:00:25. > :00:28.Welcome to Global Questions with me, Zeinab Badawi, from Riga,
:00:29. > :00:38.We're at the Blackheads House in the heart of the old town.
:00:39. > :00:41.I am joined by an esteemed panel and a wonderful audience,
:00:42. > :00:44.some of them are from here in Latvia but others have travelled to be
:00:45. > :00:47.with us from the other Baltic states of Lithuania and Estonia and,
:00:48. > :00:49.of course, welcome to you, watching and listening
:00:50. > :00:51.around the world on TV, radio and online.
:00:52. > :00:54.We will be taking questions from the floor as well as hearing
:00:55. > :00:59.comments that have been sent through on social media.
:01:00. > :01:02.Let me introduce our fantastic panel to you.
:01:03. > :01:04.General Mark Kimmitt was the US Assistant Secretary of State
:01:05. > :01:07.for political military affairs under President George W Bush.
:01:08. > :01:09.He was a senior Nato commander and served in Bosnia,
:01:10. > :01:18.Edward Lozansky is President of the American University in Moscow
:01:19. > :01:24.He left the Soviet Union and lived in the US but now divides his time
:01:25. > :01:29.From Sweden, we have Anna Wieslander, Secretary General
:01:30. > :01:39.She is also northern Europe director at the Atlantic Council think-tank.
:01:40. > :01:42.Artis Pabriks is a seasoned Latvian politician and has been a member
:01:43. > :01:46.of the European Parliament since 2014, before that he was
:01:47. > :01:50.Latvia's Foreign and Defence Minister.
:01:51. > :01:52.And James Rubin was US Assistant Secretary of State
:01:53. > :01:54.for Public affairs under President Clinton and has also
:01:55. > :01:58.He is now an international journalist and commentator.
:01:59. > :02:16.To what extent is the US going to isolate itself
:02:17. > :02:23.How can they change the behaviour of President Putin and what will be
:02:24. > :02:27.the consequences for us in the Baltic states?
:02:28. > :02:36.Is the United States going to isolate itself?
:02:37. > :02:38.Perhaps we will go to you first, Mark Kimmitt?
:02:39. > :02:41.I don't think the United States is going to isolate itself at all.
:02:42. > :02:44.The United States is a world trader and a world power.
:02:45. > :02:46.We cannot save ourselves, we cannot be more secure
:02:47. > :02:50.It's just not going to happen, it cannot happen.
:02:51. > :02:55.I hope Mark is right but I fear he is wrong.
:02:56. > :02:58.And that is that our President has made a decision,
:02:59. > :03:02.he has made a decision to put America first and that is a phrase
:03:03. > :03:09.It means that the United States is going to pay less attention
:03:10. > :03:12.to the rest of the world, it is not going to play
:03:13. > :03:15.the leadership role it has played since World War II ended and that
:03:16. > :03:18.enlightened self interest that we played for 50 years
:03:19. > :03:22.is what helped Europe stay peaceful, it is what helped the Soviet Union
:03:23. > :03:25.collapse and it is what helped the Baltic states be safe
:03:26. > :03:36.If the United States does what President Trump has promised,
:03:37. > :03:39.I am worried, worried that Putin might get the wrong idea.
:03:40. > :03:41.When President Trump says that Nato does not matter,
:03:42. > :03:44.I am worried about what will happen to the Baltics.
:03:45. > :03:55.Maybe I am the only one in this room, I do not know about Mark,
:03:56. > :04:00.And the reason I did that is because his foreign policy,
:04:01. > :04:06.he says he wants to improve relations with Russia and I think
:04:07. > :04:09.that if this happens, and I am not sure if it will,
:04:10. > :04:17.United States, Russia, Europe, all of the Baltic states,
:04:18. > :04:19.because those Baltic countries control 95% of all nuclear weapons,
:04:20. > :04:22.if they are friends, everyone will benefit.
:04:23. > :04:25.Anyone who is against this policy of the United States and Russia
:04:26. > :04:34.The question was, is United States going to isolate itself?
:04:35. > :04:39.I do not think you can say it will be more isolationist
:04:40. > :04:51.There is protectionism of borders, trade, people and jobs.
:04:52. > :04:54.At least that is the agenda that President Trump will address.
:04:55. > :04:56.I believe that we will see more activism towards fighting terrorism,
:04:57. > :04:58.we have already seen that in the past days.
:04:59. > :05:04.Stepping up on fighting terrorism in Somalia, for instance.
:05:05. > :05:09.But there will be a shift and I agree, I think there will be
:05:10. > :05:12.more space for other actors as well in the world because there will be
:05:13. > :05:16.a focus on America first but America will not lead the global scene
:05:17. > :05:25.I did not vote for Donald Trump and I hope I will never have to vote
:05:26. > :05:27.for Putin or any other Russian President.
