is that the united states has traditionally administered aid through non-governmental organizations and rather than other non-state agencies that partner up with the field offices of the usaid state department, whatnot, which again, by extension, if the united states freezes, pulls out, reduces that level of assistance, the if those organizations used some of the resources that operational costs for them to administer through the those those aid packages on the ground, i don't know where they will come up with alternative resources because neither russia, neither china nor russia, they work through ngos the ground both russia and china, they work through state to state channels. if ngos are involved, they are geos in the name only. they are. the good news. they are the government organized, non-governmental organizations. there are fewer of those that russia works with mostly in serbia and a handful of other locations. but still all of that funding is strictly controlled by the state and china also works through the government channels. yes so it is going to affect now that you brou

united states and how do you sir, address the disproportionate targeting of people of color by us law enforcement once and for all, or is this phenomena from your perspective, so deeply entrenched in engrained in police culture that there no remedy for it? well, that's why people have been calling uh for defunding of the police, dismantling of the police, also the abolitionists uh today uh, it refers uh to the abolishment of prisons and jails in the united states, so that is the only reason uh why uh this system is continuing, if people uh for example realize that the entire criminal justice system in this country is doing nothing to solve crime or to improve the social conditions of people in the united states, then people will come around to the idea that yes uh policing needs to be drastically reoriented and so does the punitive criminal justice system in this country, so to be abolished, the whole system of racism, of capitalism needs to be reformed, it needs to be transformed into something that is more equal, and that is more just for the majority of people inside the united sta

in the united states for five consecutive years. also with the inauguration of president trump, the momentum for japanese companies to invest in the united states is growing even stronger today. -- even stronger. today i conveyed my willingness to cooperate together to elevate japan's investment in the united states to an unprecedented amount of $1 trillion. president trump and myself also concurred to elevate the japan-u.s. partnership to an even higher level through improving business environment and increasing bilateral investment and employment, strengthening each other's industries, leading the world in developing advanced technologies such as ai and leading edge semiconductors and strongly promoting efforts to harness the energy of the growing market in the indo-pacific region. we also confirmed that we will cooperate to strengthen energy security between the two countries, including increasing exports of the united states liquefied natural gas to japan in a mutually beneficial manner. regarding foreign exchange, as in the fir

and there will be only one control panel, it will be in the united states.in fact, explained this. if you want everything to be fine, either lie down under the united states. you will have fewer problems, or if you are completely against it, then you will be completely out of the process, we will cope perfectly well without you, well , i think that the dominance of the united states in the field of artificial intelligence is no longer possible, this was shown by the chinese deepsky, this is really the moment of sputnik, and china has already overtaken the united states in this area, but nevertheless, the fact remains a fact, what vance actually said to the europeans: you are nobody, you should not be a subject. you cannot claim any subjectivity in the field of artificial intelligence, which is a really important area that will determine the technological, and accordingly military-technological, even development of the future, and if the europeans will claim anything in this area, then they will simply be swept away, their role is to step aside and watch the

he believes the united states should be more supportive of the french. so on july the fifth, 1793, junior meets jefferson at his house and remember, jefferson is secretary of state, but he is to nay and janay decides that he can trust jefferson and he tells t secretary of stas enre plot. and you can see here, this is jefferson's notehat meeting. and i highlighted the key parts here. he said, communicated to me ste, but as mr. jeffersonf meaning he was talking to as a frdid not in official capacity. he a me to write a letter introduction. i took back letter and i wrote another one exact as janed him to do so now andre michaux has letter of introduction from the secretary state in which the secretary state is saying this is a botanist traveling to conduct science. please allow him to travel freely, freely throughout your state and meet with people he should not be under any suspicion. yeah, well, how about this thinking for a second? this is the secretary of state. i would compare this to if the secretary of state knew when russia going to invade ukraine, d

