right, time to process this and i'm to file and started as the west or different parts of the world and different media. they're going to have their own preferences based on often. sometimes it's like what the audience is once a year or what fits into a very specific narrative. as i've said, this is all, it's good. it's not neutral as a whole history. and we, we don't have all the time to get into all the history on the politics that's into why that's the representation that we have. but it's true that our stories are not told, but i also don't want to spend some of the time blaming all the people from attending aust started. so i think we need to continue to invest in opportunities to amplify and tell our own stories as well. you're watching r t international stick around for more news and just about half an hour the,

[000:00:00;00] the welcome to was a part a few years ago at close, connected conflicts with soldiers killing each other in near proximity. what's considered obsolete at least among militarily at south nations. it was stopped on a remotely controlled west funds or part knuckles' diploma, so you could deliver a desired outcome without much blood spilling. but the war in ukraine clearly defined that push pull thinking. how is it changing the character of more than a warfare of to discuss that i'm now joined by alexander hills,

professor of military history at the university of calgary. professor hill is great to talk to you. now i'm sure that when you were just embarking on this a specialization, academics, but solicitation you perhaps thought that horace bink worst for a thing of the past. at least you know, words that involve or a fax that was directly. and nowadays it's somewhat different. i wonder what it's like for and military historian to observe and try to analyze a war in which your country is also indirectly involved in real time. yeah, i mean it's simple to remember the west has been involved in a lot of for since i've seen one area. yeah. but i didn't impact. i assume they didn't impact the lifestyle demand. no, not particularly obviously they tended to be sure, well was in some of them that the, the enemies had a reasonable technological level, but i think, but the main thing, but the west that opponents didn't have was the murano often. now that doesn't

apply necessarily say to the serbs, you know, if you're looking detail of what happened to mucous lafayette, you know, this for example, sub united defense is well, much more effective than say those in a rack for example. but you know, it was a short war. iraq, obviously the, it's not the most recent technology and 90. why should i consider as a war, or was it something like uh, you know, some operation on the other side of the globe that i mean they were cold was and i think people treated them as was but, but was over the rather the was over here i think obviously, i mean in canada for example, and in the you k. yeah, they were seen as far away was whereas obviously the war and ukraine in europe. people say very differently. now conflicts have certain dynamics and people like yourself study those dynamics to hopefully, you know, birds,

the worst case scenarios. and i wonder if that's still the case in the west, because i know people in many countries like and pack us in india, in china, the military is studying what's going on on the front lines uh, between russian, your brand a very diligently, but i get a sense that the west only uses the the warfare for propaganda reasons do the inducing, the specialist actually looking into it in a productive terms for their, their own sake. and that's a good question. i mean, uh, i was asked once by the american army to give a talk on the russian way of war. and i gave a talk and i don't know how well it was, went down, but i don't think it went down very well because i don't think i said what they want to hear. so i think in a way, i'm agreeing with you that you know, they, they want to, that the study to some extent is changed by propaganda. even best study within the military. as i said, when i spoke to these, they said it was

a sort of arms length organization from the american military. i said, you know, don't be, don't be fooled by what happened to the beginning of the war. that sort of thing often happens in the russian case, or in any way it is on the nice thing. yeah. things go wrong at the beginning. the what you need to look at is how in the past is have recovered and then look from what's going on. and i said this was back more than a year ago while a near to the year and off i said, and i loved the russian military. recall that you've seen it recover and they look, they have a history of loading. they know how to learn from a conflict, and sure enough, this was, this was, i think just after the ukrainian counter attacks. and there was this idea or in west the military is all we need to do is give the opinions a few more times and they'll be in moscow next week out. so that was clearly upset and i said it was going to be upset because, you know, i know, i, i,

i have knowledge about the russian military. i knew that, you know, things didn't necessarily go a 100 percent on the kids marxist, bought the west and observe as ignore the is the actually things went quite well elsewhere. you know, in the don't pass rusher get into a lot of territory. and the important thing to remember is russia didn't have overwhelming number of troops, they only have roughly the same number as ukrainian. so actually at the beginning of the war west, the west, the military. so focusing on, oh, this dash, the key of didn't work out. what they ignored was that the russian army go a lots of territory very quickly. in other parts of you, frank, i know that you're an expert on a soviet military history and, and so many times um there was such a phrase as a manageable uh confrontation. uh, this'll be in to the russians to i think of, i paid a lot of attention to making sure that even if there are in, in rivalry or inimical relationship with the west,