:05:28. > :05:31.We have certain worries on the European continent that
:05:32. > :05:37.Americans are turning more protectionist and also more
:05:38. > :05:39.isolationist and it is not the first time in US
:05:40. > :05:43.From our perspective, we should try to do our best
:05:44. > :05:45.to convince Americans that this is not the best way
:05:46. > :05:51.If, in fact, the United States is going to be about America
:05:52. > :05:53.first and isolationist, the American soldiers
:05:54. > :05:58.standing here in Latvia have not got that word yet.
:05:59. > :06:10.I want to go back to that question, can I ask you what is
:06:11. > :06:13.Do you believe the United States is becoming more isolationist
:06:14. > :06:29.Do you feel reassured from what you have heard from panel
:06:30. > :06:32.members who say it is not becoming more isolationist?
:06:33. > :06:45.In this part of the world, Europe, the idea that one country can invade
:06:46. > :06:48.another country to take a piece of it, incorporate it into its own,
:06:49. > :06:54.And my President cannot criticise that.
:06:55. > :06:59.It is bad enough that you want to limit sanctions,
:07:00. > :07:05.That is a fundamental constitution of American
:07:06. > :07:20.That happened under Obama and not under Trump.
:07:21. > :07:23.And it is just as bad, this is not partisan, you don't need
:07:24. > :07:28.It is terrible, whether it happened under Obama or Trump.
:07:29. > :07:35.Let's go to the next questions, please.
:07:36. > :07:48.I want to ask, will Trump strengthen Nato?
:07:49. > :08:06.In the event that Nato troops, the US trrop participation
:08:07. > :08:08.in the region is downsized, can other EU countries and Nato
:08:09. > :08:11.members fill the void that would be created by downsizing from the US?
:08:12. > :08:21.If you are looking from the outside, the United States also
:08:22. > :08:23.after the election of Trump have been sending supporters
:08:24. > :08:27.to the Baltic countries and I personally take for granted
:08:28. > :08:32.and I trust people like the Vice President, but of course,
:08:33. > :08:40.since Trump is a young, new President, we have to see how
:08:41. > :08:42.much he can work together with all of the other US
:08:43. > :08:47.institutions and I would say that security in our region
:08:48. > :08:53.depends on 50% cooperation between Washington and our countries
:08:54. > :08:56.and a trust from Americans but the other 50% is transatlantic
:08:57. > :09:02.ties between the United States and Europe, including the EU,
:09:03. > :09:07.and here I see a certain cloud at this moment.
:09:08. > :09:10.As it is, what is important for President Trump is to be clear
:09:11. > :09:18.We will all expect this when he visits the Nato summit
:09:19. > :09:21.in May, the European allies will listen carefully on what Trump
:09:22. > :09:25.will say about Nato and Russia and strengthening the defence.
:09:26. > :09:30.He also wants to strengthen Nato on fighting terrorism,
:09:31. > :09:33.and I think everyone is basically positive towards that
:09:34. > :09:49.The reason we ended up in that situation, the Baltic states
:09:50. > :09:55.and other countries are afraid of a Russian invasion
:09:56. > :09:58.and all this stuff, all of this is a process,
:09:59. > :10:00.a result of Nato expansion in the first place.
:10:01. > :10:15.I only repeated what a famous American diplomat and the architect
:10:16. > :10:17.of Soviet containment, George Cannon...
:10:18. > :10:21.Sometimes he was right and sometimes he was wrong.
:10:22. > :10:25.It was a tragic mistake, in 98 Russia liberated
:10:26. > :10:28.Eastern Europe and the Baltic States...
:10:29. > :10:44.You were under Soviet occupation and Russia liberated you.
:10:45. > :10:48.I don't think we're going to resolve the question of who exactly
:10:49. > :10:59.19 US senators voted against that and they are all Putin puppets.
:11:00. > :11:09.In answer to the question is, under Donald Trump, what do
:11:10. > :11:13.Donald Trump has to take care of the interests
:11:14. > :11:15.of the United States first, Nato countries, if you want
:11:16. > :11:18.the United States to protect them, they have to pay.
:11:19. > :11:23.He has said that but the Nato chief has welcomed the fact
:11:24. > :11:27.that there is so much focus being put on Trump's comments saying
:11:28. > :11:30.that all Nato member states must pay their 2% of GDP...
:11:31. > :11:36.If the US and Russia become friends, there will be no
:11:37. > :11:45.Ladies and gentlemen, what you're hearing is actually
:11:46. > :11:48.alternative facts on BBC News!
:11:49. > :11:59.And what I wanted to say, I think that alternative facts
:12:00. > :12:02.regarding the Nato expansion, at this moment it seems to me
:12:03. > :12:05.that the people in the Kremlin are actually angry and upset
:12:06. > :12:13.Nato did not expand in the Baltics, we decided that we wanted to be part
:12:14. > :12:22.And another thing is about the liberation.
:12:23. > :12:28.Of course Latvia or Baltic countries or many other countries,
:12:29. > :12:30.have been for a moment liberated from Nazis by Soviet army,
:12:31. > :12:36.but I already remember when I was a kid, on the streets
:12:37. > :12:39.of Riga that I could not understand why these liberators did not go home
:12:40. > :12:48.The Soviet Union and Russia, they're two different countries.