why did they not just say subject to the laws of the united states? doing so would have been quite natural given that the state -- straightforward unambiguous phrases used in article three and article six. the clause also ensures that birthright citizenship makes newborns citizens of both the united states and of the states wherein they reside. that is where they live, they are home. this word standing alone implies a lawful permanent residence and it plainly excludes tourists and other lawful visitors as well as illegal aliens who are prohibited by law by residing in the state. although they all must obey our laws. the history of the clause. the clause was framed by the 39th congress to conserve delusional eyes the civil rights act of 1866. which had been passed by that same congress just two months earlier. the 1866 act explicitly denied birthright citizenship to persons subject to any foreign power" and to "indians not taxed ". it was clear from the debate and the 39th congress that congress decided to replace this language which was subject to the

sorry, ha le , for the united states. sorry, hayley. your _ for the united states.t that. you would need to _ continue. sorry about that. you would need to map _ continue. sorry about that. you would need to map where - would need to map where the minerals are, you critical minerals are. you need to the would need to establish the mines and agreements. would need to establish the mines and benefits greements. would need to establish the mines and benefits gr the ents. would need to establish the mines and benefits gr the us 5. the tangible benefits to the us would not be under trump, would not be felt under trump, or even the next president, it would even the president would be even the president that where the us and us after that where the us and us companies could be starting companies coutd'be starting to these minerals if it ggg'g'act these minerals if it .. determined that it was was determined that it was commercially viable to do so. so we are not even talking short or term, it could short or medium term, it could be long—term, the payoff for this deal. i wa

, the united states and russia .l take into account the comments of ukrainian officials. due to the time constraints and lack of time, let's see what the europeans' approach is to this change in the united states' position on this matter. how does the body react? yes, i think that the symbolic gesture that the chairman of the munich security conference made and started crying about the issue of european security is exactly what we can see in the future in the future behavior of the united states towards europe. now europe is in a place where from now on it will have to pay for its own security and defense costs , and on the other hand , it will also be in a trade tariff war with the united states . on the other hand, apart from facing challenges with the united states in its foreign policy , this union may also face challenges in its own domestic sphere with increasing economic pressures and politics is moving towards talking or giving opinions about the collapse of the european union. this was also raised to a large

i'm not, let's say, like the interest of the united states. i mean, i am really glad and delighted that the new government wants to stop the war of the killing in the united states because they did start this at the beginning in the, on the, in ukraine. but the problem is they want us to pay the bill of this us let the need to lead to war in ukraine destructive war against russia. they want us to pay the bill be because they want to focus on their main and i mean against child and i, and this is the problem for us europeans, as long as we follow the united states in our foreign and security policy, we will be full on the bus, as we have seen in the past, for example, the, the, the, the ending of the war in, in, of going to stop after 20 years. the us americans, when they left a common stump. they didn't even explore their allies, the so called allies, because actually they do not want to advertise the west is just interested in vessels, as henry kissinger one stated, we don't have any of these. we don't have a friends, we just have interest 7

iran's government seems to be welcoming some recent decisions by the united states. president donald trump's move to freeze spending on foreign aid and overhaul may even end the us agency. for international development have been lot in iranian state media, the reports say the decisions will halt funding for opponents for the country. pvs continues, those financial resources are not charity donations, ismail baqaii, iran's farm ministry spokesman said during a briefing with reporters on monday, they are wages paid in exchange for services. this is a clear sign of america's interventionist policy, particularly during the biden administration, which tried to... iran and medal in its domestic affairs through financial aid, baghai added, it remains unclear how funding for iranian activists and opposition figures would be affected by the us aid decision. news week: iran has rare praise for donald trump. iran has reacted positively to the us government's decision to cut foreign aid funding, which is seen as a blow to opposition groups in iran, the shift and us agency for int

and if your words about the united states so the united states, i will use it in past term, had been the top humanitarian dollar in terms of just the dollar value of of of assistance. and it had also been the major contributor to covid 19. assistance and vaccines. this assistance, again, in terms of just dollar amount. this is not to say that the united states have traditionally li been driven by humanitarian concerns alone, not necessarily during the cold war era, for example, but the soviet union and the united states. they used humanitarian and development assistance as a way of countering either, you know, communist ideology or capitalist ideology. we talk about the the soviet union in the post-cold war era when you know, when various administrations would find a connection between, for example, development or underdevelopment and authoritarianism as sources of terrorism, much more aid would be channeled towards goals that were unrelated to solving humanitarian disasters, but rather standing up democratic regimes, helping development. so all i'm trying to say is that, you know, y

