Events happening today

1. ALL
   DAY

   

   

   Earliest Tornado P…

   
   

   26 April 2026

   This event began 04/26/2025 and repeats every year forever

   
   

   April 26, 1884: This Is Believed to Be the First Known Photograph of a Tornado
   Stereograph view of a tornado as it passed just northwest of Garnett on April 26, 1884 in Anderson County, Kansas. According to the Kansas Historical Society, it is believed to be the first photograph of a tornado.
   For three days that spring, the United States Signal Corps, an early precursor to the National Weather Service, observed a massive storm cell moving into Kansas from Colorado. At 5:30 p.m. on April 26, 1884, residents of Garnett witnessed a long rope-like funnel descend from the western sky near the tiny hamlet of Westphalia. For roughly 30 minutes, it moved on a northeasterly path. The tornado’s slow progress allowed local fruit farmer and amateur photographer A.A. Adams time to assemble his cumbersome box camera and capture this singular image. Positioned near the United Presbyterian Church in Garnett, Adams was standing just 14 miles from the cyclone.
   Meteorology was still in its infancy in the 1880s. The Signal Corp could measure weather anomalies through the use of field stations, but could not issue forecasts. As a result, early settlers had no warning. Before this shot, historically the only images of them were drawings by eyewitnesses. Photographic evidence provided experts with valuable insight and proved infinitely fascinating to a general public more accustomed to legend than science.
   The day after the storm, a newspaper reporter from the Anderson County Republican rode out on horseback to assess the damage. Though several residents reported having heard the sound of a locomotive often associated with tornadoes, the storm traveled roughly nine miles through open prairie and caused little damage. The funnel was reported to have “the appearance of a long rope of a purplish colored cloud.” According to Monthly Weather Review, “About three miles north of Westphalia a wagon laden with lumber was struck by the tornado. The lumber was scattered over the prairie, and the driver and horses were carried a considerable distance in the air.” The driver was identified at David Metheney, according to the Kansas Historical Society.
   Adams was well aware of the value of his image. Born on a Virginia farm, he arrived in Kansas in 1857. Following a short stint in the Civil War, he settled in Lawrence, Kansas, where he established a photography studio. He sold the studio in 1867 and moved to Anderson County. Following the 1884 storm, Adams attempted to exploit his rare image by selling souvenir cabinet cards and stereographs.
   URL
   https://www.vintag.es/2020/04/first-tornado-photograph.html
    
   
   

   Event details

   
   RMCommunityCalendar 0 Comments · 0 Reviews

   

   

   A Tale Of Two Coll…

   
   

   26 April 2026

   This event began 04/26/2025 and repeats every year forever

   
   

   Princeton university head march 21 2025
   https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/using-funding-to-force-concessions-threatens-institutions-princeton-president-says
   MY THOUGHTS 04262025
   When I look at the investment of the federal government to research departments of select colleges or universities in the usa + the fiscal allowance of National College Athletic Association [ NCAA] to allow select colleges or universities in the usa to gain wealth while not paying athletes plus gaining athletes from demographic regions different from their own. I see how the white colleges or universities in the usa were engineered for growth. The tragedy is that the legal actions to actually aid Historical Black Colleges or Universities all came in the Schrumpft time as president. why? why not Obama? as Schrumpft said correctly, black elected officials in the united states America have a share of the blame , and a majority share of the blame legally, to the black populace in the united states of America modern condition. A majority , over 90%, of black elected officials, starting circa 1865 when south Carolina had a majority black legislature, in the united states of America never had and don't have a Black Agenda; the heritage stemming from said lacking makes it where black elected officials in the united states of America think it normal that they don't have a black agenda for the primary benefit of black peoples. The historical black colleges,albeit in majority, over 95% , started by white religious institutions, are the second oldest black secular, non religions, institutions in the usa. The first being black newspapers. Yes Black people have existed in the usa since its founding but black history, especially DOSer history, is a completely different story and the lack of that truth in how black elected officials/black advocacy organizations/black communal organizations operate has been one of the greatest flaws for the majority of black people in the usa. Black leaderships desire for waiting for whites to decide or design, has made the usa the most multiracial [race defined phenotypically/religiously/genderwise/financially/linguistically + more] than any other government in humanity which has helped the usa become closer to what the black one percent led by Frederick douglass have always wanted, a composite nation. But most black people in the usa don't want a composite nation, they want black success by any means, including violence, necessary.
    
   VIDEO youtube
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yEkSa5hL0o
   
    
   TRANSCRIPT
    
   0:00 AMNA NAWAZ: Columbia University has agreed to comply with a series of 0:03 demands from the Trump administration about how it will handle protests, 0:08 antisemitism, and even some academic departments. The university faced a 0:12 deadline today to either comply or risk losing $400 million in federal funding. 0:18 Columbia agreed to ban masks that conceal identity, 0:21 to give some campus police new power to arrest protesters, review its admission procedures, 0:27 and to appoint a senior university official to oversee several academic departments, 0:32 including those focused on the Middle East, as well as Jewish and Palestinian studies. 0:36 It's part of a broader crackdown on higher education. 0:40 Jeffrey Brown has our latest look. 0:43 JEFFREY BROWN: As colleges are under pressure from the Trump administration, how should they respond? 0:47 Princeton University President Christopher L. Eisgruber is 0:51 speaking out publicly and joins the "News Hour" now for this exclusive interview. 0:55 Thanks so much for joining us. 0:57 I want to start with news that we're both learning about right now, I believe, 1:01 which is that Columbia University seems to have agreed to many of the demands from the 1:06 -+Trump administration, in the hope of keeping that $400 million in research. What's your response? 1:13 CHRISTOPHER L. EISGRUBER, President, Princeton University: Let me say first of all, 1:15 I have huge respect for Columbia University and tremendous respect for their president, 1:20 Dr. Katrina Armstrong. So I don't want to be in the position of second-guessing a peer 1:26 institution, particularly under circumstances where I have just learned about the agreement. 1:30 What I will say is this. Academic freedom is a fundamental principle of universities, 1:35 has to be protected. And so I have concerns if universities make concessions about that. 1:40 And I think once you make concessions once, it's hard not to make them again. So that 1:45 would be a framework that I would bring to this decision at any American university. 1:51 JEFFREY BROWN: In an essay in "The Atlantic" now, 1:53 you refer to what's going on as an assault on academic freedom. 1:57 You write: "The attack on Columbia is a radical 2:00 threat to scholarly excellence and to America's leadership in research." 2:05 Tell us, what do you see going on and how big is that threat right now? 2:11 CHRISTOPHER L. EISGRUBER: Well, what it says is this. 2:12 America's research universities are the best in the world. I think they are also the best 2:16 that they have ever been. If you look back at American history, two of the things that have 2:21 been critical to making American universities as strong as they are academic freedom. 2:25 That is the right of universities to make decisions about how to constitute academic 2:30 departments and the right of faculty, scholars, and scholarly disciplines 2:36 to make judgments about what counts as quality. That's one of the key factors. 2:40 And the second is the partnership with the government that has benefited the American people 2:44 tremendously by producing these great research universities. Right now, when you see that 2:50 government partnership and the government funding being used in ways to kind of force concessions 2:56 from universities around academic freedom, it threatens the strength of those institutions 3:00 by undermining the ability of scholars to insist on the right standards of excellence. 3:05 JEFFREY BROWN: But I think this is an interesting point that many of us are not so aware of, 3:09 which is how -- which is what you write about, how universities became responsible for a large 3:14 part of government scientific and research programs, accepting a lot of money for that, 3:20 but, as you write, therefore, making universities particularly vulnerable, as now. 3:28 CHRISTOPHER L. EISGRUBER: Yes, I think if you look back at American 3:30 history, one of the important developments in making America's research universities the 3:35 strongest in the world was this partnership that originated around World War II. 3:41 The United States government recognized that by asking research universities to perform 3:47 research on behalf of the American people and the American government, 3:50 it could strengthen our economy, improve our health, increase the 3:55 security of the country by making us a world leader in innovation. And it has. 4:00 But, in doing so, the government also became a uniquely powerful patron of all these 4:06 universities. It was supplying large amounts of dollars to universities. And this partnership 4:11 created a kind of interdependence. For decades, leaders and politicians, 4:17 government officials from both parties respected the academic freedom of those universities. 4:22 And that's what's made our universities so great. What concerns me so deeply about what's 4:27 happening at Columbia and elsewhere right now is that the government seems to be using 4:31 that funding stream to force concessions that are violations of academic freedom. 4:36 JEFFREY BROWN: What about, though, the main charge from the administration? Does Columbia, 4:40 do you and other universities, do you have a problem of antisemitism on campus? Or 4:46 do you think that's being exaggerated? And what, if anything, is being done about it? 4:53 CHRISTOPHER L. EISGRUBER: Look, I'm a scholar of religious freedom. I'm Jewish myself. I'm deeply 4:57 concerned about antisemitism. It is an appropriate thing for the government to be concerned about. 5:01 And it's something that all of us as university presidents have to be concerned about. 5:05 There are laws that require us to care about any kind of discrimination our campus, 5:11 including antisemitism on our campuses. And it's important that the government enforce those laws, 5:16 but there are also processes specified in those laws in court decisions and in 5:20 regulations that the government needs to follow. 5:23 So there are right ways and wrong ways to go about that. And the wrong way to 5:27 do it is to use federal funding as a cudgel to force concessions to academic freedom. 5:31 JEFFREY BROWN: We have not yet to date seen a lot of pushback from 5:36 the academic world. Is each university on its own at this point? Do you expect to 5:42 see a more collaborative effort? What do you want to see universities do? 5:49 CHRISTOPHER L. EISGRUBER: Well, first of all, I think all of us need to speak up 5:51 for the fundamental principles that define our universities and that define our missions. That's 5:56 one of the reasons why I wrote the essay that ran in "The Atlantic" that you mentioned earlier. 6:02 It's also the case that universities work together through associations, including, for example, 6:08 the Association of American Universities, which is a group of 70 leading research universities 6:14 in the country. These issues are critical to us. And we want to work with the government 6:21 in order to ensure that the basic principles that I have described around academic freedom 6:25 and this critical compact between research universities and the government are preserved. 6:32 I think that should be in everybody's interest. It's in the interest of the American people. It's 6:37 in the interest, I think, of a government that wants to make America a world leader 6:41 and to preserve our eminence in scientific research and the benefits that come with it. 6:45 JEFFREY BROWN: So how serious is this? Is it an 6:47 existential moment for the university as we know it? 6:52 CHRISTOPHER L. EISGRUBER: I think that, when you are dealing with potential intrusions 6:56 on academic freedom, when you're dealing with very serious threats to the funding 7:00 that has been at the core of this compact between universities and the government, 7:06 you're dealing with very serious issues and a crisis that deserves everybody's attention. 7:13 That principle of academic freedom and the ability of scientists and scholars to follow 7:20 their research where it takes them and the funding that has enabled our research universities to be 7:26 the best in the world have made a difference to our universities and to our country in ways that 7:33 should be the concern of every university, every American and every official in our government. 7:39 JEFFREY BROWN: All right, Christopher Eisgruber is president of Princeton University. 7:43 Thank you so much for joining us. 7:45 CHRISTOPHER L. EISGRUBER: Thank you, Geoff.
    
