for everybody in china and to reach that goal that is sort of the basic idea how do we create wealth for modest well for our people now they have the opinion that communism didn't work in the way they picked it up so they got rid of it and now they are searching for their own model which they will base of course on their own history and on their own culture and that's the way they very pragmatically go for what they can be called a huge trial and error. you know it's such an enormous country so instead of putting one system above everything they create their special economic zones for

example and now we're moving to a special political zones to try out different development different models and if it works in the region then they spread it across the country so they have a different model they used to get the results of course if you compare that to the western democracy which party could afford to say look we're going to declare california to be the model for this and that you know you would be stoned by the other party you could never have the time to really go through the years that are necessary to bring you the results so this is one of the advantages of. constancy of one party it's not called one party but the finity it is sort of a one party system that they can put up strategic goals and then. let

frame the forest so to say to reach the goal and let the people do whatever is necessary to get nothing succeeds like success. we've been talking about individual countries and democracy and i agree with you it's a it's become part of binocular but it's. it's value is so debased right now i it's i don't even like using the term anymore but you know a lot of people in this part of the world in the mill and western world in russia we have a separate program on that about its identity and you're very well aware of that but you know they will but there will be people in china and india brazil much of south america russia will say fine you talk you talk the talk of democracy but the international system isn't democratic at all ok there's a small number of people they can say no we're not going to do that one one or two countries can derail so many things initiatives in the world because that one country can say no but that's not democratic and it's a very huge double standard type i'm not going to take it aside climate change but

the united states really dragged its feet for a very long time and according to we want to listen to continues to because one country has made that decision and then the chinese can say well since you know you're not getting involved why should we get involved with whatever side you fall on it it's rather tragic ok we have how we're both americans ok we're all three of the three or four of us are americans i mean it's ok you know how do we how do we react to that you say you talk the talk and walk the walk of democracy but the international system is far from democratic and no one claims that the international system is democrat how can you keep us that if we can use this binocular of democracy all the time because democracy we would argue applies to individual societies since the individual is relationship with with the rulers it's not a theory that you apply to international relations person in part. in part because there are sufficient differences in values and way people think about the

worst that you would have our democracy is universal. even making that claim the devil's that you know i understand it may be universal in certain very broad terms but the way it is implemented in any society differ. dramatically based on the history and tradition of those societies democracy works in it in a country where there's already a political community we respect one another we know how what the framework is for the dispute and we will conduct this dispute within that framework and we're willing as americans to let a majority determine who the present in the united states is going to be or how the congress is going to run and. we're not in a position where we feel we share enough in terms of fundamental values or traditions that we would allow a billion chinese outvote three hundred million americans that i think is a very crude way because the americans would lose well obviously we would lose but the point is you can have democracy in china because there is

a shared cultural context with it we can have democracy in russia there's a shared cultural context as well in the united states and work by country for country but when you move try to move across societies and move across value systems i think we're in a different ball game and that's what international affairs of what do you think john i mean. i appreciate everything it's said but i mean a lot of people in the world would say that you know is that the international system is stacked in favor of very well i mean it's i know you know i'm not in so i didn't think anything new it's certainly the stack it's been reshuffled recently. but you know what's interesting about this talk about democracy and about china and whether or not it's becoming democratic because we believe it is you know a very different different way is that the western democracies are so dysfunctional these days their western democracy their parliaments are paralyzed all over the place including the latest examples australia. almost all the represent democracies

are including india and japan. so what what's happening to the traditional so-called universal western democracies at the same time that there are other. the country is struggling for maybe a new a new manifestation of how are you sure that in the end the people reign ok i was all we have time here for i want to thank our guest for our discussion here on the politics of recession and thanks to our viewers for watching us here are t. see you next time and remember cross talk rules. say.