so if they got on the protection from united states then thinking you what the united states wants and it is also valid for other countries. so these kind of relationship is not only between the united states and these some countries, but also between some other countries. some say okay, do you want to sit on your seat is a freaking company. ok team it is mine and let's say license and i will protect you . so this is an rule. i mean it's a, it isn't, that's maybe a little. it isn't. that's maybe it within the international in, in the if there's a practice of international relations. well, uh versus, or how it's a practice of this program to take a short break in the middle. but we will be back in just a couple of minutes statement. the the welcome back to wells, a part with the chubby and hum rector of alton bus university in turkey. and before the break, we just started talking about our artificial intelligence and much has been sad about it, is potentially and radically changing all areas of human activity from employment to social relations. i'm even say personal human relations. i'

so fact if your shipment is intelligence to united states and both countries which united states love, trump is now taking gift cert and phase or k. if you are with me to be able to visually intelligence. i can share that with you as much as i want to share, but if you go and you do enter into some kind of partnership with other countries such as china, so you're against. therefore, this is a comp type, international relations understanding because previous tvs so the same think good either with me or against me. absolutely, but it's a to some extent only in language, it's a wishful thinking that the americans want to have dominance. they want to have dominance, that's what they say that we want to control. but the question is whether the other nations actually getting the benefits rather than a being sold director rick about the benefits you see the, the distinction here in your estimate estimation of the trump administration. so if i do think they will deliver the goodies that they promise, i don't know it's up to the countries because many of the countries school, they enter into a

how they engage in the united states.t won't be easy because i suspect the trump administration will want to weaken china's grip on the country. china has invested a lot. they have a stronger grip. be that as it may. that's one leverage the country has. the red sea comes to mind.secur. so, this country will try to leverage whatever they have in that space. in terms of what they hope. i think they will hope the u.s. won't have a long laundry list of priorities that the african countries are not interested in. culture wars is one of those things they are doing everything from women empowerment. most have a handful of priorities we need to watch south africa. one economic development is the most functional on the continent. they will host the g20. it's the relationship with the united states will hinge on the punitive i poach. we will suspend aid. the u.s. dei and other issues. that sends the wrong message and something other african countries will look to see if they can bully south africa this way, what happens to me as an

he wants to reshape not just the day that he wants to, to, to put the united states in a different role. right. i think we saw that we medical reviews stating that this is no longer a uni butler world order. and you know, we're not going to be able to sanction the countries in 5 years. it seems like there's a lot of, of, of, of, of understanding in the term white house where, you know, a, the, the global quarter stands now. yeah. but in the savannah, i think there's something to what you're saying and i and, and some of that i agree with. i mean on the greenland thing, the canada thing, the panama, i get, i get the, i get that and we're in a way, it's like 6 building very. it's like it's like building fortress america, right. but then i'm going to throw now back to my home. it here, but they're still the is, is real exception. it see that's what makes it so we a logical go ahead mohammed. but that's exactly why i think from that is a good thing for the world. because, and we've had this discussion during his 1st term multiple times on your show, trump shows the video base of the united

outlook, we don't have the uh organizational capacity to continue those struggles here in the united states, also people uh were uh actually set back uh by the election of joe biden in a sense, it was considered a victory because it stopped trump from having a second consecutive term, but at the same time his history in regard to race relations and police community relations uh has not been good." so the fact that uh people did not continue to protest, they did not continue to rebel after joe biden was elected uh of course has a lot to do with the fact that uh these repressive actions are continuing uh here in the united states and they will continue because right now there's not even a pretext on the part of the current administration so almost no uh african-americans in the cabinet, even if it was it wouldn't make that much difference because they'd have to accept uh the line of donald trump. uh, but the fact that you have essentially a white supremacist government uh right now in the united states means that the police have been given even more of a green light to carry out repressive me