   white house initiative to support hbcu's
   April 23rd 2025
   Uniform Resource Locator 
   https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/white-house-initiative-to-promote-excellence-and-innovation-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities/
   TEXT
   WHITE HOUSE INITIATIVE TO PROMOTE EXCELLENCE AND INNOVATION AT HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES Executive Orders April 23, 2025 By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: Section 1. Purpose. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) remain integral to American students’ pursuit of prosperity and wellbeing, providing the pathway to a career and a better life. This order will continue the work begun during my first Administration to elevate the value and impact of our Nation’s HBCUs as beacons of educational excellence and economic opportunity that serve as some of the best cultivators of tomorrow’s leaders in business, government, academia, and the military. Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of my Administration to support HBCUs in: advancing America’s full potential; fostering more and better opportunities in higher education; providing the highest-quality education; obtaining equal opportunities for participation in Federal programs; ensuring college-educated Americans are empowered to advance the common good at home and abroad; and making our Nation more globally competitive. Sec. 3. White House Initiative on HBCUs. (a) There is hereby established the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (Initiative), housed in the Executive Office of the President and led by an Executive Director designated by the President. (b) The Initiative shall work with executive departments and agencies (agencies), the President’s Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities established in section 4 of this order, private-sector employers, educational associations, philanthropic organizations, and other partners to increase the capacity of HBCUs to provide the highest-quality education to an increasing number of students. The Initiative shall have two primary missions: (i) increasing the private-sector role, including the role of private foundations, in: (A) strengthening HBCUs through enhanced institutional planning and development, fiscal stability, and financial management; (B) upgrading institutional infrastructure, including the use of technology, to ensure the long-term viability of these institutions; and (C) providing professional development opportunities for HBCU students to help build America’s workforce in technology, healthcare, manufacturing, finance, and other high-growth industries; and (ii) enhancing HBCUs’ capabilities to serve our Nation’s young adults by: (A) supporting implementation of the HBCU PARTNERS Act (Public Law 116-270), including facilitating the Federal agency plan process required by section 4 of that Act (20 U.S.C. 1063d); (B) working to advance my Administration’s key priorities related to promoting innovation and excellence throughout HBCUs in consultation with HBCU leaders, representatives, students, and alumni; (C) fostering private-sector initiatives and public-private and philanthropic partnerships to promote centers of academic research and program excellence at HBCUs; (D) improving the availability and quality of information concerning HBCUs in the public policy sphere; (E) sharing administrative and programmatic best practices within the HBCU community; (F) addressing efforts to promote student success and retention at HBCUs, including college affordability, degree attainment, campus modernization, and infrastructure improvements; (G) partnering with private entities and elementary and secondary education stakeholders to build a pipeline for students that may be interested in attending HBCUs and promote affordable degree attainment; (H) encouraging States to provide the required State matching funds for 1890 Land-Grant Institutions; (I) collaborating with the Department of Agriculture and State governments to establish a framework for addressing barriers to accessing Federal funding to ensure that HBCUs receive the maximum funding to which they may be entitled; (J) collaborating with agencies to improve the competitiveness of HBCUs for other sources of Federal research and development funding; and (K) convening an annual White House Summit on HBCUs to address matters related to the Initiative’s missions and functions. (c) The heads of agencies shall assist and provide information to the Initiative, consistent with applicable law, as may be necessary to carry out the functions of the Initiative. Each agency shall bear its own expenses of participating in the Initiative. Sec. 4. President’s Board of Advisors on HBCUs. (a) There is established in the Department of Education the President’s Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (Board). The Board shall fulfill the mission and functions established by, shall have the structure set forth in, and shall in all other respects be subject to the provisions of section 5 of the HBCU PARTNERS Act (20 U.S.C. 1063e). The Board shall include representatives of a variety of sectors, such as philanthropy, education, business, finance, entrepreneurship, innovation, and private foundations, and current HBCU presidents. (b) The Board shall advise the President, through the Initiative, on the matters set forth in section 5(c) of the HBCU PARTNERS Act (20 U.S.C. 1063e(c)). (c) The Department of Education shall provide funding and administrative support for the Board, consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. Insofar as chapter 10 of title 5, United States Code (commonly known as the Federal Advisory Committee Act), may apply to the Board, any functions of the President under that Act, except for those in section 6 and section 14 of that Act, shall be performed by the Secretary of Education, in accordance with guidelines issued by the Administrator of General Services. Sec. 5. Accountability and Implementation. (a) The Executive Director of the Initiative shall submit an annual progress report to the President summarizing the Federal Government’s impact on HBCUs and providing recommendations for improvement. Sec. 6. Revocations. Executive Order 14041 of September 3, 2021 (White House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic Opportunity Through Historically Black Colleges and Universities), is hereby revoked. Within 14 days of the date of this order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall terminate the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Serving Institutions Advisory Council. Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) For the purposes of this order, “historically black colleges and universities” shall mean those institutions listed in 34 C.F.R. 608.2. (b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. (c) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. (d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. DONALD J. TRUMP THE WHITE HOUSE, April 23, 2025.
   
   REFERRAL
   https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-signs-new-executive-order-to-promote-excellence-at-hbcus/ar-AA1DymIS?ocid=BingNewsSerp
   PUBLIC LAW 116–270—DEC. 31, 2020 134 STAT. 3325 
   Public Law 116–270 
   116th Congress
   TEXT
   https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-116publ270/html/PLAW-116publ270.htm
    
   [116th Congress Public Law 270] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] [[Page 134 STAT. 3325]] Public Law 116-270 116th Congress An Act To strengthen the capacity and competitiveness of historically Black colleges and universities through robust public-sector, private-sector, and community partnerships and engagement, and for other purposes. <<NOTE: Dec. 31, 2020 - [S. 461]>> Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: HBCU Propelling Agency Relationships Towards a New Era of Results for Students Act. 20 USC 1001 note.>> SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``HBCU Propelling Agency Relationships Towards a New Era of Results for Students Act'' or the ``HBCU PARTNERS Act''. SEC. 2. <<NOTE: 20 USC 1063d note.>> FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following: (1) As many colleges and universities across the country kept their doors closed to African American applicants, historically Black colleges and universities (referred to in this section as ``HBCUs'') played a central role in ensuring that African Americans could attain an excellent education. (2) Today, HBCUs continue to play a critical role in ensuring that African Americans, and those of all races, can access high-quality educational opportunities. (3) HBCUs enroll nearly 300,000 students, an estimated 70 percent of whom come from low-income backgrounds and 80 percent of whom are African American. (4) According to the National Association For Equal Opportunity In Higher Education (referred to in this section as ``NAFEO''), HBCUs make up just 3 percent of American institutions of higher education but serve more than a fifth of African American college students. (5) According to the Thurgood Marshall College Fund (referred to in this section as ``TMCF''), approximately 9 percent of all African American college students attend HBCUs. (6) A March 2017 report from the Education Trust concluded that HBCUs have higher completion rates for African American students than other institutions serving similar student populations. (7) According to TMCF, 40 percent of African American Members of Congress, 50 percent of African American lawyers, and 80 percent of African American judges are graduates of HBCUs. (8) According to NAFEO, HBCUs graduate approximately 50 percent of African American public school teaching professionals. [[Page 134 STAT. 3326]] (9) According to the United Negro College Fund (referred to in this section as ``UNCF''), African American graduates of HBCUs are almost twice as likely as African Americans who graduated from other institutions to report that their university prepared them well for life. (10) According to a study commissioned by UNCF, in 2014, HBCUs generated a total direct economic impact of $14,800,000,000 and created more than 134,000 jobs. (11) According to a 2019 report produced by the American Council on Education and UNCF, despite efforts to counter a historical legacy of inequitable funding and notable investments by the Federal Government and many State governments, resource inequities continue to plague HBCUs. (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are-- (1) to strengthen the capacity and competitiveness of HBCUs to fulfill their principal mission of equalizing educational opportunity, as described in section 301(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1051(b)); (2) to align HBCUs with the educational and economic competitiveness priorities of the United States; (3) to provide students enrolled at HBCUs with the highest quality educational and economic opportunities; (4) to bolster and facilitate productive interactions between HBCUs and Federal agencies; and (5) to encourage HBCU participation in and benefit from Federal programs, grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements. SEC. 3. <<NOTE: 20 USC 1063d note.>> DEFINITIONS. In this Act: (1) Applicable agency.--The term ``applicable agency'' means-- (A) the Department of Agriculture; (B) the Department of Commerce; (C) the Department of Defense; (D) the Department of Education; (E) the Department of Energy; (F) the Department of Health and Human Services; (G) the Department of Homeland Security; (H) the Department of Housing and Urban Development; (I) the Department of the Interior; (J) the Department of Justice; (K) the Department of Labor; (L) the Department of State; (M) the Department of Transportation; (N) the Department of Treasury; (O) the Department of Veterans Affairs; (P) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; (Q) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; (R) the National Science Foundation; (S) the Small Business Administration; and (T) any other Federal agency designated as an applicable agency under section 4. [[Page 134 STAT. 3327]] (2) Executive director.--The term ``Executive Director'' means-- (A) the Executive Director of the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, as designated by the President; or (B) if no such Executive Director is designated, such person as the President may designate to lead the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities. (3) HBCU.--The term ``HBCU'' means a historically Black college or university. (4) Historically black college or university.--The term ``historically Black college or university'' has the meaning given the term ``part B institution'' under section 322 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061). (5) President's board of advisors.--The term ``President's Board of Advisors'' means the President's Board of Advisors on historically Black colleges and universities. (6) Secretary.--Except as otherwise provided, the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Education. (7) White house initiative.--The term ``White House Initiative'' means the White House Initiative on historically Black colleges and universities. SEC. 4. <<NOTE: 20 USC 1063d.>> STRENGTHENING HBCUS THROUGH FEDERAL AGENCY PLANS. (a) <<NOTE: Consultation.>> Designating Applicable Agencies.--The Secretary, in consultation with the Executive Director, shall-- (1) identify each Federal agency with which an HBCU-- (A) has entered into a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement; or (B) is eligible to participate in the programs and initiatives under the jurisdiction of such Federal agency; and (2) designate each Federal agency so identified as an applicable agency. (b) <<NOTE: Deadline.>> Submitting Agency Plans.--Not later than February 1 of each year, the head of each applicable agency shall submit to the Secretary, the Executive Director, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives, and the President's Board of Advisors an annual Agency Plan describing efforts to strengthen the capacity of HBCUs to participate or be eligible to participate in the programs and initiatives under the jurisdiction of such applicable agency as described in subsection (a)(1)(B). (c) Further Requirements for Submission and Accessibility.--The Executive Director <<NOTE: Public information. Web posting.>> shall make all annual Agency Plan submissions publicly available online in a user-friendly format. (d) Agency Plan Content.--Where appropriate, each Agency Plan shall include-- (1) a description of how the applicable agency intends to increase the capacity of HBCUs to compete effectively for grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements; (2) an identification of Federal programs and initiatives under the jurisdiction of the applicable agency in which HBCUs are underrepresented; (3) an outline of proposed efforts to improve HBCUs' participation in such programs and initiatives; [[Page 134 STAT. 3328]] (4) a description of any progress made towards advancing or achieving goals and efforts from previous Agency Plans submitted under this section by such applicable agency; (5) a description of how the applicable agency plans to encourage public-sector, private-sector, and community involvement to improve the capacity of HBCUs to compete effectively for grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements, and to participate in programs and initiatives under the jurisdiction of such agency; (6) an identification of programs and initiatives not listed in a previous Agency Plan in which an HBCU may participate; (7) any other information the applicable agency determines is relevant to promoting opportunities to fund, partner, contract, or otherwise interact with HBCUs; and (8) <<NOTE: Criteria.>> any additional criteria established by the Secretary or the White House Initiative. (e) Agency Engagement.--To help fulfill the objectives of the Agency Plans, the head of each applicable agency-- (1) shall provide, as appropriate, technical assistance and information to the Executive Director to enhance communication with HBCUs concerning the applicable agency's-- (A) programs and initiatives described in subsection (d)(2); and (B) the preparation of applications or proposals for grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements; and (2) shall appoint a senior official to report directly to the agency head on the applicable agency's progress under this section. SEC. 5. <<NOTE: 20 USC 1063e.>> PRESIDENT'S BOARD OF ADVISORS ON HBCUS. (a) Administration.-- (1) <<NOTE: Establishment.>> In general.--There is established the President's Board of Advisors on historically Black colleges and universities in the Department of Education or, if the President so elects, within the Executive Office of the President. (2) Funding from ed.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), the Secretary shall provide funding and administrative support for the President's Board of Advisors, subject to the availability of appropriations. (3) Funding from the executive office of the president.--If the President elects to locate the President's Board of Advisors within the Executive Office of the President, the Executive Office of the President shall provide funding and administrative support for the President's Board of Advisors, subject to the availability of appropriations. (b) Membership.-- (1) In general.--The President shall appoint not more than 23 members to the President's Board of Advisors, and the Secretary and Executive Director or their designees shall serve as ex officio members. (2) Chair.-- (A) Designation.--The President shall designate one member of the President's Board of Advisors to serve as its Chair, who shall help direct the Board's work in coordination with the Secretary and in consultation with the Executive Director. [[Page 134 STAT. 3329]] (B) <<NOTE: Time period.>> Consultation.--The Chair shall also consult with the Executive Director regarding the time and location of meetings of the President's Board of Advisors, which shall take place not less frequently than once every 6 months. (C) <<NOTE: Guidelines.>> Performance.--Insofar as the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) may apply to the President's Board of Advisors, any functions of the President under such Act, except for those of reporting to the Congress, shall be performed by the Chair, in accordance with guidelines issued by the Administrator of General Services. (3) Compensation.--Members of the President's Board of Advisors shall serve without compensation, but shall be reimbursed for travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law. (c) Mission and Functions.--The President's Board of Advisors shall advise the President, through the White House Initiative, on all matters pertaining to strengthening the educational capacity of HBCUs, which shall include the following: (1) Improving the identity, visibility, distinctive capabilities, and overall competitiveness of HBCUs. (2) Engaging the philanthropic, business, government, military, homeland-security, and education communities in a national dialogue regarding new HBCU programs and initiatives. (3) Improving the ability of HBCUs to remain fiscally secure institutions that can assist the Nation in achieving its educational goals and in advancing the interests of all Americans. (4) Elevating the public awareness of, and fostering appreciation of, HBCUs. (5) Encouraging public-private investments in HBCUs. (6) Improving government-wide strategic planning related to HBCU competitiveness to align Federal resources and provide the context for decisions about HBCU partnerships, investments, performance goals, priorities, human capital development, and budget planning. [[Page 134 STAT. 3330]] (d) Report.--The President's Board of Advisors shall report annually to the President on the Board's progress in carrying out its duties under this section. Approved December 31, 2020. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 461: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: Vol. 165 (2019): Feb. 12, considered and passed Senate. Vol. 166 (2020): Dec. 7, considered and passed House, amended. Dec. 11, Senate concurred in House amendment.
   PDF
   https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ270/PLAW-116publ270.pdf
   US CODE
   https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/1063d
   20 U.S. Code § 1063d - Strengthening HBCUs through Federal agency plans (a)Designating applicable agencies The Secretary, in consultation with the Executive Director, shall— (1)identify each Federal agency with which an HBCU— (A)has entered into a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement; or (B)is eligible to participate in the programs and initiatives under the jurisdiction of such Federal agency; and (2)designate each Federal agency so identified as an applicable agency. (b)Submitting agency plans Not later than February 1 of each year, the head of each applicable agency shall submit to the Secretary, the Executive Director, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives, and the President’s Board of Advisors an annual Agency Plan describing efforts to strengthen the capacity of HBCUs to participate or be eligible to participate in the programs and initiatives under the jurisdiction of such applicable agency as described in subsection (a)(1)(B). (c)Further requirements for submission and accessibility The Executive Director shall make all annual Agency Plan submissions publicly available online in a user-friendly format. (d)Agency plan content Where appropriate, each Agency Plan shall include— (1)a description of how the applicable agency intends to increase the capacity of HBCUs to compete effectively for grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements; (2)an identification of Federal programs and initiatives under the jurisdiction of the applicable agency in which HBCUs are underrepresented; (3)an outline of proposed efforts to improve HBCUs’ participation in such programs and initiatives; (4)a description of any progress made towards advancing or achieving goals and efforts from previous Agency Plans submitted under this section by such applicable agency; (5)a description of how the applicable agency plans to encourage public-sector, private-sector, and community involvement to improve the capacity of HBCUs to compete effectively for grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements, and to participate in programs and initiatives under the jurisdiction of such agency; (6)an identification of programs and initiatives not listed in a previous Agency Plan in which an HBCU may participate; (7)any other information the applicable agency determines is relevant to promoting opportunities to fund, partner, contract, or otherwise interact with HBCUs; and (8)any additional criteria established by the Secretary or the White House Initiative. (e)Agency engagement To help fulfill the objectives of the Agency Plans, the head of each applicable agency— (1)shall provide, as appropriate, technical assistance and information to the Executive Director to enhance communication with HBCUs concerning the applicable agency’s— (A)programs and initiatives described in subsection (d)(2); and (B)the preparation of applications or proposals for grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements; and (2)shall appoint a senior official to report directly to the agency head on the applicable agency’s progress under this section. (Pub. L. 116–270, § 4, Dec. 31, 2020, 134 Stat. 3327.)
    
