RT — Moscow Mules
20261012 003000 UTC
503 transcript segments
Google Speech-to-Text API Automatic Transcription (Chirp)
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:04] in
[00:00:07] of
[00:00:42] Hello a of and welcome to worlds apart. If you were asked to
[00:00:46] describe the United States relationship with other countries in three
[00:00:50] words, what would you choose? Constructive,
[00:00:53] strategic and stable, are almost certainly not near
[00:00:57] the top
[00:00:57] of the list, and yet, according to... President Trump and President She,
[00:01:01] this true will supposedly form the basis
[00:01:05] of the US-China relationship going forward. How
[00:01:08] realistic is that? Well, to discuss that I'm now joined by Andrew Lung
[00:01:12] a China specialist and Hong Kong's former chief
[00:01:15] representative for the UK, Russia, and number of
[00:01:19] EU member states. Mr. Lung, it's great to
[00:01:22] of talk to you. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you very much indeed. Great to
[00:01:26] be on the show. We are recording this interview fresh.
[00:01:30] after the Chinese president's visit to the United States, which resulted
[00:01:33] in a placatory tariff reduction agreement,
[00:01:37] but it's a very hard not to be skeptical
[00:01:41] about how long it will stand given all
[00:01:44] the
[00:01:46] of complicated relationship between China and the United States in recent
[00:01:50] months, how do you take it? well, you have to look
[00:01:54] at the readout from Beijing
[00:01:57] even before the meeting, uh and the meeting is
[00:02:01] expected to be defined
[00:02:02] by three words
[00:02:04] um according to in line with your opening remarks, but
[00:02:08] the three words are quite different,
[00:02:10] the three words are
[00:02:12] in constructive, strategic
[00:02:15] and stability, constructive strategic stability are the
[00:02:19] of three words which a Chinese side um they
[00:02:22] hope that would define the relationship. first of all, what does these
[00:02:26] three words mean? constructive means ' both
[00:02:30] countries should stay away
[00:02:33] from asum
[00:02:36] mentality, looking at
[00:02:40] what could be
[00:02:41] of achieved realistically on both sides. um, strategic
[00:02:45] means both sides should
[00:02:47] of address each other's core interests, because the core interests do not
[00:02:50] coincide. stability means the both countries should
[00:02:54] avoid a zero sum game which could
[00:02:58] spiral out of control. towards hot war
[00:03:01] confrontation, so th these are the three words, but
[00:03:05] reality as
[00:03:06] i said more complicated, well when
[00:03:07] of the Chinese present is using uh this exact phrase,
[00:03:11] of constructive strategic stability, and I fully understand what it means,
[00:03:15] but this phrase seems to be completely out
[00:03:18] of the Trump's
[00:03:21] in administration scope and style of operation, so when the
[00:03:23] Chinese rely on that, is it more
[00:03:27] about value
[00:03:28] of projection, about perhaps? virtue signaling
[00:03:31] of or they indeed believe that the Americans can
[00:03:34] commit themselves to behaving like that with any nation
[00:03:38] let let alone China. Well of course that's what China
[00:03:41] hopes, because what China wants is not to replace the
[00:03:45] United
[00:03:47] of States um dominance, because neither China is
[00:03:50] me interested nor is China
[00:03:52] of capable of replicating 800
[00:03:55] military bases around the world, and China does not have the...
[00:04:00] dominance of his
[00:04:02] of currency, and and let alone that's China's philosophy,
[00:04:06] so China wants a more stable world, so as to
[00:04:10] grow is economy, so as to achieve is vision
[00:04:13] of renaissance, achieving the so-called second
[00:04:17] centenary goal,
[00:04:18] of whereby by 2049, which is the 100th anniversary of
[00:04:22] Chinese republic of China,
[00:04:24] of China will become an advanced socialist country
[00:04:27] bringing the... the living of his people, but of
[00:04:31] course that that would mean that um China
[00:04:35] has um find itself challenging the
[00:04:38] dominance
[00:04:39] of the United States in various fields
[00:04:41] a in the fields of technology, in the field of of
[00:04:45] course um group with supplying value chain. China
[00:04:49] after all is the largest trading partner 228
[00:04:52] countries around the world, so I think
[00:04:54] that these are structural differences which translate
[00:04:57] into
[00:04:58] a um long-term riley between the two
[00:05:02] countries. now Mr. Long, just as you said, President She and
[00:05:05] of President Trump represent very different systems and they
[00:05:09] also personally and nationally operate on.