in the united states for five consecutive years.n of president trump, the momentum for japanese companies to invest in the united states is growing even stronger today. i conveyed my willingness to cooperate together to elevate japan's investment in the united states to an unprecedented amount of $1 trillion. president trump and myself also concurred to elevate the japan-u.s. partnership to an even higher level through improving business environment and increasing bilateral investment and employment, strengthening each other's industries, leading the world in developing advanced technologies such as ai and leading edge semiconductors, and strongly promoting efforts to harness the energy of the growing market in the indo-pacific region. we also confirmed that we will cooperate to strengthen energy security between the two countries, including increasing exports of united states liquefied natural gas to japan in a mutually beneficial manner. regarding foreign exchange, as in the first trump administration closed, discussions will cont

and, a few words about the united states. the united states, i will use it in past term. had been the top humanitarian dollar in terms of just the dollar value of assistance. and it had also been a major contributor to covid-19 assistance and vaccine assistance and terms of just dollar amount. this is not to say that the united states have traditionally been driven by humanitarian concerns alone, not necessarily during the cold war era for example. they used a humanitarian development assistance as a way of encountering communist ideology or talking about the soviet union in the post cold war era when various administrations would find a connection between development or under development authoritarianism sources much more aid would be channeled towards goals that were unrelated to solving humanitarian disasters but rather the democratic regimes, helping development. all i am trying to say is, the united states aid distribution has always been colored by more than humanitarian motivations. geopolitics, geo economic intervene. i do want to acknowledge that. the institution

panama, this is all of latin america, i think, is now worried about panama, the united states states.y important, the interest, of course, of beijing, the transport corridor, and the role of panama, is reduced to, well, minus one, probably not even to zero, that is, there is a struggle between two giants, undoubtedly for the geo -economic corridor, very important, the atlantic - pacific ocean, absolutely clear, and for china there is one nuance here, after all, china's policy is more flexible, since there is one train, one route, this is it. project, megaproject, and there are different variations here, we'll see, i think that china will not just let go so this project, well latin america is not enough, trump also got africa hooked, south africa represents the african continent of the g20, here is the statement of marco rubio, i will not participate in the g20 summit in johannesburg, south africa is doing very bad things, expropriating private property, using the g20 for... solidarity, equality, sustainability, in other words, this is the policy of diversity and climate change, my job

was expelled from this group, at the request of all its members, from the then president of the united states, barack obama, for attacking ukraine, for annexing crimea, because they said that the leader of a democratic state cannot behave like that. and by the way, they tolerated it for a long time, they didn't expel them after georgia, although they could have, but they tolerated it right up until the annexation of crimea, until the moment when russia obviously didn't just attack someone, but demonstratively violated international law, because if we're talking about the economy, so as you understand, then this group should also include the head of the people's republic of china xi jinping, well, it definitely should be, not putin, because... the level of the american chinese economy cannot be compared to the level of russia, and the prime minister of india narendra modi, why is he not there? parliamentary elections are held in india in a much more democratic way than in russia. when i watched the parliamentary elections in india last year, it seemed to me that my brains would boil from under

times have certainly changed, but the united states is still the canal's biggest customer and we have every right to expect an operational framework that acknowledges our modern security and economic challenges. states like indiana with robust exports feel these impacts even if we are far from the canal. chairman, and then i will allow others to respond. in light of evolving conditions, especially increased foreign investment from china, do you believe that the u.s. should explore a more comprehensive update or supplemental protocols to these decades-old treaties? chair sola: i believe that we should support u.s. investment and not have an ambassador for so long has been detrimental to us, especially the case that i just mentioned earlier where we did not have an ambassador and we had a u.s. company in need of service. however we can promote u.s. investment, especially in infrastructure. this is where china is beating us. they understand, and i believe that our bank and dfc is so limited in what they can do by the restrictions that they have that we are not able to invest in infrastru