:12:49. > :13:00.And from the beginning Russia wanted to be a part of it,
:13:01. > :13:05.The question is about the security of this part of the world
:13:06. > :13:07.under Donald Trump - here's what worries me...
:13:08. > :13:09.That one of his closest advisers, Newt Gingrich,
:13:10. > :13:11.talked about their Baltics as if they were a suburb
:13:12. > :13:20.This part of the world, that's what I suggested.
:13:21. > :13:23.And that is a mentality that is existing in our White House,
:13:24. > :13:26.and when the time comes, this is all nice we've
:13:27. > :13:33.increased our forces, that defence spending
:13:34. > :13:36.is going to grow, and I'm all for that but this
:13:37. > :13:39.This is about the fact that people are worried.
:13:40. > :13:41.Vladimir Putin has already intervened in Estonia,
:13:42. > :13:43.by kidnapping people and removing them.
:13:44. > :13:45.He's invaded Ukraine and the reason people are worried
:13:46. > :13:48.is what will the United States do in a crisis?
:13:49. > :13:53.If your president doesn't believe that Nato is important,
:13:54. > :13:57.no matter what the Vice President says, and the Secretary of Defence
:13:58. > :14:00.says, the president may not behave in a way that brings security
:14:01. > :14:11.Can we go to our next question please?
:14:12. > :14:13.A gentleman from Latvia but who is an ethnic Russian.
:14:14. > :14:17.My question is, what is the driving force behind Donald Trump's
:14:18. > :14:29.Well, I think the driving force is every president for the last 35
:14:30. > :14:32.years has started the presidency off by saying, "We're going to reset our
:14:33. > :14:41.And everyone has been disappointed, not because the United States backed
:14:42. > :14:43.away from that commitment, but the Russians have walked away
:14:44. > :14:48.So I think that same thing may happen, so I would not particularise
:14:49. > :14:53.I think you have to make that comment about every president
:14:54. > :14:58.Mark, but don't you think only Russia is to blame
:14:59. > :15:17.The Crimea would be part of Ukraine if not by the coup orchestrated
:15:18. > :15:23.Edward Lozansky, the question was, what was the driving
:15:24. > :15:27.force behind Donald Trump's policy towards Russia?
:15:28. > :15:30.You live in both countries, what do you think is
:15:31. > :15:37.He made a lot of very complimentary remarks
:15:38. > :15:40.He kept saying, Russia can be reliable and an important partner
:15:41. > :15:46.And this is exactly true, no one can deny it.
:15:47. > :15:48.If Russia and the United States fight the Islamic radicals,
:15:49. > :15:51.then they will defeat them and they can build on this
:15:52. > :15:55.and make sure that there is peace in Europe for ever.
:15:56. > :16:00.But certain special interest groups don't like it,
:16:01. > :16:02.because they have an interest that Russia is more important for them
:16:03. > :16:10.Russia wants to be a friend of all of you, all of you, yes, yes.
:16:11. > :16:13.I repeat, in '91 Russia liberated Baltic states from communism.
:16:14. > :16:22.Anna, what do you think is driving Trump's policy towards Russia?
:16:23. > :16:25.Well, President Trump is benevolent towards Russia, it seems,
:16:26. > :16:27.and also towards President Putin in his stance.
:16:28. > :16:36.They view the world, to some extent, in the same way.
:16:37. > :16:39.They don't necessarily see the United States as the unipolar
:16:40. > :16:48.There is room for more powers, and that would enable also Trump
:16:49. > :16:50.to put America first and make some other options than past
:16:51. > :16:57.So I don't really agree that this is just an ordinary
:16:58. > :17:04.I think he has, he wants more of a detente with Russia.
:17:05. > :17:07.But as it looks now, his hands are tied, actually,
:17:08. > :17:11.with congressional hearings on what's going on with Russian ties
:17:12. > :17:15.The allegations about Russian interference in the last
:17:16. > :17:23.I wish it were true that Republicans were doing so much good.
:17:24. > :17:26.There's really only one or two Republicans who are speaking up
:17:27. > :17:28.for the truth when it comes to Russia.
:17:29. > :17:32.The rest of the party has capitulated, because there
:17:33. > :17:36.is something unusual, let's face it, there is something
:17:37. > :17:41.unusual about an American president who is talking so favourably
:17:42. > :17:46.There is an unusual quality in the United States' president,
:17:47. > :17:51.people in Hungary, the leaders there, authoritarian
:17:52. > :17:55.dictators all over the world who for some reason,
:17:56. > :18:04.and it's sad but it's true, think that Mr Putin's
:18:05. > :18:06.authoritarian style, his effectiveness as a nationalist
:18:07. > :18:09.There was a time in the United States when other
:18:10. > :18:11.Republican presidents talked about freedom, freedom of the press,
:18:12. > :18:16.freedom of religion, freedom of democratic rule.