that it's within the control. i wonder if the current level of conflict could be described as manageable? well, yeah, i mean, obviously there's a, there's a, there's a continued escalation that seems to be going beyond cold. well, no, i mean, obviously in the cold war there were many, many proxy was and that seems to have been in the construction, particularly of the, the sort of sketches of the cuban missile crisis that you reach a certain point. and you don't go any further of interested in. yeah. right. yeah. you don't, for example, you know, even if you've got some of mil, military personnel in a particular country, nominally fighting the other power, it's not something you publicize. it's all covert and preferably, you know, you, you, you, you help was side by providing them with weapons equipment. and that's it. of course, we have a lot of rather dangerous tools at the moment in the west of taking things further . i mean, obviously that's been escalation after escalation. we stopped it with all we're going to provide. there was

a store for just defensive weapon rate. then it was offensive web for any of tanks . of course, most of the defensive potentially there was then that was do we send long range missiles? not then that was the at sixteen's which are going to get sent. and obviously this is, this continued escalation doesn't seem to be stopping for now, both the west and the same via credit and leadership. put the focus on military hardware. there is an assumption that if you will provide more military hardware, then supposedly if with keep the dynamic going or get some advantages for the ukraine is do you believe that to be the case? is that the, the biggest uh sort of field where they so waterville being lost for one. i'm not a 100 percent convince that west and miller trees are convinced that's all they need to do. obviously, i was asked once to talk to them. they haven't asked me again, i don't think i said what they wanted me to say um certainly the politicians

have no way to run say they've already said, you know, we're in this until you train windows and so they have to keep supplying equipment . whether or not they think it's actually going to lead to what they hope it. well, uh, behind the scenes, you know, i've spoken to one to one or 2 military people. um, you know, as i stopped at the realize that the chances are that, that's what the politicians are saying. what would happen that, you know, as i would say, would you find, well, obviously be kept if certainly not from a, a certainly not much of the don't boss. and in fact, i think now i'm on submit in military circles in the west. there's this fear that actually, you know, the trains running out of manpower and it doesn't really matter what we provide. um, you know, the russians are gaining ground bit by bit. and there's always a danger of a you finding and collapse of some sort. and then what, what would that mean for the west? well, that's where things get interesting, isn't it? uh, that's when the crumbs sort of, big ideas come in with the well, i'll set,

you know, a couple of 100 the well more because i, i mean, would they, would they send troops into the west of ukraine? would they sort of try and draw some line and say, you know, will send troops and if russian forces go beyond that line, i don't know, i didn't do you have a, any sense of, uh, the west having a strategy here because i mean, yours is a is a field of strategy basis. yeah. wars have been fought and won over centuries and you, you need to 1st of all understand what you're trying to you at the end, whether you have the resources to get it. is there any, any signs that there is some calculus conscious calculus behind the scenes? i get the impression there is okay. good to uh, the calculus a is that it's providing weapons to ukraine is a very cheap way in west, in terms of getting at russia. it doesn't really matter whether the ukrainians wind,

also getting and russia, meaning exactly why. well weakening russia. i mean, meaning what, really the soldiers look to destroying russian times the more bold the better. hopefully they, you know, i think west of politicians hope they'll be, obviously an ethan, i'll make costs to russia, having to spend more on defense that hoping eventually they'll be a sort of political cost to too many soldiers being killed. and, you know, there is a, i mean it's become most at almost a cliche in the west, but this whole idea of, of fighting to the last ukrainian there's some truth behind it. i mean, think about that for the americans. $60000000000.00 for the reason. a package, it's not a lot of money. a lot of money stays within the united states in terms of frequent defense contracts and the like. um, pulled up money that you know, they buy time, they prolong the wall. they keep rush of busy. you know, this is their, ultimately, that's what the west is doing is all about. um, you know, trying to preserve west and the heck again,