the united states has the best deals in europe in brussel, brussels. you know, i mean, the european commission is an agency of the hedge of one of the united states of the white house. they are just doing what the white house says, and it's the same with the driven, minnesota fine upstairs. i mean, i mean i babble is the best german foreign minister, the united states as a head in one job. and so, so that makes them as good victims because they followed 3 years. the policy of joe biden, to militarily and economically, really in russia that was the goal of the buys and administration. now the administration changed the policy change, and now they are very optimistic, as you can see in changing the positions. because they have to follow the hedge and one united states and, and that makes it very difficult and dangerous for europe because we, as europeans, has to understand our interests, let's say, like the interest on the united states. i mean, i am really glad and delighted that the new government wants to stop the war of the killing in the united stat

secretary of defense, even before the munich conference on romstein, said that the united stateste there. well, here is the result, yes, today the head of the french foreign ministry stated, the issue of sending western troops to ukraine is not on the agenda now, that is, yes, it will be on the agenda only after the conclusion of a peace agreement, dmitry vitalyevich, yes. everything is correct, in fact , and if i'm not mistaken, in my opinion, donald trump said that he does not see a threat from russia, a threat from nato, so guys, what are you talking about here, and the problem is somewhat deeper in my opinion, i will try to supplement you, alekseevich, you, sergey sergeyevich, this concerns the possibility of this , the future alliance military, military economy, the fact is that in the laziness of combat contact, quite often now have begun to appear examples of western technology with nameplates not from ninety-six ninety-seven, but from the twentieth year. missile technologies in many ways come from the united states, the irist complexes , forgive me, they themselves are ha

the united states, the rosvelt administration fought to the death for this to be in the united stateserican soil, in no case on the soil where wars constantly arise, that is, not in europe or somewhere in other parts, then they simply did not exist in other parts of the world, therefore. since the forties, the european elite has been aware of the fact that, that we, the little ones, can't, look, every little european country, as soon as it got, came out of the soviet camp, seemed to get independence, it immediately began to try to sell it somewhere, have you tried to throw a little lapdog out on the street, no, i didn't have a lapdog, i never had the idea of ​​throwing out a dog, it seems wild to me, but we can easily speculate on this situation to extend, that is, of course, they will immediately look for a new owner, yes of course they will immediately search, most likely they will create something like this construction, moreover, i will not say that the germans have disgraced their positions in the european union, i am not even talking about bursula, but the fact is that its entir

legitimized or sanctioned. participation of the united states of america in the united nations, but bill is quite obvious, aimed simply at sharply reducing funding for the united nations, this may reflect the general course of the trump administration to curtail, in general, participation of the united states of america in international organizations, trump has already from many organizations. on programs implemented under the american flag and by american agencies, here this is the main approach, as for everything else, in general i really think that since this was introduced by a far-right senator, i think that the senate today, especially since there are a large number of democrats there , will not support this, but it is important for us to take out the main... vector , as it were, to reduce the participation of the united states of america in various international programs that are provided for financing precisely at the expense of the budget of the united states of america. in a number of cases this is done simply for financial reasons, america really doesn't have the money to

marco rubio, secretary of state of the united states, thank you very much. we will start with a round of questions. good morning to both of you. mr. secretary of state, i would like to hear a bit if you discussed nicaragua. talk about removing nicaragua from cafta but you don't want it to affect its allies. what mechanisms have you taken into regarding considering there are no exclusion clauses that provide for removing a country from it? and i would like to continue with the issue of deportations. what will happen to nicaragua, those not accepted by the regime? they are not allowed in. what is the position of the u.s. on this continent? how will you react? first of all, those three that -- and those regimes that exist, -- their systems do not work. in the case of nicaragua, it has turned into a family dynasty with a co-presidency where they basically tried to eliminate the catholic church and the religious community and anyone who tries to take power from that regime is punished. and you have seen that. we have seen thousands of nicaraguans fleeing the syste