[00:05:13] drastically different world views that it's hard to believe that they
[00:05:17] could ever come to a lasting and mutually satisfying
[00:05:20] arrangement and from the outside at least from Russia, it looks like the
[00:05:24] Americans are trying to manage their own decline by
[00:05:28] trying to drag China down, is it how it's
[00:05:32] perceived in China? well of course that's what's perceived
[00:05:36] in by many people in China that the United States
[00:05:40] is placing road blocks ' to contain China's
[00:05:43] rice, but on the end, as I explained earlier, that's a
[00:05:47] structural kind of result from
[00:05:51] the
[00:05:52] um and continuing dominance the United States in many fields
[00:05:55] and also uh President Trump's agenda of
[00:05:59] making American great again, thinking American can
[00:06:02] maximize its dominance to con to
[00:06:05] prolong its hegemony, um so that's
[00:06:09] um is not a matter of rhetoric is a reality now. I think China
[00:06:13] understands that, but I think that China hopes that
[00:06:16] by bringing two leaders together they can better understand each
[00:06:20] other um without a kind of star
[00:06:24] eye kind of vision, but at
[00:06:28] least the truth is now some sort of a
[00:06:31] truth
[00:06:32] as is being realized, but for very short term,
[00:06:36] you can see that that
[00:06:37] there was a stoppage of terrorists, but only for a couple of months and the
[00:06:41] reason for this... very short periods suggest that the
[00:06:44] ry is likely to continue, why a couple of months? because
[00:06:48] President Trump wants to have um, I say scenario where
[00:06:52] where he can narrate kind of long-term
[00:06:56] peaceful relationship with China in the light the upcoming
[00:07:00] midterm elections. you mentioned some statistics and my
[00:07:04] statistics,
[00:07:05] my figure slightly differ, I rely on the uh latest
[00:07:08] 2026 IMF report, but it also
[00:07:11] suggests... that China is now the largest trading partner
[00:07:15] for 151 countries around the world as opposed
[00:07:19] to uh the United States being uh
[00:07:22] 58 or 57. now any case it shows
[00:07:26] very substantial disbalance and if the Americans
[00:07:30] want to change that
[00:07:31] I suppose they will need to offer the world something both positive
[00:07:35] and palitable
[00:07:37] some genuinely new added value just like China did
[00:07:41] to
[00:07:42] you ' woo all these nations and encourage them to trade with
[00:07:45] it, first and foremost, but the Americans still rely on the
[00:07:49] old narratives on the old threats
[00:07:52] plus you know the old instrument of
[00:07:55] tariffs, why do you think they are so stuck in their
[00:07:58] ways? well, let's underestimate the United States, I mean
[00:08:02] United States have lot of very clever people,
[00:08:06] um, but all the reality stares them in the face in sense that
[00:08:10] after decades of outsourcing them... manufacturing um
[00:08:14] facilities to around the world, not least to China, um,
[00:08:18] their manufacturing um capacity is been hollowed
[00:08:22] out, they no longer produce a lot the products around the world, but they
[00:08:26] are good good at producing high end goods, they want
[00:08:30] to
[00:08:30] to to maintain their control over semiconductors
[00:08:33] and also in AI, this
[00:08:37] very keen competition, so they want to zero
[00:08:40] in on the commanding. heights the
[00:08:44] the trade, not just every trade, but on the other hand, as
[00:08:48] I said, for the broad areas of trade, the