:18:17. > :18:19.Presidents like Ronald Reagan, George W Bush, George Bush.
:18:20. > :18:25.All of them couldn't stand the idea that
:18:26. > :18:28.an American Republican is talking about Mr Putin so favourably.
:18:29. > :18:35.Admiration drives his policy, admiration for Putin?
:18:36. > :18:39.Fortunately for us, government works slowly,
:18:40. > :18:43.and right now the government is implementing policy
:18:44. > :18:46.started by President Obama, to send troops into this part
:18:47. > :18:49.of the world, to follow through on decisions Nato has
:18:50. > :18:53.made, to strengthen Nato vis-a-vis the Russians.
:18:54. > :18:57.We don't know what a President Trump policy on Russia will be, because
:18:58. > :19:02.I think that Anna's right, that because of
:19:03. > :19:05.the investigations that are going on, it will be very,
:19:06. > :19:07.very difficult for Donald Trump to do something
:19:08. > :19:09.dramatically in the vein that he wanted to do
:19:10. > :19:19.You are refering fair to the fact last summer Nato announced
:19:20. > :19:22.it was going to be stationing hundreds of troops in the Baltic
:19:23. > :19:24.states and Poland and about 1000 Canadian led troops
:19:25. > :19:27.Very quickly, I just want to ask Mark Kimmitt,
:19:28. > :19:31.Well, he has, obviously he has a very core group
:19:32. > :19:35.of people that he listens to, his daughter, his son-in-law...
:19:36. > :19:39.But I also think it's true that he does listen
:19:40. > :19:46.He does listen to his State Secretary.
:19:47. > :19:50.Obviously both General Mattis and Secretary Tillerson have come
:19:51. > :20:01.out and have firmly said, we are standing behind Russia.
:20:02. > :20:08.And if the suggestion it is that the president will be made in
:20:09. > :20:11.the vacuum of the Defence Secretary and the Secretary of State, then I
:20:12. > :20:14.would suspect inside that facility that we call the National Security
:20:15. > :20:17.Council, they will walk out, because they have
:20:18. > :20:21.put their reputations and their beliefs on the line to support Nato.
:20:22. > :20:23.We've seen General Mike Flynn, the National Security adviser, being
:20:24. > :20:26.replaced by General HR McMaster, who is seen as not being
:20:27. > :20:28.as favourable towards Russia as Mike Flynn was.
:20:29. > :20:35.General HR McMaster spend a significant part of his career
:20:36. > :20:37.in Europe, looking down and staring down the East Germans
:20:38. > :20:44.and the Russians, and he hasn't forgotten that.
:20:45. > :20:54.Artis Pabriks, you want to come in quickly here? It is a good thing to
:20:55. > :21:00.have a good relationship with Russia. But we here in the Baltics
:21:01. > :21:03.were probably there will be the first to benefit if there would be a
:21:04. > :21:08.good relationship with Russia. But I don't think that at this moment we
:21:09. > :21:13.can really succeed with this, because by nature current regime in
:21:14. > :21:17.the Kremlin is an advantageous regime that wants to disrupt the
:21:18. > :21:22.current order. Occupation of Crimea shows this. From that perspective,
:21:23. > :21:27.the only write permission the West and Trump can take is resilient and
:21:28. > :21:32.deterrence at the current moment, while keeping the door open when
:21:33. > :21:37.possible to negotiate with Russia. APPLAUSE
:21:38. > :21:46.Let's go to our next question from the audience. An Estonian. Thank
:21:47. > :21:53.you. We Estonian 's have sent our troops to the hottest points in both
:21:54. > :22:01.Iraq and Afghanistan. Also we are among those very few countries of
:22:02. > :22:10.Nato who are paying 2% of their GDP on defence. APPLAUSE
:22:11. > :22:16.Still... Still we are, I would say, a bit married, and you can guess
:22:17. > :22:20.why. And the question comes, would you recommend us any additional
:22:21. > :22:28.commitment we can do? -- a bit worried. Edward Lozansky. My dear
:22:29. > :22:33.Estonian friend, that 2% you are spending is a total waste. Show me
:22:34. > :22:39.at least one success of Nato after the collapse of communism. Not a
:22:40. > :22:43.single success. Only success in raising money. American taxpayers,
:22:44. > :22:48.including myself, have to do that. So one thing for Nato to do
:22:49. > :22:56.something successful is transform, even changed name, because
:22:57. > :23:04.Bulgaria... It's not North Atlantic, you have to change it to
:23:05. > :23:08.international anti-terrorist organisation, and then Russia will
:23:09. > :23:13.join, China will join, all European countries will join and will have a
:23:14. > :23:22.common cause to succeed. Now it's a waste of money. Thank you. Anna
:23:23. > :23:27.Wieslander, what kind of additional commitment would you suggest of the
:23:28. > :23:31.Estonians? I think the Estonians are doing a lot of commitments, I think
:23:32. > :23:37.it's good you spend 2% on defence. I don't agree with Edward, I think we
:23:38. > :23:46.need that. If Russia wants to regain trust, they could return Crimea to
:23:47. > :23:50.Ukraine and stop the War. APPLAUSE You know for global questions we
:23:51. > :23:53.asked people to tell us their comments online and so on.