the defense municipal of united states. he said that in this speech, in a munich, and this is a very boy, isn't always and a proposal because it's, it's from my point of view, it's a disaster. if we were to happen because the board is almost 2000 kilometers and which has to be watched out with the troops that and the time was 50 or 200000 troops has to be there. and i mean, regarding our german history, it would say it would mean that sending german troops to watch this a ceasefire. and if the ceasefire is um, is broken, german troops would be getting war against russia and they would shoot to russian soldiers. i mean, we have the history of the 2nd world war where we, uh, attacked russia and a rush of the soviet union. we attacked of so we're doing it and they liberated at the europe from driven fascism. so i can't believe that something like this would have then, and that's why, maybe they hesitating at the moment, but we don't know what they are going to do. because as what do we know is that the german government, and i

of all, but uh, does the united states commit to all those forms? because i mean, judging from the 1st, most of the trump administration, and there's some, some controversy within that administration and looks like perhaps the relationship with indian male. so change because i heard that there are some major disputes over the age. one b visas. uh 70 percent of ways go to highly skilled workers who happen to be mostly indians in the past. if that issue is change, do you think it will affect the emotional temperature between the 2 always a little i mean dump was there also earlier for 5 years. uh, this is one area in which of, i think one can see the slight freak shows that a certain interest. i mean, it's not just only this i'm, that would be that if so i knew when somebody had also he was certain dad was sending to you. but i think that, and i think the indian policy makers are quite confident that they will be able to manage those of one. i mean, how do you negotiate with them on certain issues? all you'll give, set them given think that, you know,

the united states there are limitations. so state even though it is a larger numbers and it can have very, very important and positive effects internationally, it may not be as visible as chinese. and it is not well understood. the public opinion research in the trade has consistently shown americans exaggerate what you think the united states, how much aid a decent. like 2% of gdp? crazy, crazy assessment. no, it's a teeny tiny, i mean the united states in terms of percentage of gdp is at the bottom of the list of the organization of advanced developed economies. it doesn't really meet that unofficial standard of aid given in dollars, yes, but i think domestically we also don't understand how that aid benefits american citizens either in terms of preventing the outbreak of another infectious disease or whatnot. i do think it's a letter strategic communications. i spoke to a lot of state department folks and a college that exist and communications company is have not been their strength. >> do we have any more questions? righ

but when you see how the united states reacted 2014, when you see what the united states did or more importantly, did not do, when syria using, you know, russia's assistance carried out this horrendous massacres. what do you think, richard? the russians are expecting going forward? >> well, vladimir putin. is in a very strong position right now. he favored president trump. he's always expressed admiration to president trump. and president trump has expressed admiration about him. this is something that i mean, compared to where we were a year ago or two years ago, the united states was firmly behind ukraine, the united states, president biden was committing to supporting ukraine for as long as it takes. and towards the last couple of months of his administration, fearing that president trump would cut off ukraine, the united states started expediting its shipments of weapons and money. it wanted to give the ukrainians as much support as possible before donald trump came to the office. if donald trump was elected president, and lo and behold, he won. he won by a large majority. and th

it was a notion on how do we in the united states settle futures, how do we in the united states if mr. lutnick's future company was doing business with a london exchange settle any kind of -- let's say we don't raise the debt ceiling and the debt, we had a crisis here, what would the united states do? not unsimilar to what we did in 2009 after the 2008 basically recession of our economy. i raised -- these similar questions came up in the finance committee and i found that the treasury nominee before the committee answered those questions correctly but mr. lutnick said that he thought his idea of settling with a foreign country, which i think puts the united states second, above england, is not something i would be willing to do but i think he was willing to continue to move forward. so those things, an answer about how we'll catch up with the money laundering in the future with an a.i. solution and settling on the foreign exchange also left me with some concerns. but when we come to noah -- noaa -- when asked for the record should noaa be dismantled in 2025, mr. lutnick only would say

to act in the united states to try to be part of the movement to change us policy. and what do you think has happened with this? obviously it is the worst, the genocide of our century. it's being called all requests. what is it? what effect as it had on the jewish americans? because the poles of showed the jews in the united states do sympathize with some of the issues in your book which wears before we would never seen anything like that. yeah, i think the, i think the term genocide is i think there's, there's good reason to believe this from genocide apply like i would resist the term holocaust because i think that suggests and i kind of it, did they the genocide of use that took place in nazi germany was, was very different in many ways from what's happening to policy is as in gaza as car finding the house is, i don't think i don't, i don't think that i don't think it. does anyone any good to, to, to try to make those historical equivalencies? the point is that genocide has an international legal definition. so we can apply it to what we've done and rolanda we've