[00:08:52] capacity has been hot out, but they want to focus on the
[00:08:56] commanding heights, so I think that this is the keen competition that
[00:08:59] slightly intensify on AI, on high-tech
[00:09:03] technology, on on robotics
[00:09:07] and and drones and that kind of thing, now you talked about
[00:09:11] the American. ration to secure that dominance
[00:09:15] at the so-called commanding heights and China has also uh
[00:09:18] made some inroads in that direction, I'm talking about its
[00:09:22] leverage over the Americans, particularly its
[00:09:26] access to rare earth materials which are critical for American
[00:09:30] manufacturing, including military manufacturing, how big of
[00:09:34] factor is that and without it, do you think the geopolitical
[00:09:38] situation between Washington and Beijing and perhaps even more broadly around the world,
[00:09:42] do
[00:09:42] you think... would have been the same, well let's concentrate on the two examples
[00:09:46] as an illustration on the kind
[00:09:49] of continuing rary, the first one is on
[00:09:53] maybe rare earth you mentioned and the second is on
[00:09:57] AI, well as far as rare earth is concerned um
[00:10:01] let's not conflate the supplied of rare
[00:10:04] earth with the processing because supply rare
[00:10:08] earth is everywhere, mean the rare earths in in united states rare
[00:10:11] earth. in Ukraine and the Greenland, Canada,
[00:10:15] Australia, all over the place, but then the rare earths are are
[00:10:19] the rare elements, they need to be
[00:10:23] refined and highly... sophisticated and highly
[00:10:26] polluting process which China has perfected, China would
[00:10:30] continue to maintain this dominance, but again this dominance
[00:10:34] is not going to last forever, and other countries, not
[00:10:38] just the United States are going to find their own way to develop
[00:10:41] their capabilities, but it's likely to take maybe
[00:10:44] decades before that happens. now on
[00:10:48] AI, um, I think that the there's no doubt
[00:10:52] that again, America is slightly... head, but
[00:10:55] even then um the top um officials
[00:10:59] admitted that the china is is now 80 or
[00:11:02] even 90% and only few months uh
[00:11:05] behind, but the big big difference is that the American
[00:11:09] put um almost selling the farm and putting all
[00:11:13] they have on
[00:11:14] um AI data centers. the second big difference is that
[00:11:18] the American AI ecology is based on fee
[00:11:22] charging, you can't use the AI model unless pay whereas China is now
[00:11:26] opening up is the open um open
[00:11:30] forum um and you like the internet in the beginning is over to
[00:11:34] everybody so China the strategy is based
[00:11:37] a the modu is much cheaper much more
[00:11:40] affordable um and to use and because it's free after
[00:11:43] all um secondly it's compare very
[00:11:47] closely with the you fees pay kind of model and
[00:11:51] then you have more people embrace the china's model then china would
[00:11:55] have the advantage. now uh, I heard you also say in another
[00:11:59] interview that Trump's capriciousness could lead to a more
[00:12:02] balanced world as more and more countries seek various
[00:12:06] partnerships as a way of ensuring uh
[00:12:10] predictability of ensuring stability and also ensuring better deal
[00:12:13] as you ellicidated just now, if you can get a cheaper
[00:12:17] technology and with uh less restraints, why wouldn't you
[00:12:21] do that? I mean, ultimately, the nation still have...