:23:54. > :23:57.I will give you a taste of the kind of thing we have been getting on
:23:58. > :24:01.social media. One says, do you think the appeasement of Putin by Trump
:24:02. > :24:05.would lead to invasion of the Baltic states?
:24:06. > :24:09.And another asks, does anyone really believe that Russia wants to attack
:24:10. > :24:14.the Baltic states, and why should it?
:24:15. > :24:17.You know what, actually, panel, take a pause. I will ask the audience
:24:18. > :24:22.what they think about that question. Give me a show of hands, who
:24:23. > :24:27.believes Russia really wants to attack the Baltics? Put your hand up
:24:28. > :24:32.if you think they do. That is quite incredible. I would
:24:33. > :24:35.say literally just a handful of people believe Russia really wants
:24:36. > :24:39.to attack the Baltic states. Let's go to the audience again for
:24:40. > :24:46.some questions. Let's take a couple together. Kate, who is Latvian, your
:24:47. > :24:53.question. I would like to ask the panel about future relations about
:24:54. > :24:57.the cyber attacks. How could it escalate in the face of repeated
:24:58. > :25:03.attacks and what would you think the future tax and responses? And
:25:04. > :25:10.another member of the audience from the United States. If any or all of
:25:11. > :25:14.the Baltic states invoke Article five for any legitimate reason, be
:25:15. > :25:19.it a massive military attack or a cyber attack, and certain Nato
:25:20. > :25:27.countries do not respond, what would be the repercussions to those
:25:28. > :25:33.nations? James Rubin. US - Russia relations relating to cyber attacks?
:25:34. > :25:37.Well, unfortunately there has already been a cyber attack on my
:25:38. > :25:41.country. It happened during the election last year. There was an
:25:42. > :25:44.active cyber sabotage by the Russians. They did something that is
:25:45. > :25:54.almost impossible to believe happened. It's not proven. I think
:25:55. > :25:59.anyone who doesn't spend their day watching alternative fact news
:26:00. > :26:03.organisations... APPLAUSE Knows perfectly well that Russian
:26:04. > :26:07.organisations were involved in the hacking of the Democratic party's
:26:08. > :26:15.efforts and that Russia's covert operation was designed... No CIA, no
:26:16. > :26:23.FBI, no agency said this is true. Are you finished with your alphabet?
:26:24. > :26:25.Edward Lozansky denying rusher in -- Russian involvement. Everyone in
:26:26. > :26:30.American eyes and I think the audience knows rusher interfered and
:26:31. > :26:35.committed an attack of cyber sabotage on our country. It will
:26:36. > :26:40.happen in Europe. This is a reality, and if people want to deny it they
:26:41. > :26:44.can, but the reality is Russia has invoked and spent a lot of money and
:26:45. > :26:52.effort and resources on this and we are going to have to do a better
:26:53. > :26:59.job. Listen carefully. Every US security... 17 intelligence
:27:00. > :27:05.agencies. Nunn said it is confirmed. It is rumours, probably, maybe, and
:27:06. > :27:10.there's a group of US former CIA and NSA officials who can tell the
:27:11. > :27:17.truth. They said it was leaked, not hacked. Edward Lozansky, we have
:27:18. > :27:21.general Mike Flynn saying to the Congressional hearing he will say
:27:22. > :27:25.what he knows about US- Russia ties that kind of thing if he gets
:27:26. > :27:31.immunity from prosecution. So the story is still unfolding. That's
:27:32. > :27:35.right. Why say confirmed? Mark Kimmit, regarding cyber attacks, the
:27:36. > :27:39.impact on US - Russian relations. Again, as we said earlier, we have
:27:40. > :27:42.do get a grip with the issue of cyber attacks. There is nobody on
:27:43. > :27:46.this panel who disagrees with that. It is a threat and a threat that
:27:47. > :27:51.needs to be addressed. I think the more important question is the
:27:52. > :27:55.question that was asked here. If a country invokes article five and the
:27:56. > :28:00.rest of the Alliance walks away, I simply hope that is a hypothetical
:28:01. > :28:04.and I do not believe that Nato can stand as an organisation or even
:28:05. > :28:09.look at itself in the eye if it didn't, if it seeks to be an
:28:10. > :28:12.organisation, if we ever walk away from our article five commitments.
:28:13. > :28:20.APPLAUSE Anna.
:28:21. > :28:26.There are mechanisms for that that I know of, but I would assume... It is
:28:27. > :28:30.false to think if Nato does an act, no one will act. Countries will act.
