The following is a conversation with Oliver Stone. He's one of the greatest filmmakers of all time with three Oscar wins and 11 Oscar nominations. His films. Tell stories of war and power fearlessly and often controversially Shining Light on the dark parts of American and global history. His films include platoon Wall. Street born on the fourth of July Scarface. JFK. Nixon, Alexander W Snowden and documentaries were
He has interviewed some of the most powerful and consequential people in the world, including Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and Vladimir Putin. And in this conversation Oliver and I mostly focus our discussion
on Vladimir Putin
Russia and the war in Ukraine. My goal with these conversations is to understand the human being before me to understand, not just what they think, but how they think the Steel, Man, their ideas and to steal man, The Devil's Advocate.
All in service of understanding. Not the version. I have done this poorly in the past. I'm still struggling with this, but I'm working hard to do better.
I believe the moment we draw lines between good people and evil, people will lose our ability to see that we're all one people in the most fundamental of ways and lose track of the deep truth expressed by the old Shield units in line that I return to time and time again, that the line between good and evil runs through the heart of every man.
Oliver Stone has a perspective that he extensively documents in
his powerful, controversial series, The
Untold History of the United States that imperialism, and the military industrial complex, paved, the path to absolute power and thus corrupt the minds of the leaders and institutions that wielded.
From this perspective, the way out of the humanitarian crisis and human suffering in Ukraine. And the way out from the pole of the beating Drums of nuclear Wars, not simple to understand. But we must because all of humanity, hangs in the balance.
I will talk to many people who seek to understand the way out of this growing catastrophe, including two historians to leaders and perhaps most importantly to people on the ground in Ukraine and Russia not just about war and suffering but about life friendship, family, Love, and Hope.
And now a quick view. Second mention of a sponsor, check them out in the description. It's the best way to support this podcast. We got Novo for banking, blink is for nonfiction, simply say for security expressly p.m. For privacy and netsuite for efficiency Choose Wisely, my friends. And now on to the full ad reads as always. No ads in the middle. I hate those frankly. I try to make these ads here, interesting. But if you skip them, please do check out our sponsor.
I enjoy their stuff. Maybe you will too. This show is brought to you by Novo, which is a business banking app. The process is simple, sign up. They will mail you a Novo debit card and you get free ATM. Use who doesn't love free ATM, use and the flip side of that, who doesn't hate ATM fees.
Frankly, if there's any industry that needs to be disrupted as the old-school banking industry. So I'm really glad that Novo exist. It needed to be done and needs to be done. I'm glad somebody's doing it. Novo is backed by FDIC Insurance, that's important. There's no hidden fees unlike traditional banks. No monthly fees or minimum balance requirements. It's easy to use, mobile apps, great customer service, free transfers mail, checks and incoming wires integrates with other small business tools, like stripe Shopify.
Of books and more refunds all ATM fees. Like I said before, get free business checking account in just 10 minutes and Novo. Does Co / Lex? That's nov O.co /. Lex. That's fun to say you get the small business starter guide. Noble.com /. Flex the show is also brought to you by blankest my favorite app for learning new things. Blink is takes the key ideas from thousands of nonfiction books.
And condenses them down to just 15 minutes so you can read or listen to. I can recommend so so many books on their sapiens. One of the great non-fiction books of all times. They're even greater than that is meditations by Marcus Aurelius beginning of infinity by David Deutsch. Probably the most recommended to me by friends and colleagues and so on there's a lot more all the biggest most impactful non-fiction books are on there. So if you don't have time to read
All of said books, you just want the summaries great. If you already read it and you want to remind yourself as to the key insights, the key ideas. That's also blink is great at, go to Blink. Is.com Lex to start your free 7-Day trial and get 25% off of a blink as premium membership. That's blink is.com. Lex, spelled blink-182's.com, Lex they show is also
Brought to you by Simply Safe, a home security company designed to be simple and effective. It takes 30 minutes to set up, you can customize the system for your needs on simple safe.com Lex. I have it set up in my place and I love it. It is I guess you could say in the delicious sandwich. That is my personal security. It is one of the layers. What is it would be one of the burger patties. Would it be the cheese?