[00:12:25] a degree of choice in the economic affairs, now that would still leave
[00:12:29] the United States as this wild card of
[00:12:33] international affairs as a disrupting force, and I do want to
[00:12:37] ask you about that, do you think the Americans will continue
[00:12:41] relying on this uh disrupting strategy going forward, or do you
[00:12:45] think sooner or later they will get they will have enough of it and will
[00:12:49] also want to ensure some predictability and
[00:12:52] stability for themselves perhaps a less grand yours
[00:12:56] grounds, well let to understand the dynamics
[00:13:00] going ahead, one has got to understand Americans
[00:13:03] dominance um the unip unipolar
[00:13:07] world which existed after the second world war, other countries
[00:13:11] can compare American influence not only on the military but also
[00:13:15] in trade, in finance um and in is the size of his
[00:13:19] economy and so on, and this so-called American
[00:13:22] led liberal world order is... based on even though
[00:13:26] American own interest because after all the
[00:13:30] rules are skilled and in favor the el states, but
[00:13:33] nevertheless there are some norms and some
[00:13:36] rules which American try to uphold so as to
[00:13:40] lift the b for everybody and so that's to benefit
[00:13:44] um other allies and traders including especially china, china
[00:13:48] is benefit hugely by this American world liberal
[00:13:51] order, but as I said in the beginning this order is now lies in.
[00:13:55] tatus as the Trump administration is imposing sanctions and
[00:13:58] tariffs and making petitory demands even for
[00:14:02] territory of his closest allies including Canada,
[00:14:06] Greenland and and so on, and then it's so
[00:14:10] capricious because one one hand they negotiating with
[00:14:13] Iran, and while the negotiation going
[00:14:16] on, they sending bombers and and and steal fighters and destroy their
[00:14:19] leadership, so I think many countries are
[00:14:23] now have now lost. part in this
[00:14:26] american world order, but China is not prepared, it's
[00:14:30] not entirely capable of replacing that,
[00:14:33] because as I said China is now benefiting hugely, so I think that
[00:14:37] what China wants is a at least growd is
[00:14:41] in self-reliance and technology, b) to
[00:14:45] be less succeptable to American dominance
[00:14:48] using the US dollar using bilateral
[00:14:52] trade currencies, the UAE or if the middle east are
[00:14:56] selling oil to China, why do they need to use the US dollar? so I think
[00:15:00] the same applies to country selling soy beans to China and so so
[00:15:04] forth and and gradually um more countries
[00:15:07] trading between countries not between individuals because after
[00:15:10] all the US dollars still very useful uh but between countries trading
[00:15:14] with China um the directly in their own mutual
[00:15:18] currencies and that would have the effect of
[00:15:21] eroding the dollars dominance. well Mr. Long and you
[00:15:25] still haven't answered my direct question of whether you think the Americans will have
[00:15:29] had enough the sort of dominance
[00:15:32] claims and may resort to a more gradual and
[00:15:36] stable arrangement. with other nations, but let's address that question after a
[00:15:40] short break, we will be back a couple of moments, stay
[00:15:43] tuned.
[00:16:07] The Deep State has its hands in everything. I was in the middle
[00:16:11] of it for decades. When I blew the whistle on CIA
[00:16:15] torture, the Deep State turned on me. They ruined my
[00:16:19] life, took away my rights, threw me in
[00:16:22] prison, but they didn't break
[00:16:24] me. I fought back
[00:16:28] and I still do. I'm John Kiriaku, on my
[00:16:32] show, the Deep State, I take you behind the geopolitical moves, the color
[00:16:36] revolutions, behind the... politics and the
[00:16:38] politicians, we shine a light on where the deep state is
[00:16:42] hiding,
[00:16:53] welcome back to world's apart with Andrew Lung a China
[00:16:56] specialist and Hong Kong's former chief representative for the
[00:17:00] UK, Russia and number of EU member states.