:28:31. > :28:34.They are not prohibited to act because Nato is not able to take a
:28:35. > :28:38.decision to act. I think that is important. The US can act on its
:28:39. > :28:42.own, other countries can act on their own, Sweden... I don't think
:28:43. > :28:46.we would have a situation where no one helps. Perhaps they would be
:28:47. > :28:50.disappointments and capabilities are not made available that should have
:28:51. > :28:56.been made available. But I cannot foresee a situation where the West
:28:57. > :29:01.would not act, in case there would be... What action would that be, not
:29:02. > :29:09.military action necessarily for cyber? Cyber warfare retaliation I
:29:10. > :29:14.guess would come... What kind of retaliation? I am not an expert on
:29:15. > :29:20.that. I would simply say that they are not the only people that have a
:29:21. > :29:25.cyber capability. Putin is playing a very weak hand, but he's playing it
:29:26. > :29:30.well. Silicon Valley far surpasses anything that the Russians have, in
:29:31. > :29:34.terms of cyber capability. As we said earlier, we need to get better
:29:35. > :29:38.at it but rest assured we have an offensive capability and that is
:29:39. > :29:49.what Nato is coming to grips with as well. Thank you. APPLAUSE
:29:50. > :29:55.OK, let's go to our next question. From the Baltic state of Lithuania,
:29:56. > :30:00.your question? The world will fall into a second Cold War if the two
:30:01. > :30:05.great nations failed to negotiate? Could our world fall into a second
:30:06. > :30:10.Cold War if the two nations failed to negotiate any differences they
:30:11. > :30:14.may have or whatever, Anna Wieslander, I don't see that we are
:30:15. > :30:18.moving into a new Cold War. I think we're moving into perhaps a bit of a
:30:19. > :30:22.different world order, with some changes that we will have to adapt
:30:23. > :30:30.to. But I think there are great possibilities in that world as well,
:30:31. > :30:34.actually. I would not foresee, I think it leads the thought wrong to
:30:35. > :30:38.say a new Cold War. I think we're actually in a new Cold War. Whether
:30:39. > :30:42.negotiations will solve that will not... Our two countries have
:30:43. > :30:45.interests that are completely different. Some interest such as
:30:46. > :30:50.counterterrorism which may be capable of achieving... But what we
:30:51. > :30:54.are seeing in places like Crimea, certainly what we're seeing in
:30:55. > :30:59.places such as Syria, there are areas where we have significant
:31:00. > :31:04.differences. My personal hope is that the points being made by
:31:05. > :31:10.President Trump within two weeks of the Iranians testing him, he stood
:31:11. > :31:14.up and said, we are putting the Iranians on notice. When the
:31:15. > :31:18.Russians said we are going to expand our nuclear forces, he said we will
:31:19. > :31:22.outspend you. The real question comes down to if the Russians want a
:31:23. > :31:27.new Cold War, the Americans will stand up to that and we will stand
:31:28. > :31:32.by our allies and will continue to deter them for whatever they may
:31:33. > :31:40.seek. Can I just say a comment on social media, why are we over Lee
:31:41. > :31:43.and unashamedly racist towards Russia and Russians? He says it is
:31:44. > :31:51.OK to assume all Russians are bad and contact with Russians is like
:31:52. > :31:54.communing with the devil. We need to focus on this in a mega sense. All
:31:55. > :32:00.these questions boiled down to what our world has become when it is an
:32:01. > :32:04.issue of nationalism. The reason why you hear me getting so worked up
:32:05. > :32:09.about Vladimir Putin is because he has become the leader of a worldwide
:32:10. > :32:15.movement which has praised intolerance. I worry that my
:32:16. > :32:19.president, the leaders of Hungary, leaders in Europe, leaders in the
:32:20. > :32:23.middle east, all of these people together don't understand that what
:32:24. > :32:28.has made the progress possible we've had is when we've eliminated our
:32:29. > :32:32.hatred of the other. When we realised we can disagree with
:32:33. > :32:38.somebody without hating them. When we realised that fighting over
:32:39. > :32:43.nationality is what the thread titled this together is. As long as
:32:44. > :32:47.Mr Putin will be the leader of a worldwide alliance of neo-
:32:48. > :32:49.nationalists, we will have a big problem. Especially if Mr Trump
:32:50. > :33:02.joins the Alliance. APPLAUSE Thank you, James Rubin. Our next
:33:03. > :33:07.question from the audience... Another question from Latvia. Good
:33:08. > :33:12.evening, why is there no close coordination between the United
:33:13. > :33:17.States and Russia fighting against Isis? President Trump defended the
:33:18. > :33:20.idea give the United States and Russia should cooperate in his
:33:21. > :33:26.campaign. What do you think are the main obstacles to achieve this
:33:27. > :33:31.cooperation? Mark Kimmit Fuss. We certainly aren't fully cooperating
:33:32. > :33:36.with the Russians in the fight against terror and Isis. We conduct
:33:37. > :33:40.simultaneous operations but we don't feel good at this point it would be
:33:41. > :33:44.worthwhile to share our intelligence with the Russians. But we have some
:33:45. > :33:52.concerns about how the Russians are fighting Isis inside of Syria,
:33:53. > :33:56.because they label anybody who opposes Bashar al-Assad as a