when this war began 11 years ago, the response was weak, both from the united states and europe. and even in ukraine, the people and the government were not ready for such a conflict. so there are many lessons here for western powers, for europe and for the states, about how to respond more decisively to such forcible seizure of territory that violates the principles of the international order established during world war ii, but the real test of ending the war in ukraine is yet to be passed, it will be written in the coming months and years, and eventually we will finally understand, how it affected the world when china decides whether the old rules-based order is finally gone when they also may decide to aggressively assert their foreign policy. the united states is really the only country now that can push back against putin, at least stop the escalation, to achieve peace. i don't know how sustainable that peace will be after so many losses that the ukrainian people have suffered. it's cruel, it's terrible what the ukrainians have gone through, but at least there will be no fur

administration does not make concessions to russia, because that would be a disastrous position for the united statesthermore, it would contradict the stated policy of the trump administration itself. secretary of state pompeo has made it clear that the united states will never recognize the legitimacy of the russian occupation or annexation of crimea. the trump administration has already officially rejected the idea of ​​soviet or russian territorial appropriation of ukrainian lands, and i hope that this position will remain unchanged. trump wants first and foremost to absolve himself of responsibility, in particular when he talks about absolving the united states of responsibility for guarantees for... ukraine, yes, when i hear the words that the europeans have to guarantee something, i understand that this is simply avoiding responsibility, the situation is very bad, you described it very correctly, but in your opinion, dear ambassador, what could we do in the current situation, time is short, the pressure is insane, well, and in principle trump has demonstrated what he can do, he may not give mon

in fact, the united states delegation to the treaty body was always at least twice as large as any other delegation. and they were there as, as not as a state party, but as a uh, a signatory of the wrong group, the wrong statute. and of course rush, you also signed the wrong statute back in 2000. so 2001. so it is very important. i think that we continue to do everything we can to expand the support around the world. and perhaps, as i said, the trump in ministration will actually bring a lot of countries in south east asia, in africa, central america, of eastern europe, et cetera, closer to supporting the clock instead of moving the other way. thank you so much for all your thoughts to will i guess, went in pace. kenneth, well david l. phillips, we are out of time. thank you for all your analysis and thank you to for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website. i'll just say we're adult calm. i'm for further discussion, go to our facebook page. that's facebook dot com, forward slash ha. inside story. you can also join the conversation on x on handle is at a j

it require as robust, coordinated response by the united states and our allies. investments by chinese state owned companies and terminal leases at u.s. ports must continue to be reviewed carefully by the committee on foreign investments in the united states as they have been to date and p.r.c. investments in ports abroad must be countered by u.s. foreign aid. however, scrutinizing p.r.c. investments in our ports only go so far if we are at the same time opening the front gates of our government to chinese influence. the p.r.c. poses a threat to u.s. national security through investments not just in ports but all manner of foreign assets, including their top puppet elon musk. since being installed as the de facto president of the united states, he's acted at every turn of the interest of china and himself at the expense of the american people. musk has deep ties to china. we don't know the full extent of those ties because he refuses to file a public financial disclosure but know music has received hundreds of millions in loans from p.r.c. controlled banks to buil

we are together, the united states and poland, poland and the united states are loyal friends.ur cooperation will be at a higher level. >> thank you, pete hegseth, secretary of defense of the united states. >> mr. deputy prime minister, thank you for your incredibly strong words, which i echo and concur completely. our friendship, our bond is ironclad. we came here specifically to reinforce that. i also want to thank your wife for being a part of this and your entire delegation. the warmth of the polish people is clear. it is a privilege to be here and i want to emphasize it is quite intentional that our first european bilateral is right here in poland. the symbolism is not lost, in fact it is intentional. we see poland as the model allied on the continent, willing to invest not just in their defense but in our shared defense and the defense of the continent. our relationship is strong and growing stronger every day. poland, a strategic frontline partner on nato's eastern flank. poland, a staunch u.s. ally. poland, as i said, a model ally. not only in words -- words are cheap -