   20 U.S.C. 1063e
   https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title20/chapter28/subchapter3/partB&edition=prelim
   https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:20%20section:1063e%20edition:prelim)
   20 USC 1063e: President's Board of Advisors on HBCUs Text contains those laws in effect on April 25, 2025 From Title 20-EDUCATION CHAPTER 28-HIGHER EDUCATION RESOURCES AND STUDENT ASSISTANCE SUBCHAPTER III-INSTITUTIONAL AID Part B-Strengthening Historically Black Colleges and Universities §1063e. President's Board of Advisors on HBCUs (a) Administration (1) In general There is established the President's Board of Advisors on historically Black colleges and universities in the Department of Education or, if the President so elects, within the Executive Office of the President. (2) Funding from ED 1 Except as provided in paragraph (3), the Secretary shall provide funding and administrative support for the President's Board of Advisors, subject to the availability of appropriations. (3) Funding from the Executive Office of the President If the President elects to locate the President's Board of Advisors within the Executive Office of the President, the Executive Office of the President shall provide funding and administrative support for the President's Board of Advisors, subject to the availability of appropriations. (b) Membership (1) In general The President shall appoint not more than 23 members to the President's Board of Advisors, and the Secretary and Executive Director or their designees shall serve as ex officio members. (2) Chair (A) Designation The President shall designate one member of the President's Board of Advisors to serve as its Chair, who shall help direct the Board's work in coordination with the Secretary and in consultation with the Executive Director. (B) Consultation The Chair shall also consult with the Executive Director regarding the time and location of meetings of the President's Board of Advisors, which shall take place not less frequently than once every 6 months. (C) Performance Insofar as the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) 2 may apply to the President's Board of Advisors, any functions of the President under such Act, except for those of reporting to the Congress, shall be performed by the Chair, in accordance with guidelines issued by the Administrator of General Services. (3) Compensation Members of the President's Board of Advisors shall serve without compensation, but shall be reimbursed for travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law. (c) Mission and functions The President's Board of Advisors shall advise the President, through the White House Initiative, on all matters pertaining to strengthening the educational capacity of HBCUs, which shall include the following: (1) Improving the identity, visibility, distinctive capabilities, and overall competitiveness of HBCUs. (2) Engaging the philanthropic, business, government, military, homeland-security, and education communities in a national dialogue regarding new HBCU programs and initiatives. (3) Improving the ability of HBCUs to remain fiscally secure institutions that can assist the Nation in achieving its educational goals and in advancing the interests of all Americans. (4) Elevating the public awareness of, and fostering appreciation of, HBCUs. (5) Encouraging public-private investments in HBCUs. (6) Improving government-wide strategic planning related to HBCU competitiveness to align Federal resources and provide the context for decisions about HBCU partnerships, investments, performance goals, priorities, human capital development, and budget planning. (d) Report The President's Board of Advisors shall report annually to the President on the Board's progress in carrying out its duties under this section. ( Pub. L. 116–270, §5, Dec. 31, 2020, 134 Stat. 3328 .) Editorial Notes References in Text The Federal Advisory Committee Act, referred to in subsec. (b)(2)(C), is Pub. L. 92–463, Oct. 6, 1972, 86 Stat. 770 , which was set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, and was substantially repealed and restated in chapter 10 (§1001 et seq.) of Title 5 by Pub. L. 117–286, §§3(a), 7, Dec. 27, 2022, 136 Stat. 4197 , 4361. For disposition of sections of the Act into chapter 10 of Title 5, see Disposition Table preceding section 101 of Title 5. Codification This section was enacted as part of the HBCU Propelling Agency Relationships Towards a New Era of Results for Students Act or the HBCU PARTNERS Act, and not as part of the Higher Education Act of 1965 which comprises this chapter.
    
   34 C.F.R. 608.2.
   https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-VI/part-608/subpart-A/section-608.2
   https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/34/608.2
   34 CFR § 608.2 - What institutions are eligible to receive a grant under the HBCU Program? § 608.2 What institutions are eligible to receive a grant under the HBCU Program? (a) To be eligible to receive a grant under this part, an institution must— (1) Satisfy section 322(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA); (2) Be legally authorized by the State in which it is located— (i) To be a junior or community college; or (ii) To provide an educational program for which it awards a bachelor's degree; and (3) Be accredited or pre accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association. (b) The Secretary has determined that the following institutions satisfy section 322(2) of the HEA. Alabama Alabama A&M University-Huntsville Alabama State University—Montgomery Carver State Technical College—Mobile Concordia College—Selma Fredd State Technical College—Tuscaloosa J.F. Drake State Technical College—Huntsville S.D. Bishop State Junior College—Mobile Lawson State College—Birmingham Miles College—Birmingham Oakwood College—Huntsville Selma University—Selma Stillman College—Tuscaloosa Talladega University—Talladega Trenholm State Technical College—Montgomery Tuskegee University—Tuskegee Arkansas Arkansas Baptist College—Little Rock Philander Smith College—Little Rock Shorter College—Little Rock University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff—Pine Bluff Delaware Delaware State College—Dover District of Columbia Howard University University of the District of Columbia Florida Bethune Cookman College—Daytona Beach Edward Waters College—Jacksonville Florida A&M University—Tallahassee Florida Memorial College—Miami Georgia Albany State College—Albany Atlanta University—Atlanta Clark College—Atlanta Fort Valley State College—Fort Valley Interdenominational Theological Center—Atlanta Morehouse College—Atlanta Morris Brown College—Atlanta Paine College—Augusta Savannah State College—Savannah Spelman College—Atlanta Kentucky Kentucky State University—Frankfurt Louisiana Dillard University—New Orleans Grambling State University—Grambling Southern University A&M College—Baton Rouge Southern University at New Orleans—New Orleans Southern University at Shreveport—Shreveport Xavier University of Louisiana—New Orleans Maryland Bowie State College—Bowie Coppin State College—Baltimore Morgan State University—Baltimore University of Maryland-Eastern Shore—Princess Anne Michigan Lewis College of Business—Detroit Mississippi Alcorn State University—Lorman Coahoma Junior College—Clarksdale Jackson State University—Jackson Mary Holmes College—West Point Mississippi Valley State University—Itta Bena Prentiss Normal and Industrial Institute—Prentiss Rust College—Holly Springs Tougaloo College—Tougaloo Hinds Junior College (Utica Jr Coll)—Raymond Missouri Lincoln University—Jefferson City Harris-Stowe State College—St. Louis North Carolina Barber-Scotia College—Concord Bennett College—Greensboro Elizabeth City State University—Elizabeth City Fayetteville State University—Fayetteville Johnson C. Smith University—Charlotte Livingstone College—Salisbury North Carolina A&T State University—Greensboro North Carolina Central University—Durham Saint Augustine's College—Raleigh Shaw University—Raleigh Winston-Salem State University—Winston Salem Ohio Central State University—Wilberforce Wilberforce University—Wilberforce Oklahoma Langston University—Langston Pennsylvania Cheyney State University—Cheyney Lincoln University—Lincoln South Carolina Allen University—Columbia Benedict College—Columbia Claflin College—Orangeburg Clinton Junior College—Rock Hill Denmark Technical College—Denmark Morris College—Sumter South Carolina State College—Orangeburg Voorhees College—Denmark Tennessee Fisk University—Nashville Knoxville College—Knoxville Lane College—Jackson LeMoyne-Owen College—Memphis Meharry Medical College—Nashville Morristown College—Morristown Tennessee State University—Nashville Texas Huston-Tillotson College—Austin Jarvis Christian College—Hawkins Paul Quinn College—Waco Prairie View A&M University—Prairie View Saint Philip's College—San Antonio Southwestern Christian College—Terrell Texas College—Tyler Texas Southern University—Houston Wiley College—Marshall U.S. Virgin Islands College of the Virgin Islands—St. Thomas Virginia Hampton University—Hampton Norfolk State University—Norfolk Saint Paul's College—Lawrenceville Virginia State University—Petersburg Virginia Union University—Richmond West Virginia Bluefield State College—Bluefield West Virginia State College—Institute (c) If an institution identified in paragraph (b) of this section has merged with another institution, and, as a result of the merger, would not otherwise qualify to receive a grant under this part, that institution may nevertheless qualify to receive a grant under this part if— (1) The institution would have qualified to receive a grant before the merger; and (2) The institution was eligible to receive a grant under the Special Needs Program in any fiscal year prior to fiscal year 1986. (The Special Needs Program was authorized under Title III, Part B, of the HEA before 1986.) (d) For the purpose of paragraph (a)(3) of this section, the Secretary publishes a list in the Federal Register of nationally recognized accrediting agencies and associations. (e) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, for each fiscal year— (1) The University of the District of Columbia is eligible to receive a grant under this part only if the amount of the grant it is scheduled to receive under § 608.31 exceeds the amount it is scheduled to receive in the same fiscal year under the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act; and (2) Howard University is eligible to receive a grant under this part only if the amount of the grant it is scheduled to receive under § 608.31 exceeds the amount it is scheduled to receive in the same fiscal year under the Act of March 2, 1867, 20 U.S.C. 123. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1061, 1063, and 1063a; House Report 99-861, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. p. 367, September 22, 1986; Senate Report 99-296, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. p. 23, May 12, 1986; Cong. Rec. of June 3, 1986, pp. 6588-6589)
   