[00:17:04] Mr. Lung, just before the break we discuss that America. are
[00:17:07] pretty used to uh getting that way uh a
[00:17:11] hard way by threats, by demands, by trying to be
[00:17:15] domineering uh, and I ask you whether you think
[00:17:19] that uh soon or later they will find it that uh,
[00:17:23] you know, this strategy is no longer working, especially as more and more
[00:17:26] nations uh do take the liberty to build the
[00:17:30] relationships diplomatic and economic relationships with China and with
[00:17:34] other international players, so do you think... the
[00:17:37] americans will ever get enough of this
[00:17:41] domineering strategy? well, I think that
[00:17:44] this
[00:17:46] um um hegemonic kind of mindset is
[00:17:49] deeply within Donald Trump's
[00:17:52] personality, he think that the American of course is is
[00:17:56] is still the the greatest and most powerful country on the
[00:17:59] planet and and the United States according to
[00:18:03] his him and his followers has been short changed
[00:18:07] by this even by his allies, so it's now um
[00:18:10] incument upon him to change that by maximizing American's
[00:18:14] dominance on finance, with us dollar,
[00:18:18] is military, so it's likely to continue with the Trump
[00:18:22] administration, but of course there are um increasing headwinds as we
[00:18:26] have covered, both in China's able to withstand
[00:18:30] resilience and other countries in the group of south
[00:18:33] recalibrating relationship with away from the...
[00:18:37] states uh not to forsake United States all together, but at
[00:18:41] least balancing the trade, which result, as you pointed out
[00:18:45] earlier in China achieving huge
[00:18:48] surplus by pivating to the global south, so I think that
[00:18:52] this is like to continue, but I think that with democratic
[00:18:55] administration uh things may be again recalibrated,
[00:18:59] because um still Americans the people set greak
[00:19:03] store on American's leadership um the whole world
[00:19:06] order. since the second world war, and then as you pointed out, they
[00:19:10] find that this kind of unilateral hegemonic mindset
[00:19:14] maybe hasn't is not working, and they may be
[00:19:17] recalibrating back towards a more
[00:19:21] beny relationship, but still
[00:19:23] the they would rely on Americans at dominance in many fields including the
[00:19:27] military. Let ask you about perhaps
[00:19:30] taking this relationship from a
[00:19:34] unilateral or bilateral format to a trilater. one because
[00:19:38] there is lot of talk ahead the upcoming apex
[00:19:41] summit in China in November about a possible
[00:19:45] meeting between uh President Trump president she and President
[00:19:48] Putin um do you think it's likely? well
[00:19:52] I would roll out the possibility because after all President
[00:19:56] Trump has expressed the wish to attend the
[00:19:59] meeting and as far as the host the meeting China's
[00:20:03] concerned Beijing of course would prefer uh Trump
[00:20:07] attended. and of course um president Putin um which is
[00:20:11] very good friend with President C, so if the three leaders
[00:20:14] are there, why not organize a
[00:20:17] trilateral, at least dialogue, even though
[00:20:21] it's unlikely change the fundamental and structural
[00:20:25] differences, so I think that this is possible, but whether that
[00:20:29] happens still remains to be seen, again there could be
[00:20:32] informal meetings and even if there is a formal meeting, I don't think it's
[00:20:36] unlighted with. change the dynamics, for example, the war on Ukraine is
[00:20:40] still going on, and the United States approach
[00:20:43] to the war um and is not always
[00:20:47] at all force with Russias and and national
[00:20:50] security and then the Europeans of course are putting spinners in the
[00:20:54] works and the Europeans are al also some them are still
[00:20:58] maintaining very close relationship with the United
[00:21:02] States to contain Russia over
[00:21:06] Ukraine so I think that there are still fundamental differences but as far as the
[00:21:10] trilateral meeting idea is no bad idea so
[00:21:13] that the two three dealers together at least talk things um um
[00:21:17] not talk things over but at least establish. a deeper understanding of
[00:21:21] each each other's position, for a long time the Americans had