many against the russian challenge. you pray that there's nothing, there were some challenges actually going after western hotel. no, that's the next the to there's a, there's a don't sense box way. but i mean, i, it's a guides, but it's about a russian challenge on the world stage. you know, cuz you know, i'm sure, obviously, but, you know, there was this feeling in the west after the, after the collapse of the soviet union that, you know, that were in amount of power the world. you know, that it's, that there's one world older. however, you want to phrase it, you're like what, what's difficult to understand about that is it's good to have power. it's good to have it done. and so i assume like if brings your any like many invited drugs, at least you would know how to use it for your own benefit. then when we look at the situation in the west, i myself having cited there and having many friends there. i don't get a sense that's west and looters are using it for their own advantage. it's. it's almost like a, you know, an old curse. you have access to lots of power, but they are using it in

a way that's totally destroyed as your society from with them. well, i agree that there might be long term consequences, but i think, you know, any politician knows that the best shot gun to gain to be had for you, not some sort of uniting against anatomy, an external, letting me. and so you know, in a way that they loved the idea of russia being the extra atlanta me because the coldwell wasn't that long ago. lots of people remember it, particularly in north america. i see it, i get the feeling that the cold war was taking a bit more seriously. need to say britain and to, you know, they were almost piggybacking on people's feelings from the previous cold war. and you know, it's, it distracts people's attention from domestic politics when you know, oh, you know, we've got to think about ukraine struggle for democracy that we, you know, we've got to be a nice fit in the face of the axis of evil. i've heard one of my colleagues describe, you know, russia, iran, china,

so just the recent reports coming out of washington, the white house. yeah. i mean, they obviously have a conception of, of that sort of axis of evil. but it's good to, you mentioned the, the issue of feelings i want to return to it. but after a short break, we'll be back in just a few moments state you in the village, largest democracy village, the rest of the planet watchers in an emerging multi polar world. india's voice matters, but who will be the power behind watches, almost 1000000000 people decide and billions more, react the

welcome back towards the parts with alexander hills, professor in the military history and university of calgary, professor field before the break. we started talking about the motions and sort of resurrecting the old stereotypes of the soviet union as this, the new, clear on the boogie man i'm the we see and that trends in russia to uh, to sonics down because uh, the ethers of the grace patriot. a war have been resurrected during this conflict, and i know this is one of your preferred subjects of study the soviet period, the during the or rather the soviet involvement in the 1st world wars. how do you think uh, of those past experiences are affecting what's going on today between russia and the west, both militarily on the battlefield and in terms of propaganda and messaging, there was a little bit talk in the west uh, in the, even into the early 2000, so you know,

the russian army was outdated and even within russia there was this idea that it was updated. there were obviously then it was on that one just, i'm extend and that they were there, they were the reform started at the end of in sort of 2008, 2009 period. and, you know, you know, in a way rush, the resting on forces stopped to move multiple, just sort of west and model of the more nimble of forces capable of dealing with terrorist threats. you know, smaller units getting rid of divisions at one point down. just making brigades, but i think it's fortunate probably, militarily for russia though, that process didn't go too far because obviously, you know, it found itself fight to get more conventional war. uh, it didn't go too far because of fresh concerns about the nature of the schools. and you know, very soon they were recreating divisions and even call her again of, thankfully, you know, you, you and i both know the in rush as

a sort of tendency to safe things for a rainy day. and obviously the russian on forces save lots of equipment from the soviet period. and you know, that equipments still useful today in a wall that is, in some ways quite similar to the 2nd world war, obviously with chet technological changes. but you know, it's still relies on off hillary and it doesn't really matter. whereas about the, some of this off hillary was manufactured in the seventy's or in the last 10 years it's still very useful tight. so whatever else, and i think it has a very um, russian and different from the west understanding of petrol, a component because just stay on the day put in was talking about how it's fun, the whole caught, which industry of have made drones that civil and fiercely as construct in san to the military unit. so there is that nation wide engagement in this war in either military sense or in like non governmental civil sounds. people are

collecting money. they are sending military aids and like it involves the whole population and i get a sense of the for the west. and it's, it's a totally different war. it's a, it's a propaganda worth of work. persuasion, you know, using all those stereotypes about, you know, the russians as orks and by a robot, etc. but without actually explaining to the people why this effort is important to the lively, because for the russians it's, it's clear why, why they're fighting that this. what do you think people in the west understands why their money, you know, the money for that could have been gone into schools and yeah, this and why it's going there. i think, i think that the beginning people were willing to accept the idea that, you know, this is defending democracy. there's some sort of wall of democratic countries that rush just trying to smash through, you know, stopping with ukraine. but i don't think those those ideas are necessarily working in the west as well as they were. one of the reasons i think is, is what the,