    
   

   Event details

   
   RMCommunityCalendar 1 Comment · 0 Reviews

   

   

   Truth from Jeffrey…

   
   

   26 April 2026

   This event began 04/26/2025 and repeats every year forever

   
   

   Truth from Jeffrey Sachs 04262025
    
   Paraphrase- a paraphrase isn't a quote 
   When the soviet union ended in 1991 the united states literally believed this is now a u.s. world and we will do as we want, the wars in the middle east, Serbia, the wars in Africa, these are wars that the united states led and caused, and this has been true for more than 40 years, as Europe has not had any foreign policy during this period that i can figure out, no voice, no unity, no clarity, only American loyalty, please don't have American officials as head of Europe , have European officials, have the European foreign policy, you are going to be living with Russia for a long time, so please negotiate with Russia, cause trump and president putin will agree to end the war, if Europe does all it's great war mongering, it doesn't matter, the war is ending, not one word is told to the American people about anything, or to you, or by any of your newspapers these days, this idea that putin reconstructing the Russian empire , this is childish propaganda, so the war started, what was putin's intention in the war, i can tell you what his intention was, when Zelensky said in seven days lets negotiate, i know the details of this exquisitely, I flew to Ankara to listen in detail, to what the mediators were doing, Ukraine walked away unilaterally from a near agreement, why , because the united states told them to, I begged the Ukrainians, and I had a track record with the Ukrainians, I advise the Ukrainians, I am not anti Ukrainian, i am pro Ukrainian completely, I said save your lives, save your sovereignty, save your territory, be neutral, don't listen to the americans, I repeated to them the famous adage of henry Kissinger, that to be an enemy of the united states is dangerous but to be a friend is fatal. 
   COMPLETE
   Video
   https://youtu.be/_RNE3X41IvM?si=0GVA2hOPZfapR5hJ
   