[00:21:25] habit of treating such high-level visits, not as a meeting
[00:21:29] of equals or diplomatic necessity, but as reward
[00:21:32] for good behavior. now that clearly is not going
[00:21:36] to work for either president Putin or president chi, but I wonder
[00:21:40] if the tables by now have turned a little bit
[00:21:44] that, President Trump may seek such an occasion
[00:21:48] more than the the the other two. presidents not because of any
[00:21:51] concrete deals, but just for the
[00:21:53] sake of grandstanding and personal gratification
[00:21:57] being pictured you together with other
[00:22:01] presidents or leaders of great powers, wouldn't
[00:22:05] that tantalize President Trump's
[00:22:08] ego? well of course President Trump is a great master
[00:22:12] theatrics, um, he can turn um the
[00:22:15] perception as according to the China saying, deer into a
[00:22:19] horse. you thinks is a horse, it would become a horse instead of
[00:22:23] deer, and so I think that his master of
[00:22:26] narrative, but on the other hand, I think that if
[00:22:30] he wants things badly, he could really bend backwards as
[00:22:34] exemplified by his um fawing reception
[00:22:38] of president sea, you ruling out the red carpet and meeting
[00:22:41] presidency and and his first lady a tamet has never
[00:22:45] been seen before, so I think that again is a theatre, I
[00:22:49] think the... both um all the leaders and see through that um,
[00:22:53] but it doesn't stop presidency continue to play the
[00:22:57] game is very very good at. well uh, good rapport among
[00:23:01] leaders is definitely a very valuable asset in
[00:23:04] geopolitics, the Putin sheer relationship is a good example of that,
[00:23:08] but what do you think it means in case of Donald Trump, and isn't there
[00:23:12] a risk that President Trump, if that meeting indeed comes to
[00:23:16] pass, may feel a little bit left out given the,
[00:23:20] Putin Shinge that exists already, because President She
[00:23:24] and President Putin do understand each other much a much deeper level
[00:23:27] and then President Trump relates to either
[00:23:31] one them. I think that the Beijing is much
[00:23:35] better master the kind of international
[00:23:39] and geopolitical dynamics even the
[00:23:42] perceptions in such important meetings, witness president
[00:23:46] Trump's last visit to the bricks summit, you can. see on the
[00:23:50] theater, obviously India was trying to cosey up to
[00:23:53] president Putin um and leaving the
[00:23:57] China's leader in the cold sometimes with and
[00:24:01] also presidency afterwards make hasty
[00:24:05] exit from the the bricks
[00:24:08] meeting, but I think that as far as the Beijing is
[00:24:12] the host obviously he want to be to be seen to be
[00:24:15] respectful to both leaders to as United States.
[00:24:20] and and after all Putin is a long-term allied and
[00:24:24] very good friends and so I think that this is
[00:24:28] um um presidency is trying to cheat both leaders with great
[00:24:31] respect and on even kill now if that meeting
[00:24:35] uh indeed materialize one the issues that seems to be offering
[00:24:39] itself up for discussion would be the resumption the talks
[00:24:42] on some sort of trilateral nuclear arms
[00:24:46] control treaty and CNN reported the... other day that
[00:24:50] China and the United States have already discussed reciprocal
[00:24:54] nuclear sites visits, do you think that
[00:24:58] uh,
[00:24:59] you know, deal has any potential, given that
[00:25:03] China's nuclear arsenals at this point of time are substantially
[00:25:07] smaller than those the United States and Russia, and clearly
[00:25:10] China wouldn't want to be uh reduced at
[00:25:14] that level, it would want to feel on on equal
[00:25:18] kill with other players. Well, I don't think the Beijing necessarily
[00:25:22] wants a complete parity, because after all the modern nuclear
[00:25:26] weapons are warheds and much more powerful that those drop
[00:25:29] on Nagasaki and
[00:25:32] Hiroshima, multiple times more powerful, so you don't
[00:25:36] need hundred nuclear warheads um to destroy
[00:25:39] nation, and now you look at the stock pile, um, Russia
[00:25:43] is the largest, world's largest stop pile over 3ous,
[00:25:47] maybe 3,300, the United States. is very closely behind over
[00:25:51] 300 and china is not even reaching 100
[00:25:54] um even though China doesn't