because the war and when the boring causes started. because then then i think when you know, when, when west and television showed, you know, thousands and thousands of civilians in gauze and getting killed and fairly staunch west and support these riley side. i think that stopped it to undermine the sort of wide belief. and i'm on a minute what is what we're being told really accurate. i think people started to question more partly because about the reason being because although the west sort of prides itself on having this open press and whatever else, very difficult in the west say something and get it in the mass media country to a sort of established political life squares on the gauze, the issue was a bit easier and that sort of broke into that, that sort of broke, broke, this whole the media had on, on people. and it allows me really, when i don't remember him, if you mentioned people's believe that they leave in democracies,

but do they actually have the tools or, you know, any leverage to influence uh, what is being done in the name and the behalf. oh yeah. i mean, obviously a lot of people understand the democracy doesn't really allow a lot of info of west and style democracy doesn't allow a lot of influence for the people on the street. and then as in any country, some people say, oh, well whatever i, i'll just going with my life and i'm not really interested in international affairs, others across the united states that they think that they are concerned about that, but i feel, i suppose disenfranchised. i mean, if i take the example of canada, a 3 political major political policies are essentially pro war against russia. so yes, there's no voice in follow them as a tool saying how long a minute we subs and obviously canada doesn't spend as much on the water as the us . so the u. k. but you know, nobody's really questioning. is this the right thing to do?

it's a, it's a to boot and yeah, i think a lot of people just feel powerless. you know, there isn't a premium here in russia. that's one of the things that distinguishes western and russian associated this war is the factor of fear. because russia having lost so much during the world war 2 and no e, you do not metabolize the collector of trauma like that in 2 or 3 generations. so like, visceral sierra would still be within the like people psyche is. yeah. and this is troubling because fear is actually, you know, it's a live saving motion. this is something that protects you against the, you know, decisions that would be too big and we haven't during the world war 2. so in a sense, i see it as a, as a contradiction that you say that's the old steward, tops of the russians are being resurrected. yeah, the fear factor is being resurrection, but somehow it's totally absent in decision making. that is, this fear and this fear obviously rushes

a long way away from canada. bit close to the britain. it's still, but the weapon still the quickly. i mean, i think the west, the military. well, her, in the clear what obviously they're nuclear weapons that obviously there's some political reaction to the possibility know, might say, even though we know the russia that has no funds to protect canada, for example, if it's threatening the sleep of kind of there's has a such a puny ami, it's no position to threaten anybody. suppose they have purity, our neighbor, the allowed boy is allowed cause the rest of the rhetoric off is allowed to the it's, it's a lot of box, but not much bite. but, i mean, obviously kind of this chosen, for example, to finally spend money on the $35.00, that's billions of dollars is a huge piece of expenditure. and, you know, i hope that they wouldn't this their own, that much better things to spend the money on. this even talking canada of canada, buying nucleus operates, which they've never had. now that may not have,

but it depends how long you know, these tensions go. um, so i think that is enough enough people have bought into this fear high data for that to be politically acceptable in canada. it's an abstract fear. it's a fear of do payable. but i mean, the western governments have been very careful to sort of play down the possibility of nuclear war because they want to keep escalates again. they realize that the fear of nuclear war is one thing that names what might make west of the population to start to question what's going on. so it's instrumental, i fear it's safe here for the politicians to get what they want. oh, you don't think it was, but if you'd like to disclose it is so yeah, they want to, they want to play off the, the sort of conventional threat that's, you know, if you're trying falls then special take the both the public some. but i really wants to play down the nuclear threat because they realize that something that people might get really concerned about. and you know,

they might be public pressure fall negotiations. but this is something that the number of freshman hardliners have raised recently that they, they need to be some real stripe, perhaps with tactical nuclear weapons. so that this fear becomes a little bit more concrete ties for the west and populations to put pressure on that leaders and stop, you know, sending weapons and the right pushing into our neighborhood. what do you think about that there the hotline is booted? there's no odd line there. in fact, one thing that i think west and audience is, don't understand this in many ways, letting me put it as quite a moderate character. absolutely. the allowed for western alliance and they to alliance to push into the 1st. i don't know, that's how i rush. it didn't invite me really worth less of a hard life pull to be making those have had the ukrainian war. i mean, if you drew the line a little bit earlier. yeah, that's right. so, you know, pictures i'm old. right. he's in no rush to clearly to use nuclear weapons. you