   
   Transcript
    
   0:00 Jeffrey Zak is about to give a talk here in the European Parliament enjoy it when 0:05 the Soviet Union ended in 1991 the United States literally 0:10 believed this is now a US World and we will do as we want the wars in the 0:16 Middle East Serbia the wars in Africa these are Wars that the United States 0:21 LED and caused and this has been true for more than 40 years Europe has not 0:28 had any foreign policy during this period that I can figure out no voice no 0:33 Unity no Clarity only American loyalty 0:39 please don't have American officials as head of Europe have European officials 0:45 have a European foreign policy you're going to be living with Russia for a long time so please negotiate with 0:51 Russia Trump and President Putin will agree to end the war if Europe does all 0:57 its great warmongering it doesn't matter the war is ending not one word is told 1:03 to the American people about anything or to you or by any of your newspapers 1:09 these days this idea that Putin's reconstructing the Russian Empire this is childish propaganda so the war 1:17 started what was Putin's intention in the war I can tell you what his 1:23 intention was when zalinski said in 7 Days let's 1:28 negotiate I know know the details of this exquisitly I flew to anchora to 1:34 listen in detail to what the mediators were doing Ukraine walked away 1:40 unilaterally from a near agreement why because the United States told them to I 1:46 begged the ukrainians and I had a track record with the ukrainians I advised the ukrainians I'm not anti-ukrainian I'm 1:53 Pro Ukrainian completely I said save your lives save your sovereignty save 1:58 your territory be neutral don't listen to the Americans I repeated to them the 2:03 famous adage of Henry Kissinger that to be an enemy of the United States is 2:09 dangerous but to be a friend is fatal above all I want to welcome Professor 2:15 Jeffrey saak and today Jeff is probably the person in the world to speak up for 2:20 peace everywhere for peace which all these things combined and therefore I'm very happy that you're here and uh I'm 2:28 here since 6 months and this Parliament and for somebody who worked for the UN I was actually quite shocked to learn that 2:34 this Parliament speaks only about War I think we have now to rethink what we 2:40 want to do and I hope the European Union will also come because I'm Pro European 2:45 Union will come to to realize that we have also to see how we seek peace and how we manage peace and how we create 2:52 again a peaceful Europe and Jeff might give us for these things some insight thank you very much 2:59 [Applause] I've watched the events very close up uh Jeffrey Sachs' Background 3:05 in Eastern Europe the former Soviet Union Russia uh very closely for the 3:14 last uh 36 years I was an advisor to the Polish government in 3:20 1989 uh to uh President gorbachov in 3:26 1990 and 91 to president yelton in 1991 to 3:32 1993 to president kochma of Ukraine in 1993 3:38 94 I helped introduce the Estonian currency I I helped several countries in 3:46 uh former Yugoslavia especially Slovenia uh I've watched the events very 3:54 close up for 36 years uh after after the 4:00 maidan I was uh asked by the new government to come to Kiev and I was 4:05 taken around the maidan and I learned a lot of things uh firsthand I I've been in touch with 4:13 Russian leaders for more than 30 years I know the American political 4:20 leadership uh close up uh our previous 4:25 uh Secretary of Treasury was my macroeconomic teacher uh 51 years ago or 4:33 just to give you an idea so we were very close friends for a half century I know 4:41 all of these people I just want to say this because what I want to explain in 4:46 my point of view is not uh secondhand it's not ideology it's what I've seen 4:52 with my own eyes and experienced during this 4:57 period in my understanding of the events that have uh befallen Europe in many The Origin of Today's US Foreign Policy 5:06 contexts uh and I'll include not only the uh Ukraine crisis uh but uh 5:15 Serbia 1999 the wars in the Middle East 5:21 including Iraq Syria the wars in Africa including 5:27 Sudan Somalia uh Libya these are to a very significant 5:36 extent that would surprise you perhaps uh and would be 5:42 denounced about what I'm about to say these are Wars that the United States 5:48 LED and caused and this has been true 5:53 for more than 40 years now what happened 6:01 more than 30 years I should say to be more precise the United States came to the 6:10 view especially in 1990 91 and then with the end of the Soviet 6:16 Union that the US now ran the world and that the US did not have to 6:24 heed anybody's views red lines con concerns 6:30 security viewpoints or any International 6:35 obligations or any un framework I'm sorry to put it so plainly but I do want 6:44 you to understand I tried very hard in 6:52 1991 to get help for gorbachov who I think was the greatest Statesman of our 6:57 modern time I recently read the archived memo of the 7:05 National Security Council discussion of my proposal how they 7:11 completely dismissed it and laughed it off the table when I said that the 7:16 United States should help the Soviet Union in financial stabilization and in making its 7:24 reforms and the memo documents including some of my former colleagues at Harvard 7:31 in particular saying we will do the minimum that we will do to prevent 7:37 disaster but the minimum it's not our job to help quite the contrary it's not 7:43 our interest to help when the Soviet Union ended in 7:50 1991 the view became even more exaggerated and I can name chapter and 7:58 verse but the view was We Run The Show Cheney Wolowitz and many other 8:06 names that you will have come to know literally believed this is now a US 8:14 World and we will do as we want we will clean up from the former Soviet Union we 8:23 will take out any remaining allies countries like Iraq Syria 8:30 and so forth will go and we've been experiencing this foreign 8:36 policy for now essentially 33 8:43 years Europe has paid a heavy price for this because Europe has not had any 8:49 foreign policy during this period that I can figure out no voice no Unity no Clarity no 8:58 European interests only American 9:04 loyalty there were moments where there were disagreements and very uh I think 9:10 uh wonderful disagreements especially in the last time of significance was 2003 9:17 in the Iraq War when France and Germany said we don't support the United States 9:24 uh going around the UN Security Council for this war that war by the way was 9:30 directly concocted by Netanyahu and his colleagues in the US 9:38 uh Pentagon I'm not saying that it was a link or mutuality I'm saying it was a 9:46 direct war that was a war carried out for Israel it was a war that Paul wolfowitz 9:53 and Douglas feith coordinated with Netanyahu and that was the last time 10:00 that Europe had a voice and I spoke with European leaders 10:07 then and they were very clear and it was uh quite 10:15 wonderful Europe lost its voice entirely after that but especially in 10:22 2008 now what happened after 1991 to get to 2008 is that NATO Enlargement 10:30 the United States decided that unipolarity meant that NATO would 10:36 enlarge somewhere from Brussels to Vlados step by step there would be no 10:42 end to Eastward enlargement of NATO this would be the US unipolar World 10:51 if you play the game of Risk as a child like I did this is the US idea to have 10:58 the peace on on every part of the board any place without a US military base is 11:05 an enemy basically neutrality is a dirty word in 11:10 the US political lexicon perhaps the dirtiest word at 11:15 least if you're an enemy we know you're an enemy if you are neutral you're 11:21 subversive because then you're really against us because you're not telling us you're pretending to be neutral 11:30 so this was the mindset and the decision was taken formally in 11:35 1994 when President Clinton signed off on NATO enlargement to the east you will 11:42 recall that in February 7th 11:47 1991 Hans Dietra genter and James Baker III spoke with 11:54 gorbachov genter gave a press conference afterwards where he explained 11:59 NATO will not move Eastward we will not take advantage of the dissolution of the 12:08 Warsaw Pact and understand that was in a 12:13 juridical context not a casual context this was the end of World War II being negotiated 12:21 for German reunification and an agreement was 12:26 made that NATO will not move one in Eastford and it was explicit and it is 12:33 in countless documents and just look up National Security Archive of George 12:39 Washington University and you can get dozens of documents it's a website called what gorbachov heard about NATO 12:48 take a look because everything you're told by the US is a lie about this but 12:54 the archives are perfectly clear so the decision was taken in 13:01 1994 to expand NATO all the way to 13:06 Ukraine this is a project this is not one Administration or another this is a 13:13 US Government project that started more than 30 years 13:23 ago in 1997 zign binski wrote The Grand 13:30 chessboard that is not just musings of Mr binski that is the presentation of 13:36 the decisions of the United States government explained to the public which 13:42 is how these books work and the book describes the Eastward 13:48 enlargement of Europe and of NATO as simultaneous 13:55 events and there's a good chapter in that book that says what will Russia do as Europe 14:04 and NATO expand Eastward and I knews big binski 14:11 personally he was very nice to me I I was advising Poland he was a big help he 14:18 was a very nice and smart man and he got everything wrong so in 1997 he wrote In detail why 14:29 Russia could do nothing but exceed to the Eastward expansion of NATO and 14:35 Europe in fact he says the Eastward expansion of Europe and not just Europe but NATO this was a plan a 14:44 project and he explains how Russia will never align with 14:49 China Unthinkable Russia will never align with 14:55 Iran Russia has no vocation other than the European vocation so as Europe moves 15:02 East there's nothing Russia can do about it so says yet another American 15:09 strategist is it any question why we're in war all the 15:14 time because one thing about America is we always know what our counterparts are 15:20 going to do and we always get it wrong and one reason we always get it 15:26 wrong is that in game theory that the American strategists play you don't 15:32 actually talk to the other side you just know what the other side strategy is 15:38 that's it's wonderful it saves so much time you don't need any 15:48 diplomacy so this project began and we had a continuity of government for 30 15:56 years until maybe yesterday 16:02 perhaps 30 years of a project Ukraine and Georgia were the keys to the project 16:12 why because America learned everything it knows from the 16:18 British and so we are the wannabe British 16:24 Empire and what the British Empire understood in 185 16:29 53 Mr Palmer Lord Palmerston excuse me is that you surround Russia in the 16:37 Black Sea and you deny Russia access to the Eastern 16:43 Mediterranean and all you're watching is an American project to do that in the 16:50 21st century the idea 16:55 was that there would be Ukraine Romania Bulgaria turkey and 17:03 Georgia as the Black Sea literal that would deprive Russia of any 17:12 International status by blocking the Black Sea and essentially 17:19 by neutralizing Russia as more than a local power brinsky is completely clear 17:26 about this and before rinsky there was mender and who owns the island of the 17:34 world owns the world so this project goes back a long time I think it goes 17:40 back basically to Palmerston in 19 and again I've lived 17:49 through every Administration I've known these presidents I've known their teams nothing changed much from Clinton 17:57 to Bush to Obama to Trump one to 18:02 Biden maybe they got worse step by step Biden was the worst in my 18:09 view uh maybe also because he was not compos mtis for the last couple of years 18:16 and I say that seriously not as a snarky remark the American political system is 18:23 a system of image it's a system of media manipulation every day 18:29 it is a PR system and so you could have a president that basically doesn't 18:35 function and have that in power for two years and actually have that President 18:42 run for reelection and one damn thing is he had to stand on a stage for 90 18:47 minutes by himself and that was the end of it had it not been that mistake he 18:53 would have gone on to have his candidacy whether he was sleeping after 400 p.m. in the afternoon or 18:59 not so this is actually the reality everybody goes along with it it's 19:06 impolite to say anything that I'm saying because we don't speak the truth about 19:12 almost anything in this world right now so this project went on from the 19:19 1990s bombing Belgrade 78 straight days in 1999 was part of this project 19:27 splitting a part the country when borders are Sacro San aren't they indeed 19:33 except for Kosovo that's fine because borders are sacrosanct except when America changes 19:42 them Sudan was another related project the South Sudan Rebellion did 19:50 that just happen because South Sudanese rebelled or can I give you the CIA 19:57 Playbook to please understand as grown-ups what this is 20:04 about military events are costly they require equipment 20:10 training base camps intelligence finance that comes from Big 20:18 powers that doesn't come from local 20:23 insurrections South Sudan did not defeat North Sudan or Sudan 20:30 in a tribal battle it was a US project I would go often to Nairobi and 20:39 meet us military or senators or others with deep interest in Sudan's 20:48 politics this was part of the game of 20:53 unipolarity so the NATO enlargement as you know started in 1999 with Hungary 20:59 Poland and the Czech Republic and Russia was extremely unhappy about it but these were 21:06 countries still far from the border and Russia protested but of course to no avail then 21:15 George Bush Jr came in when 911 occurred President Putin pledged all 21:22 support and then the US uh decided in 21:28 September mber 20th 21:33 2001 that it would launch seven wars in five years and you can listen to General 21:41 Wesley Clark online talk about that he was NATO Supreme Commander in 21:47 1999 he went to the Pentagon on September 20th 2001 he was handed the 21:53 paper explaining seven wars these by the way were Netanyahu 21:59 Wars the idea was partly to clean up old Soviet allies and partly to take out 22:06 supporters of Hamas and Hezbollah because netanyahu's idea was 22:12 there will be one state thank you only one state it will be Israel Israel will 22:18 control all of the territory and anyone that objects we will overthrow not we 22:25 exactly our friend the United States that's US policy until this 22:32 morning we don't know whether it will change now the only wrinkle is that 22:37 maybe the US will own Gaza instead of Israel owning Gaza but the idea has been around at 22:46 least for 25 years it actually goes back to a 22:51 document called clean break that Netanyahu and his American political team put together in 1996 to end the 23:01 idea of the two-state solution you can also find it online so these are projects these are 23:08 long-term events these aren't is it Clinton is it bush is it 23:15 Obama That's the boring way to look at American politics as the day-to-day game but 23:21 that's not what American politics is so the next round of NATO enlargement 23:27 came in 2004 with seven more countries the three Baltic states 23:34 Romania Bulgaria Slovenia and Slovakia at this point Russia was pretty 23:41 damn upset this was a complete violation of the postwar order 23:49 agreed with German reunification essentially it was 23:55 a it it was a fundamental trick or defection of the US from a Cooperative 24:02 Arrangement is what it amounted to because they believe in 24:10 unipolarity so as everybody recalls because we just had the Munich security conference last week in 2007 President 24:17 Putin said stop enough enough stop 24:23 now and of course what that meant was in 2008 the United States Jam down Europe's 24:29 throat enlargement of NATO to Ukraine and Georgia this is a long-term 24:35 project I listened to Mr sakash in New York in May of 2008 and I walked out 24:44 called Sonia and said this man's crazy and a month later a war broke out 24:50 because the United States told this guy we save Georgia and he stands at the 24:57 Council on Foreign ation says Georgia's in the center of Europe well it ain't 25:03 ladies and gentlemen it's not in the center of Europe and the most recent events are 25:10 not helpful for Georgia for its safety and your MPS going there or MEPS going 25:16 there and European politicians that gets Georgia destroyed that doesn't save Georgia that gets Georgia 25:24 destroyed completely destroyed in 20 8 as everybody knows our former CIA 25:33 director William Burns sent a long message