[00:25:56] want parity obviously um you need
[00:26:00] a sufficient number to deploy. them in
[00:26:03] strategic assets and theaters, but on the other
[00:26:07] hand, it's not in China's interest to see
[00:26:10] nuclear proliferation as well as because then the more
[00:26:14] weapons um if there is an arms race,
[00:26:18] especially with what's happening around the world over
[00:26:21] Ukraine and and on over Iran,
[00:26:25] countries are beginning to feel, especially the middle power
[00:26:29] countries, they feel they're
[00:26:31] so not vulnerable to... american military dominance and the only defense
[00:26:35] is possession and nuclear powers, this could lead to priferation around the
[00:26:39] world. now what worries china? of course is the population in the Asian
[00:26:42] Pacific, particularly Japan and also
[00:26:46] other countries, and this will stabilize China's neighborhood,
[00:26:49] so China doesn't want proliberation, but nor does China
[00:26:53] want deliberate limitation of his nuclear
[00:26:57] arsenal. you said that China is not striving towards
[00:27:01] nuclear part. but at the same time it's been investing lot
[00:27:04] of resources into various nuclear facilities and
[00:27:08] it has enormous uh technological and economic
[00:27:12] provest, something that perhaps neither Russia nor the United
[00:27:15] States can uh afford at the moment, and therefore there's been a
[00:27:19] lot of articles about how the Americans are
[00:27:22] concerned about uh China secretly expanding
[00:27:25] its nuclear weapons infrastructure. I guess my last question to you
[00:27:29] is whether you think that perhaps China does doesn't mind the
[00:27:33] Americans being concerned uh about that issue
[00:27:37] and using it as a sort of psychological deterrent so that the
[00:27:41] Americans know that while China is not like it's
[00:27:45] part of China's doctrine not to attack first not to use nuclear strike
[00:27:49] first but that the Americans know that it has something
[00:27:53] to respond with. I think no country wants to
[00:27:56] reveal is
[00:27:57] core military
[00:28:01] hardware software. completely uh to his
[00:28:04] arch um enemies or potential rivals
[00:28:07] and no doubt that technology is
[00:28:11] advancing a nuclear warhead front for example is i
[00:28:14] mentioned before the warhead drop in hirushiman arakasaki
[00:28:18] is now only as very very small fraction the power that can
[00:28:22] be unleashed with modern warheads so i think that there was
[00:28:26] continuing research not only in china but in other countries
[00:28:30] now where the china remains ahead and so... technologies
[00:28:34] um that cannot be root out, but I don't think China is ready
[00:28:38] to reveal everything, nor the United States, North Russia, but I
[00:28:42] think the danger is on the one hand there is
[00:28:45] keen competition on AI, drone warfare
[00:28:49] and all that, because the technology is changing and then
[00:28:53] that the world becomes much more um
[00:28:56] disruptive, on the other hand um and each
[00:29:00] country will stay ahead with the... as I said
[00:29:03] commanding heights in
[00:29:05] in in all all fields where been AI or nuclear weapons
[00:29:09] or space technology um and even
[00:29:12] in how uh trade is going to be conducted so
[00:29:16] I think that we are seeing a world which is totally up
[00:29:19] ended um and we are we are in for major
[00:29:23] change a number of key fields across the group okay
[00:29:27] well Mr. Long this is all we have time for uh for now thank you
[00:29:30] very much for your insights. Thank you very much
[00:29:34] indeed and thank you for watching, see you next week
[00:29:38] on world's
[00:29:38] apart.
[00:30:02] Hello! And welcome to Crosstal Bullhorns. Here we discuss some
[00:30:06] realness.
[00:30:28] Hey everybody, welcome back to Moscow. Welcome back to the Moscow Mules. I'm Shaw.
[00:30:32] "he's still uggy, hiding away somewhere, trying to pretend that he's actually doing some
[00:30:36] work, never done a day's work in his life, but hey, look, someone's got to carry the
[00:30:40] can, and it's usually me. now, this week, lots going on around the
[00:30:44] world, but it's still one place that is particularly
[00:30:47] burning, yeah, and that's good old france, god damn
[00:30:51] it, evolution, yes, the the beautiful
[00:30:55] heartland of you know, european dignity, uh,
[00:30:58] justice, liberty,