know, i think, i think increasingly i, i get the impression just from watching a lot of russian television speeches. you know, i think a lot to me putting feels a lot more in control of the situation than perhaps you did. you know, earlier on in the war, um, you know, the west crude escalates, but you know, they're reaching the point that there might be more serious consequences from an escalation. i mean, i personally don't think, but, you know, we're in the talking about tactical nuclear weapons. but my colleagues and i sometimes my sort of more reasonable colleagues and i sometimes talk about what would happen say if front states send some troops into it. right. us now, ida. nobody's going to use a nuclear weapon out for that. but for example, russia might, it could use a few cruise missiles, feel a few french soldiers and say, hey, we're serious about this. you know, not a huge loss of life. but just to sort of cross press the red line and say, you know what, you guys need to stand off. i think us, but sort of scenarios

a lot more likely than nuclear weapons. there's big talk about, you know, maybe russia could explode a tactical nuclear weapon over the baltic, just the, so to show people, i think we're a long way away from that. well, if fruit is in charge, as i say, he's the mother. he says, you know, he's looking very controlled, he's got control of the situation that fails the task. obviously he's got pressure from the. so the 5 line is but, you know, if they don't roll the right, i don't think he easily yields to pressure. but uh, ultimately, you know, i think most moral ends and people would wanna, they swore to out in some sort of a compromise that would be good for the russians, for the ukrainians and for the west. and i wonder, and i guess this is my last question here, as long as the worst continues fighting this proxy war with the trying to get something without really enduring any consequences? do you think it's possible? well, i mean for the west it is as long as the ukrainians keep fighting and dying full

them, then they can keep providing money. now ultimately, i think the frame unami will would collapse with me clearly. you know, you, frank just doesn't on fairly simple level, it simply doesn't have a population to stay in the you're suggesting is just the a sitting i've lee and waiting for, for you for the well, the west happy with the in some ways that situation because like there are those in the west is a rush or is being kept busy, so it's not doing something else. i'm not sure what else russia would be doing, but you know it's, it's literally it's sort of, you know, we just want to hurt rusher and boots in and, you know, have to ukrainians, want to suffer for it then. then let them, by the way, why do you think the premium is one to suffer for it? because it's also a very puzzling point issue from the historical perspective. not many countries a read it's, you know, compromise itself and to such an extent, how do you understand it? yeah, i mean, i mean sort of,

i think part of the problem for the ukrainians is that obviously the most nationalistic part of ukraine is in the west, and that's the past. right. it also is yeah, that, yeah, yeah, and that's the bought this least touched by the war. so to some extent, even within your train, you know, the west console to pretend the was not is obviously much more real for people in the app on the east. obviously, those reality is a striking home. now, as you're training a new prescription is ramping up this doctor to get younger people. you know, that's trying to get people from abroad. you know, slowly but surely i, you know, i, i think with time even with the fact that the training and government is clearly controlling the message within ukraine very carefully. i mean, i'm sure it's only a matter of time before they'll be preference pressure to some sort of compromise based that will involve, you know, acceptance that, that on bus and from a, a russian. and then they can stop talking about, you know, the nitty gritty things,

you know, what sort of relationship movie brain have with nato, those thoughts of all the issues. but you know, i think it's only a matter of time full of hopefully we will not have to wait until the last tier crane in franklin. oh yeah. but it's time for us to leave it there. thank you very much for the people have always been pleasure. thanks. thank you for watching and hope to see you again. as well as the part

the the buried alive at least 11 people are killed and 20 wounded after ukrainian strike decimate. so section of an apartment building and the russian city of gallagher, but also the rescue team searched for the victims further. debris came raining down on them, injuring 3 workers on the offensive. russian troops gain ground in the heart of region, leaving ukrainian forces on the back foot. also ahead. president vladimir putin is re shuffling his cabinets. the russian defense minister sir de chicago, is proposed to be the russians security council secretary with his post to be