back to condalisa Rice net means 25:38 net about expansion this we know from Julian Assange because believe me not 25:45 one word is told to the American people about anything or to you or by any of 25:51 your newspapers these days so we have Julian Assange to thank 25:57 but we can read the memo in detail as you know Victor yanukovich was 26:03 elected in 2010 on the platform of neutrality Russia had no 26:11 territorial interests or designs in Ukraine at all I know I was there during these PE 26:19 these years what Russia was negotiating was a 25-year lease to 2042 26:28 for saastal Naval Base that's it not for Crimea not for the donbas 26:35 nothing like that this idea that Putin is 26:40 reconstructing the Russian Empire this is childish propaganda excuse me if 26:48 anyone knows the daytoday and year-to-year history this is childish 26:55 stuff childish stuff seems to work better than adult old stuff so no designs at all the United 27:04 States decided this man must be overthrown it's called a regime change 27:11 operation there have been about a hundred of them by the United States many in your 27:18 countries and many all over the world that's what the CIA does for a 27:26 living okay please know it it's a very unusual kind of foreign policy but in 27:34 America if you don't like the other side you don't negotiate with them you try to 27:41 overthrow them preferably covertly if it doesn't work covertly you 27:49 do it overtly you always say it's not our fault they're the aggressor they're the 27:56 other side they're Hitler that comes up every two or three years whether it's 28:01 Saddam Hussein whether it's Assad whether it's Putin that's very 28:06 convenient that's the only foreign policy explanation the American people are ever given 28:14 anywhere well we're facing Munich 1938 well we're facing Munich 1938 can't talk 28:21 to the other side they're evil implacable foes that's the only model of foreign 28:28 policy we ever hear from our mass media and the mass media repeats it entirely 28:36 because it's completely suborned by the US government now in 2014 Ukraine Euromaidan 28:44 2014 the US worked actively to overthrow 28:50 yanukovich everybody knows the phone call intercepted by my Columbia University colleague Victoria nuland 28:59 and the US ambassador Peter Pat can't remember if I told you this or 29:04 if I only told Washington this that when I talked to Jeff feltman this morning he had a new name for the UN guy Robert 29:11 Siri did I write you that this morning yeah I saw that he's now gotten both 29:17 Siri and Bon kimoon to agree that Siri could come in Monday or Tuesday okay so 29:24 that would be great I think to help glue this thing and have the un help glue it and you know the EU no exactly and 29:32 I think we've got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure that if it does if it 29:37 does start to gain altitude the Russians will be working behind the scenes to try to torpedo it you don't get better 29:44 evidence the Russians intercepted her call and they put it on the internet 29:49 listen to it it's fascinating I know all these people by the way by doing that they all 29:57 got promoted in the Biden Administration that's the job now when 30:04 the maidon occurred I was called immediately oh Professor Sachs the new 30:11 Ukrainian prime minister would like to see you to talk about the economic 30:17 crisis because I'm pretty good at that and so I flew to 30:23 Kiev and I was walked around the maidan and and I was told how the US 30:30 paid the money for all the people around the maidan 30:36 spontaneous revolution of dignity ladies and Gentlemen 30:42 please where do all these media Outlets come from where does all this 30:47 organization come from where do all these buses come from where do all these people called in come from are you 30:55 kidding this is organized and 31:00 effort and it's not a secret except to citizens of Europe and 31:09 the United States everyone else understands it quite 31:14 clearly then came Minsk and especially Minsk Minsk Agreements 31:20 2 which by the way was modeled on South troan 31:26 autonomy and the belg could have related to MS2 very well it 31:32 said there should be autonomy for the Russians speaking regions in the east of 31:39 Ukraine it was supported unanimously by the UN Security 31:45 Council the United States and Ukraine decided it was not to 31:51 be enforced Germany and France which were the guarantors of the Normandy process 31:59 Let It Go and it was absolutely another direct 32:07 American unipolar action with Europe as usual playing 32:13 completely useless subsidiary role even though it was a guarantor of the 32:20 agreement Trump one raised the armaments there were many thousands of 32:28 deaths in the shelling by Ukraine in the donbas there was no Minsk 2 32:35 agreement and then Biden came into office and again I know all these people 32:42 I used to be a member of the democratic party I now am strictly sworn to be a 32:50 member of no party because both are the same 32:56 anyway and because this is I the Democrats became complete warmongers 33:02 over time and there not was not one voice about peace just like most of your 33:10 parliamentarians the same way so at the end of 33:19 1991 Putin put on the table a last effort in two security agreement draft 33:28 one with Europe and one with the United States the US put on the table December 15th n uh 33:36 2021 I had an hour call with Jake Sullivan in the white house Sachs' Call with Jake Sullivan 33:42 begging Jake avoid the war you can avoid the war all you have 33:49 to do is say nato will not enlarge to Ukraine and he said to me oh NATO is not 33:58 going to enlarge to Ukraine don't worry about it I said Jake say it publicly no 34:04 no no we can't say it publicly said Jake you're going to have a war over 34:10 something that isn't even going to happen he said don't worry Jeff there will be no 34:17 war these are not very bright people I'm telling you if I can give you 34:25 my honest view they're not very bright people and I've dealt with them for more than 40 34:30 years they talk to themselves they don't talk to anybody else they play game 34:37 theory in non-cooperative Game Theory you don't talk to the other side you 34:42 just make your strategy this is the essence of Game 34:50 Theory it's not negotiation Theory it's not peacemaking Theory it is UN atal 34:59 non-cooperative theory if you know formal Game Theory that's what they play 35:04 it started at the Rand Corporation that's what they still play in 2019 35:09 there's a paper by Rand how do we extend Russia do you know they wrote a paper 35:15 which Biden followed how do we annoy Russia that's literally the strategy how 35:23 do we annoy Russia we're trying to provoke it trying to make could break 35:28 apart maybe have regime change maybe have unrest maybe have economic 35:33 crisis that's what you call your ally are you 35:41 [Music] kidding so I had a long and 35:46 frustrating phone call with suvan I was standing out in the freezing 35:52 cold I happen to be H trying to have a ski day 35:58 and there I was Jake don't have the war oh there'll be no war 36:04 Jeff we know a lot of what happened the next month which is that they refus to NATO's Open Door Policy 36:12 negotiate the stupidest idea of NATO is the so-called open door 36:18 policy are you kidding NATO reserves the right to go where it wants without any 36:26 neighbor having any say whatsoever well I tell the Mexicans and 36:32 the Canadians don't try it you know Trump may want to take over Canada 36:40 so Canada could say to China why don't you build a military base uh in uh in in 36:47 Ontario I wouldn't advise it and the United States would not say 36:53 well it's an open door that's their business I mean they can do what they want that's not our 36:59 business but grown-ups in Europe repeat this in Europe in your commission your 37:08 high representative this is nonsense stuff this is not even baby 37:17 geopolitics this is just not thinking at all so the war started what was Putin's Putin's Intentions in Ukraine 37:25 intention in the war I can tell you what his intention was it was to force 37:33 zalinski to negotiate neutrality and that happened within 7 37:41 Days of the start of the invasion you should understand this not 37:48 the propaganda that's written about this oh that they failed and he was going to take over 37:54 Ukraine come on ladies and gentlemen understand something 37:59 basic the idea was to keep NATO and what is NATO it's the United 38:06 States off of Russia's border no more no 38:12 less I should add one very important Point why are they so interested first 38:22 because if China or Russia decided to have a military base on the Rio Grand or 38:29 in uh the Canadian border Not only would the United States freak out we'd have 38:34 War within about 10 minutes but because the United States 38:40 unilaterally abandoned the anti-ballistic missile treaty in 2002 38:46 and ended the nuclear arms control framework by doing so and this is extremely important to 38:55 understand the nuclear Arms Control framework is based on trying to block a 39:01 first strike the ABM Treaty was a critical component of that the US unilaterally 39:08 walked out of the ABM Treaty in 2002 it blew a Russian gasket so everything I've 39:15 been describing is in the context of the destruction of the nuclear framework as well and starting in 2010 the US put in 39:24 AIS missile systems in Poland and then in 39:29 Romania and Russia doesn't like that and one of the issues on the table in 39:35 December and January December 2021 January 2022 was does the United States 39:42 claim the right to put missile systems in Ukraine and blinkin told lavro in 39:49 January 2022 the United States reserves the right to put middle missile systems 39:55 wherever it wants that's 40:00 your putative Ally and now let's put intermediate 40:06 missile systems back in Germany the United States walked out of the INF treaty unilaterally in 2019 there is no 40:14 nuclear arms framework right now 40:21 none when zalinsky said in seven days let's 2022 Peace Talks 40:26 negotiate I know the details of this 40:31 exquisitly because I've talked to all the parities in 40:36 detail within a couple of weeks there was a document 40:42 exchanged that President Putin had approved that lavro had presented that 40:47 was being managed by the Turkish mediators I flew to anchora to listen in 40:54 detail to what the mediators were doing Ukraine walked away unilaterally 41:02 from a near agreement why because the United States 41:09 told them to because the UK added icing to the cake by having 41:18 Bojo go in early April to Ukraine and 41:24 explain and he has recently and if your security is in the hands of Boris 41:29 Johnson God help us all Keith starmer turns out to be even 41:35 worse it's unimaginable but it is 41:42 true Boris Johnson has explained and you can look it 41:47 up on the website that what's at stake here is Western 41:54 hegemony not Ukraine Western he 42:00 Michael and I met at the Vatican with a group in the spring of 42:05 20122 where we wrote a document explaining nothing good can come out of 42:11 this war for Ukraine negotiate now because anything that takes time will mean massive amounts of deaths risk of 42:20 nuclear escalation and likely loss of the 42:26 war I wouldn't change one word from what we wrote then nothing was wrong in that 42:32 document and since that document since the US talked the negotiators away from 42:38 the table about a million ukrainians have died or been severely 42:45 wounded and the American Senators who are as nasty and cynical and corrupt as 42:54 imaginable say this is wonderful expenditure of our money because no Americans are 43:00 dying it's the pure proxy war one of our Senators near by me uh 43:07 Blumenthal says this out loud Mitt Romney says this out loud it's 43:14 best money America can spend no Americans are dying it's 43:21 unreal now just to bring us up to yesterday 43:28 this failed this project failed the idea of the project was that Russia would 43:34 fold its hand the idea all along was Russia can't 43:40 resist as big new binski explained in 1997 the Americans thought we have the 43:47 upper hand we're going to win because we're going to Bluff them they're not really 43:54 going to fight they're not really going to mobilize the nuclear option of cutting them out 44:00 of Swift that's going to do them in the 44:06 economic sanctions that's going to do them in the himars that's going to do them in 44:13 the attacks the f-16s honestly I've listened to this for 44:21 70 years I've listened to it as semi understanding I'd say for 44:27 about 56 years they speak nonsense every day my 44:33 country my government this is so familiar to me completely familiar I begged the 44:42 ukrainians and I had a track record with the ukrainians I advised the ukrainians I'm not anti-ukrainian I'm pro-ukrainian 44:49 completely I said save your lives save your sovereignty save your territory be 44:55 neutral don't listen to the Americans I repeated to them the famous 45:01 adage of Henry Kissinger that to be an enemy of the United States is dangerous 45:07 but to be a friend is fatal okay so let me repeat that for 45:13 Europe to be an enemy of the United States is dangerous but to be a friend 45:18 is fatal so let me now finalize a few words Donald Trump 45:26 about Trump 45:31 Trump does not want the losing hand this is 45:38 why it is more likely than not this war will end because Trump and President Putin 45:47 will agree to end the war if Europe does all its great 45:54 warmongering it doesn't matter the war is ending so get it out of your 46:02 system please tell your colleagues it's 46:07 over and it's over because Trump doesn't want to carry a 46:14 loser that's it it's not some great morality he doesn't want to carry a 46:21 loser this is a loser the one that will be saved by the 46:26 negoti iations taking place right now is Ukraine second is Europe your stock 46:33 markets rising in recent Days by the horrible news of negotiations I know 46:40 this has been met with the sheer Horror in these Chambers but this is the best 46:47 news that you could get now I encouraged they don't listen to me but I 46:55 tried to reach out to some of the European leaders most don't want to hear 47:00 anything from me at all but I said don't go to 47:08 Kiev go to Moscow discuss with your 47:13 counterparts are you kidding you're Europe you're 450 million people your $ 47:19 20 trillion economy you should be the main economic 47:25 Trading partner of Russia it's natural 47:31 links by the way if anyone would like to discuss how the US blew up nordstream 47:37 I'd be happy to talk about 47:43 that so the Trump Administration is 47:49 imperialist at heart it is a great 47:55 powers dominate the world it is we will do what we want when 48:01 we can we will be better than a 48:08 ccent Biden and we'll cut our losses where we have 48:14 to there are several war zones in the world the Middle East being another we 48:20 don't know what will happen with that again if Europe had a proper policy you 48:26 could stop that war I'll explain how but war with China is also a 48:36 possibility so I'm not saying that we're at the new age of 48:42 Peace but we are in a uh very uh different kind of politics 48:51 right now and Europe should have a foreign policy and not just a foreign policy of 48:59 russophobia a foreign policy that is a realistic foreign policy that 49:04 understands Russia's situation that understands Europe's situation that understands what America is and what it 49:10 stands for that tries to avoid Europe being invaded by the 49:17 United States because it's not impossible that 49:23 America will just land troops in Danish territory 49:28 I'm not joking and I don't think they're joking and Europe needs a foreign policy 49:35 a real one not a yes we'll bargain with 49:41 Mr Trump and meet him halfway you know what that will be like 49:47 give me a call afterwards please don't have American 49:55 officials as head of Europe have European officials 50:02 please have a European foreign policy you're going to be living with 50:07 Russia for a long time so please negotiate with 50:12 Russia there are real security issues on the table but the bombast and the 50:21 russophobia is not serving your security at all it's not serving you security at 50:27 all and contributed to a million casualties in Ukraine from this idiotic 50:34 American Adventure that you signed on to and then became the lead cheerleaders 50:40 of solves Middle East 50:45 nothing on the Middle East by the way the 50:51 US completely handed over foreign policy to Netanyahu 30 years ago ago the Israel 50:58 Lobby dominates American politics just have no doubt about it I could explain 51:06 for hours how it works it's very dangerous I'm hoping that Trump will not 51:14 destroy his administration and worse the Palestinian people because of Netanyahu who I regard 51:22 as a war criminal uh properly indicted by the 51:29 IC and that needs to be told no more