:33:57. > :34:00.terrorist. So we have come a little bit closer to working with the
:34:01. > :34:04.Russians on the fight against terrorism, specifically in Syria,
:34:05. > :34:12.but we do have a long way to go. Anna Wieslander? I agree there could
:34:13. > :34:16.be some steps, but I would not count that much on Russia as a stable
:34:17. > :34:20.partner in fighting Isis. I think there is a big difference between
:34:21. > :34:26.the US and Russia when it comes to fighting Isis. It's a next Distin
:34:27. > :34:30.threat to the US, on top of the threat level for the US. It's not
:34:31. > :34:36.that important for Russia. I disagree. If you take a look at the
:34:37. > :34:40.Russian history, the recent history, they have been consumed by radical
:34:41. > :34:47.Islamic terrorism on their southern flanks. You take a look at those
:34:48. > :34:50.places... It's decreasing and I think the main interest of Russia
:34:51. > :34:54.for working together with the US in the Middle East is to position
:34:55. > :34:59.Russia as a global power and to execute, and to be a regional actor
:35:00. > :35:03.in the Middle East. That's why you also see them now in Libya, we see
:35:04. > :35:12.them in Afghanistan. I think what they want to solve in Syria is the
:35:13. > :35:20.Civil War, and to first-hand maintain Assad in power and maintain
:35:21. > :35:24.Syria as one state. Mark Kimmit? The comment I was referring to was the
:35:25. > :35:29.notion of Isis being a threat to the United States... We are worried
:35:30. > :35:35.about home-grown terrorism, but they're people killed in Chicago
:35:36. > :35:40.last week than killed by Isis. On the other hand, the Soviet Union,
:35:41. > :35:45.first and the Russians now, I think they think that radical Islamic
:35:46. > :35:50.terrorism is far more affect their country than the United States does
:35:51. > :35:57.or should. Our next question please. An ethnic Russian from Latvia. Dear
:35:58. > :36:00.experts, considering serious media and peer pressure on the US
:36:01. > :36:06.administration in the US to discipline Russia. Under which
:36:07. > :36:14.scenarios would US and Russia normalise their relations at all?
:36:15. > :36:20.Edward Lozansky Test Rex Tillerson. A very capable man, who knows Russia
:36:21. > :36:25.very well. He worked with Russia, knows Putin and Sergey Lavrov and
:36:26. > :36:27.the Russian crowd. He is coming to Moscow and he will bring some
:36:28. > :36:33.proposals. We think he will bring some proposal that he calls a grand
:36:34. > :36:37.bargain. You give something and Russians give something. This is how
:36:38. > :36:41.you do business. Trump is not a regular politician. He's not
:36:42. > :36:45.ideological, is a businessman. I think the first step will be on
:36:46. > :36:52.April 12. Then you have to wait for a meeting between Putin and Trump.
:36:53. > :36:59.After that, I think process will start. I'm very optimistic. I really
:37:00. > :37:04.like this crowd, when you said Russia didn't... You made my day.
:37:05. > :37:09.What is the quick Pruitt pro grow? It is still in the process. I think
:37:10. > :37:18.it is very simple. Two issues, Syria and Ukraine are something that are
:37:19. > :37:21.on the table right now. In Syria already military to military there
:37:22. > :37:25.is some contact, Mark, you should know that. It is not full-scale
:37:26. > :37:31.corporation but they are talking, it's good. Under Clinton, sorry
:37:32. > :37:36.Obama administration, it did not happen. Ukraine, very simple. What
:37:37. > :37:41.Ukrainians want, they want to speak their own language, Russian
:37:42. > :37:48.language. A few million people and the Ukrainian government, first
:37:49. > :37:53.decree when they orchestrated the coup was forbid Russian language. If
:37:54. > :37:58.Ukrainians allowed to have Russian language... BOOING
:37:59. > :38:02.So there is some room for negotiations?
:38:03. > :38:06.They have what you call federalisation. I live next to
:38:07. > :38:14.Canada. Canada has federal states and two languages. Why? Why
:38:15. > :38:24.Ukrainians and Canada have better life than... Two languages, peace
:38:25. > :38:29.for ever. Artis Pabriks, I am very sceptical about any possibility for
:38:30. > :38:34.a grand bargain because there is no source for that. Neither in American
:38:35. > :38:39.traditional real politics. The difference between Cold War and
:38:40. > :38:43.today is during the Cold War, for instance, both sides wanted to keep
:38:44. > :38:47.the status quo. At this moment, Kremlin's government wants to change
:38:48. > :38:50.the status quo. If we speak about Ukraine, it cannot be chance for
:38:51. > :38:57.Americans to give up something, because here it challenges the basic
:38:58. > :39:02.fundamental relations rules. Will never recognise occupation of
:39:03. > :39:10.Crimea. We must understand... APPLAUSE
:39:11. > :39:14.And we must understand that it's not about language, Russian language in
:39:15. > :39:18.Ukraine, it's about Russia's dominance over its neighbours like
:39:19. > :39:25.Ukraine. It's nothing to do with language. Forget about this. Now
:39:26. > :39:35.let's go to our final question from the audience, from Latvia. Is French
:39:36. > :39:38.between this leader is possible? Everything Russia would like to
:39:39. > :39:43.achieve in this region would come at the expense of American influence.