were able to take china then the united states will which is not at all certain whatever trump does it's a very very big deal because china is the most the most peer state. of the united states, but if it were able to do so then trump will turn around and russia, or the united states will turn around and attack russia, that's because he made and therefore they understand that, so therefore why should they go along with this proposal, so what trump is, therefore what, there's one thing what is trump is trying to do, there's another is the calculations which will be taking place in russia, because the russia also know the history of what happened with the catastrophe with this with the breakup of the soviet union, but that that's... what he's trying there's a long way to go before he succeeds in this enormous obstacles i'm not predicted he will succeed analy what he is attempting to do at the present time and logical and it's it's not even implicit, there's lots of people in the united states to write that this is what the strategy was, it was a huge mistake in their view have a

the united states wants peace. i pledged in my campaign for the presidency to end the war in a way that we could win the people. we seek peace. we strive for peace. "there's something really weird here, the truth, fact is fiction, fiction is fact, war is peace, peace is war. what the hell's going on here? if this little nation goes down the drain and can't maintain her independence, ask yourself what's going to happen to all the other little nations. gaining control of this middle east, central asian region, knocking down any obstacles, whether they be in the form of anti-us movements, or states such as iraq, iran, syria that weren't firmly under us control, once having done this and gained control of this region, bush, chiney, and company felt this would put the united states in a position, it would be a key element of preventing the rise of any challenger to us power globally or regionally, and of course the two main countries they've been work. about are russia and china, now this is something that these people

and also to create more jobs in the united states. [speaking japanese] >> another example is the c.e.o. who happens to be a long time friend of mine foreign minister. he also had a chance to see me together with mr. altman of open a.i. and he shares his vision to bring more investment to the united states. [speaking japanese] >> japan has been the largest investor for the united states in the last five consecutive years. [speaking japanese] >> and building upon that, we are ready to further increase our investment to the united states. [speaking japanese] >> and also there is other good news i would like to say to you, japanese isuzu has a plan to create a factory in the united states in the near future. [speaking japanese] >> and as i touched upon the example of toyota, they have another plan to expand their factories as well as expanding new factories in the near future and as i understand, there is one factory to be fully operational starting the month of april this year. president trump: thank you very much. we are going to be wor

united states, it is a business, it's a big business, and all these prisons that are are are built in every state all across the united states bring in money, and a lot of these prisons are being built in largely white areas, rural communities where they already have a lot of poverty, and this provides jobs for whites who live in these areas and their job is to guard black people and brown people for as long as you can keep them there in order to maintain the systems uh status quo and now i'm glad we mentioned donald trump earlier buse i want to set a question aside just for current us president president trump campaigned on ending all department of just pattern and practice investigations into troubled police departments my question to you uh mr ab is uh how does us leadership impact law enforcement violence in america yeah well the justice department uh is under uh the w house uh, they are the ones uh initiate investigations into police misconduct uh here in detroit um years ago, 20 years ago, there was the imposition of a consent judge. uh will not no longer be in forced, so trump

if the united states stops supporting. ukraine and russia will be able to achieve their goals over the next five years, washington will have to spend $ 800 billion more on defense, at least this is the conclusion reached by researchers from the american enterprise institute. tatyana voroshko spoke with one of the authors of the study , fredrik keiken. how does he justify his calculations? let's listen further. you calculate the cost of how much it would cost the united states if they left... what we really wanted to focus on was that, first, there is a scenario where the us leaves ukraine and the russians would completely blow up ukraine, and at that point you have to look carefully at what the russian presence would then look like along nato's border, from the arctic to the black sea, and what the implications would be for nato's defense under those circumstances, and what else could happen, and in that scenario there is a large southern flank that... would need to be covered from the russian threat, which is currently pr