that there will be a state of Palestine 51:36 on the borders of the 4th of June 1967 according to international law as 51:42 the only way for peace it's the only way for Europe to have peace on your borders 51:50 with the Middle East is the two-state solution there is only one obst Le to it 51:57 by the way and that is the veto of the United States and the UN Security Council so if you want to have some 52:04 influence tell the United States Drop The veto you are together with 180 countries 52:13 in the world the only ones that oppose a Palestinian state 52:19 are the United States Israel Micronesia naaru 52:27 poao Papa guini Mr 52:32 Malay and Paraguay so this is a place where Europe 52:39 could have a big influence Europe has gone silent about the jcpoa and 52:46 Iran netanyahu's greatest dream in life is a war between the United States and 52:52 Iran he's not given up and it's not impossible that that would come 52:58 also and that's because the US in this regard does not have an independent 53:04 foreign policy it is run by Israel it's tragic it's amazing by the 53:12 way and it could end Trump may say that 53:18 he wants foreign policy back maybe I'm hoping that it's the case finally let me China 53:24 just say with respect to China China CH is not an enemy China is just a success 53:31 story that's why it is viewed by the United States as an enemy because China 53:38 is a bigger economy than the United States that's 53:46 [Applause] 53:55 all there 54:01 [Applause] 54:07 thanks very well now questions please don't make any 54:12 statements just make questions because we are too many and we we don't have 54:18 that all that much time so um where do I start I start with on the left side I 54:25 have a preference to left as you know you come all yeah go ahead uh thank you Jeffrey 54:32 Sak uh from the Czech Republic we are glad we have you here uh we have a problem uh we were cursed by a witch who Europe-Russia Relations 54:39 uh told the EU and the EU is marked uh so uh it won't be improved until 54:46 2029 but what we the central Europeans should do in the meantime especially if 54:52 the Germans doesn't don't happen to vote for SAR enough uh are we supposed to create some 55:00 kind of neutrality for the Central Europe or what would you suggest us to do 55:08 yeah so uh first of all uh all my 55:13 grandchildren are Czech I want you to know uh and Sonia is a Czech born and 55:20 Czech citizen um so we're very proud uh I'm I'm the trailing spouse in this but 55:26 I'm a check wannabe 55:34 um Europe needs to have a foreign policy that is a European foreign policy and it 55:41 needs to be a realist foreign policy realist is not hate realist is actually 55:48 trying to understand both sides and to negotiate there are two kinds of 55:54 realists a defensive realist an offensive realist uh my dear friend John 56:00 mimer who is the offensive realist I I we're very close friends and I love him 56:06 but I believe more than he does you talk to the other side and you find a way to 56:12 make uh an understanding and so basically 56:21 uh Russia is not going to invade Europe this is the fundamental point it may get 56:29 up to the deeper River it's not going to invade Europe 56:35 but there are real issues the the main issue for Russia was 56:42 the United States because Russia as a major power and a the largest nuclear 56:50 power in the world was profoundly concerned about us unipolarity 56:56 from the beginning now that this is seemingly possibly ending Europe has to open 57:04 negotiations directly with Russia as well because the United States will quickly lose interest and you're going 57:11 to be living with Russia for the next thousands of years okay so what do you want you want 57:20 to make sure that the Baltic states are secure the best thing for the Baltic 57:25 states is to stop their russophobia this is the most important 57:33 thing Estonia has about 25% Russian citizens Russian speaking citizens 57:39 ethnic Russians Lota the 57:45 same don't provoke the neighbor that's 57:52 all this is not hard it really isn't Hur and again I 57:59 want to explain my point of view I have helped these countries the 58:05 ones I'm talking about trying to advise I'm not their enemy I'm not Putin's puppet I'm not Putin's 58:12 apologist I worked in Estonia they gave me I don't it's not I think it's the 58:19 second highest civilian honor that a president of Estonia can bestow on a 58:24 non-national because I designed their currency system for them in 58:31 1992 so I'm giving them advice do not stand there Estonia and say we want to 58:37 break up Russia are you kidding don't this is not how to survive in this 58:46 world you survive with mutual respect 58:52 actually you survive in negotiation you survive in discussion you don't 58:59 Outlaw the Russian language not a good idea when 25% of 59:05 your population is has a first language of Russian it's not right even if there 59:12 weren't a giant On the Border it wouldn't be the right thing to do you'd 59:18 have it as an official language you'd have a language of a in lower school you 59:24 wouldn't antagonize the Russian Orthodox church so basically we need to behave 59:31 like grown-ups and when I constantly 59:38 say that they're acting like children Sonia always says to me that's unfair to 59:46 children because this is worse than children we have a six-year-old 59:52 granddaughter and a three-year-old grandson and they actually make up with their 1:00:00 friends and we don't tell them go just just ridicule them tomorrow and every 1:00:08 day we say go give them a hug and go 1:00:13 play and they do this is not 1:00:19 hard by the way well anyway I won't be labor the point Thank you so elect the 1:00:25 new I should say all I should say is change change 1:00:31 policy I don't want to have a political leaning here yeah maybe a lady and does that work yeah hi my name 1:00:39 is Cara I'm a reporter with the Brussels times um thank you for the fascinating talk Jeffrey um I just wanted to ask you NATO 5% Defence Spending 1:00:45 about Trump's statements about wanting uh NATO members to increase their spending by 5% and we're now seeing lots 1:00:51 of countries scrambling to prove that they're going to do that including Belgium and given that Belgium is also 1:00:56 the NATO headquarters um I wanted to ask you what would be the appropriate response to those statements by NATO 1:01:02 members thanks great thank you uh we don't see exactly eye eye on this 1:01:08 question so let me let me give you my own uh my own view 1:01:14 um my first recommendation with all respect to Brussels is move the NATO 1:01:20 headquarters somewhere else uh I I mean it's seriously because one 1:01:28 of the worst parts of European policy right now is a complete 1:01:34 confusion of Europe and NATO these are completely different but 1:01:39 they became exactly the same Europe is much better than 1:01:46 nato in my opinion NATO isn't even needed anymore I would have ended it in 1:01:54 1991 but because the US viewed it as a 1:01:59 instrument of aemy not as a defense against Russia it 1:02:04 continued afterwards but the confusion of NATO and Europe is 1:02:12 deadly because expanding Europe meant expanding NATO period and these should have been 1:02:20 completely different things so this is uh the first point 1:02:27 my own view again with all respect to Michael we only had a brief conversation 1:02:32 about it is that Europe should have Europe basically should have its own 1:02:38 foreign policy and its own uh its own military security its own 1:02:45 strategic autonomy so-called and it should I'm in favor of that I would disband NATO and maybe Trump is going to 1:02:53 do it anyway maybe Trump's going to invade Greenland who knows then you're really 1:02:59 going to find out what NATO means 1:03:04 so I do think that Europe should invest in its 1:03:09 security 5% is outlandish ridiculous 1:03:16 absurd completely absurd no one needs to spend anything like that 1:03:23 amount 2 to 3% of GDP probably under the current 1:03:30 circumstances what I would do by the way is by European 1:03:38 production because actually strangely 1:03:43 weirdly unfortunately in this world and it's a true truism but it's unfortunate 1:03:51 so I'm not championing it a lot of technological Innovation spins off from 1:03:59 the military sector because governments invest in the military 1:04:04 sector so Trump is a arms salesman you 1:04:10 understand that he's selling American 1:04:16 Arms he is selling American Technology Vance told you a few days ago 1:04:23 don't even think about having your own AI 1:04:28 technology so please understand that this increase of 1:04:34 spending is for the United States not for 1:04:40 you and in this sense I'm completely against that approach but I would not be against an 1:04:47 approach of Europe spending two to three% of GDP for a unified European 1:04:54 security structure and invested in Europe and European 1:05:00 technology and not having the United States dictate the use of European 1:05:07 technology it's so interesting it's the Netherlands that produces the only 1:05:12 Machines of advanced semiconductors extreme ultraviolet 1:05:19 lithography it's asml but America determines every policy of asml 1:05:26 the Netherlands doesn't even have a footnote I wouldn't do that if I were 1:05:32 you hand over all security to the United States I wouldn't do it I would have 1:05:39 your own security framework so you can have your own foreign policy framework 1:05:45 as well Europe stands for lots of things that the United States does not stand 1:05:51 for Europe stands for climate action by the way rightly so because our 1:05:57 president is completely Bonkers on this and Europe stands for 1:06:04 indecency for social democracy as an ethos I'm not talking about a party I'm 1:06:10 talking about an ethos of how equality of Life 1:06:16 occurs Europe stands for multilateralism Europe stands for the UN 1:06:21 Charter the US stands for none of those things you know that our secretary of state Marco Rubio 1:06:30 cancelled his trip to South Africa because on the agenda was equality and 1:06:38 sustainability and he said I'm not getting into that that is an honest reflection of 1:06:46 deep anglosaxon 1:06:51 libertarianism egalitarianism is not a word of the American 1:06:57 lexicon sustainable development not at all you probably know by the way that of 1:07:04 the 193 UN member states 1:07:10 191 have had sdg plans presented as voluntary National reviews 1:07:17 191 two have not Haiti and the United 1:07:22 States of America the the Biden Administration wasn't even allowed to say sustainable 1:07:29 development goals the treasury had a policy not to say sustainable 1:07:34 development goals okay I mention all of this because you need your own foreign 1:07:41 policy I issue a report two reports each year one the world happiness report and 1:07:48 18 of the top 20 countries if I I remember correctly are European this is 1:07:53 the highest quality of life in the world so you need your own policy to 1:07:59 protect that quality of life the United States ranks way 1:08:05 down and the other report where's my colleague Gom is somewhere in the room 1:08:10 here there he is Gom La foron is the lead author of our annual sustainable 1:08:16 development report and almost all of the top 20 countries are European countries 1:08:23 because you believe in this stuff and that's why you're the happiest except in 1:08:32 geopolitics but quality of life so you need your 1:08:37 own foreign policy but you won't have it unless you have your own security you 1:08:42 just won't and so and by the way 27 countries cannot each have their own 1:08:49 foreign policy this is a problem you need a European foreign policy and and a 1:08:55 European security structure and by the way although Michael assures me it's dead I was the greatest fan of 1:09:04 osce and believe that occe is the proper framework for European security it could 1:09:11 really work okay and um afterwards first thank 1:09:19 you thank you very much you at the lunch no you can yeah yeah okay uh well uh thank you Professor I'm from Slovakia 1:09:26 and my prime minister Robert fito was almost shot dead because the opinions you had the similar with him uh yes we 1:09:34 are as a Slovakia Slovak government of the few countries in the European Union we are talking to Russians uh two months 1:09:41 ago I was talking with Mr medv uh in two weeks I will be talking uh in Duma with 1:09:47 Mr slutzki who is the chairman of the Russian uh foreign affairs Committee in uh Moscow maybe my question is what 2025 Peace Negotiations 1:09:54 would you be your message to Russians in this moment because as I heard they are on 1:10:00 the Victorious wave they have no reason to not to conquer the dbas because that's their War aim and what can Trump 1:10:07 uh can offer to them uh to stop the war immediately what would be what would be 1:10:13 the message for Russians from your side thank you very 1:10:20 much lots of uh important things are uh now on offer and on the table and I 1:10:27 believe that the war will end quickly because of this and this this will be at 1:10:34 least one blessing in a very uh very difficult time exactly what the 1:10:40 settlement will be I think uh is now only a question of the territorial 1:10:47 issues uh and that is whether it is the complete four OAS including all of Heron 1:10:55 and upper Asia or whether it is on the contact line and how all of this will be 1:11:01 negotiated I'm not in the room of the negotiations so I can't really say more 1:11:07 but the basis will be there will be territorial concessions there will be 1:11:14 neutrality there will be security guarantees for Ukraine for all parties 1:11:20 uh there will be at least with the US an end of the economic sanction 1:11:26 but what counts of course is Europe and Russia I think that there are and maybe 1:11:33 there will be a restoration of nuclear arms uh negotiations which would be 1:11:40 extraordinarily positive I think that there are tremendously important issues for 1:11:48 Europe to negotiate directly with Russia 1:11:53 and so I would urge uh president Costa and the leadership of Europe to open 1:12:01 direct discussions with President Putin because European security is on the 1:12:08 table I know the Russian leaders many of them quite well uh they are good 1:12:17 negotiators and uh you should negotiate with them uh and you should negotiate 1:12:23 well with them uh I would ask them some questions uh I 1:12:30 would ask them what are the security guarantees that can work so that this 1:12:36 war ends permanently what are the security guarantees for the Baltic states what 1:12:43 should be done part of the process of negotiation is actually to ask the other 1:12:48 side about your concerns not just to know what they know as you think is to 1:12:55 true but actually to ask we have a real problem we have a real worry what are 1:13:01 the guarantees well I want to know the answers also uh by the way I know Mr 1:13:07 lavro Minister lavro for 30 years I I regard him as a brilliant foreign minister uh talk with him negotiate with 1:13:16 him get ideas put ideas on the table put counter ideas on the table I don't think 1:13:22 all of this can be settled by pure reason because uh of oneself you settle 1:13:30 Wars by negotiating and understanding what are the real issues and you don't 1:13:36 call the other side a liar when they express their issues you work out what 1:13:42 the implications of that are for the mutual benefit of Peace So the most 1:13:50 important thing is stop the yelling stop the war mongering and discuss with the 1:13:58 Russian counterparts and don't beg to be at the table with the United States you 1:14:04 don't need to be in the room with the United States you're Europe you should be in the room with Europe and 1:14:11 Russia if the United States wants to join that's fine but to beg no and by the 1:14:19 way Europe does not need to have Ukraine in the room when Europe talks with 1:14:27 Russia you have a lot of issues direct issues don't hand over your foreign 1:14:34 policy to anybody not to the United States not to Ukraine not to 1:14:40 Israel keep a European foreign policy this is the basic idea 1:14:49 [Applause] 1:14:55 Hans noof from the sovereignist political group in this Parliament um alternative for Germany as political 1:15:02 party first of all let me thank you Mr Sax for being here and sharing your ideas with us and be assured that many 1:15:10 of your ideas and of your colleague John mimer have well been received by 1:15:16 political groups here and have been integrated into our agenda I widely Beginning of NATO Expansion 1:15:21 share your views um yet there's one question regarding the historical 1:15:27 account that you gave uh where I would like to go in some detail and This concerns the beginning of NATO expansion 1:15:36 um you um uh uh reported from uh um the 1:15:42 website um what gorbachov heard that there are many um quotations from Ganser 1:15:48 for example um that NATO will not move one inch