:39:44. > :39:47.How can a leader who puts his name in giant letters on buildings work
:39:48. > :39:52.with Oman who has a Mac image, riding bareback on horses? Panel, I
:39:53. > :39:57.think you can all answer this question starting with you, Anna
:39:58. > :39:59.Wieslander? I don't foresee a long-term friendship between
:40:00. > :40:09.President Trump and President Putin. I would be surprised, due to various
:40:10. > :40:13.reasons, for that. Mark Kimmit? They may have a friendship, that may be
:40:14. > :40:19.irrelevant. This is an improperly named panel. It should not be Putin
:40:20. > :40:24.and Trott, it should be Putin and America. What we've already seen is
:40:25. > :40:28.that the institutions in America have put this president in check. We
:40:29. > :40:32.have a system of checks and balances. If you want to talk about
:40:33. > :40:37.Russia, you must talk about Putin. If you want to talk about America,
:40:38. > :40:47.you need to talk about America with its checks and balances. APPLAUSE
:40:48. > :40:50.Artis Pabriks? Looking at their characters, I would say if there was
:40:51. > :40:54.friendship it will be short lived with lots of sparks. This might be
:40:55. > :40:58.what we are afraid of. I will join the previous speaker and say there
:40:59. > :41:03.are different political systems. America is still a big, democratic
:41:04. > :41:07.country, and this is not about love and friendship, this is about
:41:08. > :41:11.fundamental rights and principles. This is what I think Putin at this
:41:12. > :41:15.moment, he understands, because even if he might be interested in
:41:16. > :41:21.disrupting elections in US, I think he might be a little bit afraid of
:41:22. > :41:27.what he is wishing for. Because this relationship between two leaders
:41:28. > :41:32.might be not in his favour. Edward Lozansky, I think it is possible two
:41:33. > :41:37.men like each other. They publicly stated they respect each other. I
:41:38. > :41:43.think it is going to happen. Of course, Putin's job is much easier.
:41:44. > :41:49.Because Trump is facing huge, huge, almost brick wall of the
:41:50. > :41:52.establishment of the special groups who would rather see Russia as an
:41:53. > :41:56.enemy rather than a friend. But in the end, there is no other way. If
:41:57. > :42:05.we don't make peace between the United States and Russia, it's a
:42:06. > :42:08.road to nuclear war. So let's pray these two men will make peace. It
:42:09. > :42:13.will be good for all of you, all of us. James Rubin? I don't think
:42:14. > :42:18.there's going to be a long friendship between Putin and Trump,
:42:19. > :42:22.unless Mr Putin has a complete change of heart. Remember, for about
:42:23. > :42:29.seven or eight years now his entire foreign policy has been about
:42:30. > :42:32.weakening the United States, he has been troubled by the strength of the
:42:33. > :42:35.United States and the weakness of Russia and everything he's done ever
:42:36. > :42:39.since is designed to weaken the United States. But in the end,
:42:40. > :42:43.whether it's Nato enlargement or something else, I would just say to
:42:44. > :42:48.the people sitting in this room, given the danger that Mr Putin has
:42:49. > :42:56.posed, aren't you glad you are in Nato? APPLAUSE
:42:57. > :43:03.OK, can I just ask... What is your answer to your own question?
:43:04. > :43:07.I believe infringer between men but probably this isn't going to be a
:43:08. > :43:14.match made in heaven. Let's see what the audience think? Is French
:43:15. > :43:17.between these two egocentric leaders possible. Show your hands if you
:43:18. > :43:23.think it is possible. -- is friendship. I would say a
:43:24. > :43:26.very, very small minority. Who thinks friendship between Vladimir
:43:27. > :43:31.Putin and Donald Trump is not possible? A very, very clear
:43:32. > :43:34.majority are very sceptical about the friendship between these two
:43:35. > :43:44.leaders. I think that point can end this edition of Global Questions. My
:43:45. > :43:48.thanks to our panel, and thank you to all of our audience here and to
:43:49. > :43:55.you, where ever you have been following this edition of Global
:43:56. > :43:57.Questions. From the capital of Latvia, thank you very much and
:43:58. > :44:17.goodbye. Thank you for tuning into our look
:44:18. > :44:19.at the weather for the week ahead. In the short
:44:20. > :44:27.term we have had some grey weather -- great weather and more great
:44:28. > :44:29.weather for the second half of the weekend. In south-eastern parts