eastwards now the two for 1:15:55 treaty has been signed in September 1990 right in Moscow so at that point in time 1:16:02 the waro PCT still existed and countries like Poland Hungary and czechia were not part of the 1:16:10 negotiations for the two and four treaty so The wara Pact actually dissolved in 1:16:16 July 1991 and the Soviet Union dissolved in December 1:16:21 1991 so nobody who was was present in the negotiations could speak for Poland 1:16:28 could speak for Hungary could speak for Slovakia that they would not try to become member of NATO once the overall 1:16:37 situation has changed so the counterargument um which we have to 1:16:42 counter um is that it was on the will of these countries of Poland of Hungary of 1:16:50 Slovakia that they wanted to join NATO because of the very hist 1:16:55 they had with the Soviet Union and of course Russia was still perceived in a 1:17:00 way um as a follower of the Soviet Union so how do you counter that 1:17:12 argument I have no doubt of why Hungary Poland Czech Republic Slovakia wanted to 1:17:21 join NATO the question is what is the US 1:17:27 doing to make peace because NATO is not a choice of Hungary Poland Czech 1:17:34 Republic or Slovakia NATO is a us-led military Alliance and the question is 1:17:42 how are we going to establish peace in a reliable way if I were uh making those decisions 1:17:52 back then I would have ended NATO nato altoe in 1:17:58 1991 when those countries requested NATO I would have explain to them what our 1:18:05 defense secretary William Perry said what our lead Statesman George Kenan 1:18:11 said what our final ambassador to the Soviet Union Jack Matlock said uh they 1:18:18 said well we understand your feelings but it's not a good idea because it could provoke a new cold war with Russia 1:18:26 so that's how I would have answered it when those countries joined uh in the 1:18:32 first wave I don't think it was that consequential in fact except that it was 1:18:40 part of a bigger project and the project was spelled out already in 1994 there's 1:18:46 a very good book by Jonathan Haslam Harvard University press called hubris 1:18:54 which uh gives a detailed historical documentation of step by step what 1:19:00 happened uh and uh it's it's really worth reading um so this is a now but 1:19:08 the point I would really make is that Ukraine and Georgia were too 1:19:16 far this is right up against Russia this is in the context of the 1:19:23 complete dest ization of the nuclear framework this is in the context of the 1:19:29 US putting in missile systems on Russia's borders if you listen to 1:19:34 President Putin over the years probably the main thing if you 1:19:39 listen carefully that he's concerned about is missiles 7 minutes from Moscow 1:19:45 is a decapitation strike and this is very real the US Not 1:19:51 only would freak out but did freak out when this happened in the Western 1:19:57 Hemisphere so it's the Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse and fortunately Nikita kushev 1:20:06 did not stand up and say open door policy of the Warsaw Pact we can go 1:20:13 wherever we want Cuba's asked us it's none of America's business what kushev said Is War my God 1:20:21 we don't want war we end this crisis we both pull back that's what kushev and 1:20:27 Kennedy decided in the end so this is the real consequential Russia even 1:20:34 swallowed with a lot of pain the Baltic states Romania Bulgaria Slovakia and 1:20:40 Slovenia it is Ukraine and Georgia and it's because of geography it's because 1:20:48 of Lord Palmerston it's because of the first Crimean War it's because of the 1:20:53 missile systems that this is the essence of why there was this 1:21:03 [Applause] war um yeah is there anybody else 1:21:10 because then we maybe close what you want to be the last one oh which one 1:21:19 oh can can we still continue yeah no you you come for the lunch don't take 1:21:25 you thank thank you very much Professor sax for coming um here um you've How to achieve a real European Foreign Policy 1:21:31 mentioned that the European Union needs to formulate its own foreign policy um in the past the German Franco Alliance 1:21:38 was a big driver for for those policies now with the Ukraine war arguably that 1:21:44 received the crack um do you think that in the future when the European Union is going to formulate this new foreign 1:21:49 policy that they are going to be again in the front seat or uh should it be other other countries or other blocks um 1:21:56 trying to make that change thank you very much oh it's hard it it's hard because 1:22:08 uh of course you don't yet have a a constitution for Europe which really 1:22:16 underpins a European foreign policy and it can't be by 1:22:22 unanimity there has to be a structure in which Europe can speak as Europe even 1:22:28 with some uh dissent but with the European policy I don't want to 1:22:35 oversimplify how to get there exactly but even with the structures you have 1:22:40 you could do a lot better with negotiating directly the first rule is 1:22:47 your diplomats should be diplomats not secretaries of War 1:22:58 honestly that would go halfway at least to where you want to 1:23:04 go a diplomat is a very special kind of 1:23:09 talent a diplomat is trained to sit together with the other side and to 1:23:16 listen to shake hands to smile and to be pleasant it's very hard it's a skill 1:23:25 it's training it's a profession it's not a 1:23:31 game you need that kind of 1:23:37 diplomacy I'm sorry we are not hearing anything like 1:23:45 that I'll just make a couple complaints first Europe is not NATO as I 1:23:53 said I thought stoltenberg was the worst but I was 1:24:00 wrong it just keeps getting worse could someone in NATO stop 1:24:08 talking for God's sake about more 1:24:14 war and could NATO stop speaking for Europe and Europe stop thinking it's 1:24:21 NATO this is the first absolute Point second I'm sorry but your high 1:24:28 representative vice presidents need to become 1:24:35 diplomats diplomacy means going to Moscow inviting your Russian counterpart 1:24:45 here discussing this doesn't happen till 1:24:52 now so this is really my point now 1:24:59 I believe that Europe should become more integrated and more unified in the years 1:25:06 ahead I'm a strong believer in subsidiarity so we were discussing I 1:25:13 don't think housing policy is really Europe's main issue I think this can be 1:25:19 handled at the local level or at the national level I don't see it as a European issue but I don't see foreign 1:25:26 policy as being a 27 country issue I see it being as a European issue and I see 1:25:33 security being at a European level so I think things need to be readjusted but 1:25:39 I'd like to see more Europe for truly European issues and maybe less Europe 1:25:45 for things that are properly subsidiary to Europe at the national and the local 1:25:50 level and I hope that uh such an Evolution can take place you know when 1:25:56 the world talks about great Powers right now they talk about us Russia China I 1:26:04 include India and I really want to include Europe and I really want to 1:26:10 include Africa as an African Union and I want that to happen but 1:26:17 you'll notice on the list Europe doesn't show up right now and this is because there is no European foreign policy 1:26:28 okay you maybe after you one more then we when I close is there is there 1:26:33 anybody wanted I would prefer a woman actually if I'm there you you you wanted 1:26:40 no first first this gentlemen and then you close okay sorry for this one it's 1:26:46 a thank you very much and thank you very much Professor for this very courageous speech very clear speech also that you 1:26:52 made I'm an MEP from Luxemburg uh my question is the following what are the long-term 1:26:58 consequences of this lost War we lost the war now we have an uncertain future for NATO we have also clearly and you 1:27:06 refer to it the marginalization of Europe we have um a strengthening of the 1:27:11 bricks countries which can be rivals in many uh respects so will there be a 1:27:17 future for a collective West over the next 20 or 30 years thank you very much 1:27:26 I I don't believe there is a collective West uh I believe that there is a United 1:27:32 States and Europe that are uh in some 1:27:37 areas uh in parallel interests and in many areas not in parallel 1:27:43 interest I I want Europe to lead uh sustainable The Future of the West 1:27:51 development climate transformation Global 1:27:56 decency I believe if the world world looked more like Europe it' be a happier 1:28:03 more peaceful safer world and long longevity and better food by the way uh 1:28:11 but uh just saying um in any event Europe has a vocation that is 1:28:17 rather different from the American tradition and frankly from the angloa 1:28:24 tradition because it's been 200 years of anglo-saxon hegemony or aspirational 1:28:31 hegemony the British still believe they run the world it's amazing what 1:28:36 nostalgia means uh they don't even stop 1:28:42 it's almost like a Monty Python skit actually uh but in any event 1:28:49 um where was I I'm thinking of Monty Python when uh 1:28:54 when the Knight gets all his limbs cut off and says everything's fine I'm Victorious that's Britain unfortunately 1:29:01 uh and so it's uh it's it's really terrible so no I don't believe in the 1:29:07 collective West I don't believe in the global South uh I don't believe in uh I 1:29:13 all these geographies don't even make sense because I'm actually you know I look at Maps a lot and the global South 1:29:20 is mostly in the North and the West is not even West uh and so I don't even 1:29:26 understand what this is about I do believe that um we could be in a true 1:29:36 age of abundance if we got our heads on straight we're in the biggest 1:29:43 technological advance in human history it's truly amazing what can be done 1:29:50 right now you know I Marvel at the fact that that somebody who knows no 1:29:56 chemistry won the Nobel Peace Prize for chemistry because he's very good at Deep 1:30:03 neural networks a genius Demis hbus 1:30:09 um they figured out protein folding uh that uh generations of biochemists spent 1:30:16 their whole lives on and now U Deep Mind figured out how to do it U you know uh 1:30:24 by the thousands of proteins we have friends that spent their entire life on one protein brilliant friends and uh now 1:30:32 what we can do so if actually and same with renewable energy as everybody knows 1:30:38 the prices come down by more than two orders of magnitude the costs we could 1:30:45 transform the planet we could protect the climate system we could protect biodiversity we could ensure every child 1:30:52 gets a good education we could do so many wonderful things right now and so 1:30:58 what do we need to do that in my view we need peace most importantly and my basic 1:31:06 point is there are no deep reasons for conflict 1:31:11 anywhere as every conflict I study is just a mistake it's not we are not 1:31:19 struggling for laon's real that idea that came from Mal 1:31:24 and it became a Nazi idea was always a wrong idea it was a mistake a 1:31:31 fundamental intellectual mistake an intellectual Mistake by the 1:31:37 way cuz leading scientists adopted the idea that we had race Wars we had 1:31:42 National Wars we had Wars of survival because we don't have enough on the planet as an economist I can tell you we 1:31:50 have plenty on the planet for everybody's development plenty we're not in a conflict with 1:31:57 China we're not in a conflict with Russia if we calm 1:32:04 down if you ask about the long term the long term is very good thank you the 1:32:11 long term if we don't blow ourselves up is very good and so this is what we 1:32:18 should aim for a positive shared Vision under International 1:32:24 law because of our technology things operate at a regional scale now it used 1:32:30 to be it was Villages then it was a it was small areas then it was unification 1:32:36 of countries now it's regional that's not just because regions are wonderful 1:32:42 it's because the underlying technological reality say Europe should be an integrated area by transport by 1:32:49 fast rail by digital by and so there's Europe the politics follows the 1:32:55 technological realities to a very important extent we're in a world of regions 1:33:00 now so Europe should be Europe with subsidiarity don't lose all of the 1:33:08 wonderful wonderful national and local elements but Europe should be Europe so 1:33:16 the good side is let's I want Europe to have diplomacy for example with Assan I 1:33:22 spend a lot of time with the aan countries if the the EU green deal wonderful 1:33:31 idea I said many years ago okay to the Assan leaders make an Assan green deal 1:33:39 and then talk with the Europeans so that you have this uh wonderful relationship 1:33:45 trade investment technology so last year they announced an aan green deal what 1:33:51 did Europe do about it nothing it said sorry we're in the Ukraine war thank you no interest so this is my 1:34:01 point the prospects are very positive if we construct the 1:34:08 piece [Applause] yeah because we have to go I get all the 1:34:16 time messages that I should here leave the room can you something very short yeah 1:34:23 um do you think that a way out of the conflict is some kind of style of Finlandization 1:34:28 finlandization um and then like is that what you would have sorry yeah is that what you would have lik to see like 1:34:35 Sweden and finland's foreign policy as an example like is that instead of them becoming members of NATO is that the way 1:34:42 that you would have likeed to see these countries handled out foreign policy um and do you think that these countries 1:34:49 that border Russia should just kind of succumb to their fate that okay we can't provoke Russia like this is the way we 1:34:54 have to live yeah very good excellent question and let me let me just report 1:35:03 one uh part about finlandization finlandization landed Finland number one in the world 1:35:11 happiness report year after year Rich successful happy and secure that's 1:35:21 prenado so finlandization was a wonderful thing number one in the world 1:35:28 when Sweden and Finland and Austria were neutral Bravo smart when Ukraine was 1:35:36 neutral smart if you have two superpowers keep them apart a little bit 1:35:42 you don't have to be right with your nose up against each other especially if one of them the US is pushing its nose 1:35:49 into the other one and so finlandization 1:35:55 to my mind has a very positive connotation so does Austrian 1:36:00 isation Austria 1955 signed its uh 1:36:06 neutrality the Soviet Army left and Austria is a wonderful place by the way 1:36:12 absolutely wonderful and so this is uh basic how to avoid conflict if the 1:36:19 United States had any sense at all it would have left these countries as a neutral space in between the US Military 1:36:29 and Russia but that's where the US lost it thank you very much let 1:36:35 [Applause] me I I just want to end with an appeal I 1:36:42 think we both agree that we will have a the war will end within a month or two 1:36:49 and that means the fighting will end it doesn't mean that we will have peace in Europe the peace in Europe that has to 1:36:54 be done by us by Europeans not by a president from the United States we have to create this peace and that is Europe 1:37:01 which includes of course Belarus Russia and all these other countries so we have to do something and we are here at 1:37:08 Parliament as a parliamentarians we represent people we are the only legitimate democratically legitimate 1:37:14 institution in the European Union maybe we should have become all a little bit more proactive in trying to move this 1:37:22 peace process forward cross party lines I think I don't know how many parties here really are but that we can talk to 1:37:27 each other without saying ah you're from this party you're from this party I think we really have to concentrate if 1:37:33 here we could not take more initiative from the parliament Visa V the commission and saying we are presenting 1:37:40 the people not you we are presenting the people and these people in Europe want peace and that's what we should go so 1:37:46 maybe this is the beginning of one we will make every month I will organize with my colleagues an or the same thing 1:37:53 here about different topics which were all around it and we hope that this one we get a discussion that is different 1:37:59 what we have in the plenum where we basically don't have a discussion but that we have a discussion and also 1:38:04 across the party and invite also people from other political parties we don't bite anybody let's discuss it in the end 1:38:11 we want all want this the same peace for the next generation and I have plenty of children grandchildren you too and 1:38:17 that's what we need okay thank you very much professor [Applause] [Music] 1:38:23 [Applause] [Music] 1:38:33 you
    
    
    
   

   Event details

   
   RMCommunityCalendar 1 Comment · 0 Reviews