I don't know, but it's an important layer. It's the first physical layer of protection for my place. I think you want to make sure that that layer is reliable, easy to set up easy to use Easy to maintain, all those kinds of things, and it has good cameras. I mean, just everything is as it should be executed wonderfully and it's affordable. Go to Simply Save.com / next to customize your system and claim your free indoor security camera.
Le plus 20% off with interactive monitoring. Again, that's simply saved outcome / Flex, take your physical, or mental, you're all kinds of other whatever else there is All Digital to security, seriously, and this is the way to take your physical security. Seriously. This show is also brought to you by expressvpn. I use them to protect my privacy on the internet. Speaking of security. This is a good way to protect your digital security.
Everybody should have a VPN everybody and my favorite, the one I use for many. Many years is expressvpn. I recommend it, highly. One of the biggest reasons is it does what it's supposed to do? Well, it's fast, it works on any device and operating system including Linux. It has a simple interface with a big sexy button. You choose a location, you press the button, it's on, you know, it's on, it does this thing and does it. Well, like I said, this is my
My favorite kinds of programs that just don't try to just overwhelm you with features. They do one thing and they do it. Well, that's why for many years. I've used and loved expressvpn. You can go to expressly p.m..com flexpod to get an extra three months free. That's expressvpn.com flexpod. This show is also brought to you by net. Sweet netsuite, allows you to manage financials, Human, Resources, inventory.
Mercy. Many more business related details? All in one place running. A company is tough. It's like a factory floor. There's so so many components that don't involve the sort of brilliant Innovation or The Cutting Edge of the design in the engineering or the product and the customer fit. All those kinds of things that make a business profit making business succeed, versus
Fail. But all of that requires that the infrastructure works. Well, what do I mean by infrastructure? It's all the messy stuff. It's making sure the financials are managed. Well, it's making sure the human resources, the hiring, all that kind of stuff is, is managed. Well, it's making sure that if you're doing inventory, like actual physical products, or if you're doing, e-commerce, so selling online, all of that is done. Well.
Basically to do this kind of stuff while you should be using the best tools for the job right now. The special financing is back. You can head to netsuite. That's any TSU ite.com, Lex to get their one-of-a-kind financing program. That's not sweet.com. Lex. Netsuite.com Lex. This is Alex Friedman podcast and now dear
friends. Here's Oliver
Stone.
You're working on a documentary now. About nuclear
energy. Yes, so it's
interesting to talk about this energy is such a big part of the world about geopolitics of the world about the way the world is, what do you think is the role of nuclear energy in the 21st?
Century question. And the first of all, I'll be because everyone's talking about climate change, right? So here, I wake up to that a few years ago and clearly were concerned. I picked up a book by
Josh Goldstein and his co-author who Swedish those two wrote a book called bright future, a bright future came out a few years ago and I lapped it up. It was a book fact-based, clear, not too long and not too Technical and it was very clear that they were in favor of all kinds of Renewables, renewable energy. Yes, they hated made it very clear how dangerous oil
and gas were methane and made it very clear to the Layman like me. And at the same time, said that this Renewables can work so far, but the Gap is enormous, is to wonder how much electricity this country the world is going to need in 2050 and Beyond, two, three, four times. We don't even know the damage, but we have India, we have China, we have Africa. We have Asia coming onto the scene, wanting more and more electricity, so they had
Is the problem as a global one. Not just as often in the United States, you get the ethnocentric United States point of view that we need. We know we're doing well, blah blah, blah. We're not doing well, but we sell that to people that were comfortable with spend more energy than anybody, this country per capita than anybody, and at the same time, we don't seem to understand the global picture. So that's what they did and they made me very aware. So the only way to close that Gap. The only way
Never mind is nuclear energy and talking about a gap of building, a huge amount of reactors over the next 30 Years and starting now, they make that point over and over again.
So
obviously, there's country. The United States is not going to go in that direction because it just is incapable with its of having that kind of will political will and fear is a huge factor and still a lot of shibboleths.
Lot of myths about nuclear energy of have confused and confounded the landscape. The environmentalists have played a huge role in doing good things. Many good things but also confusing and confounding the Landscaping making accusations against nuclear energy. They were exaggerated.
So taking all these things into consideration we set about making this documentary, which is about finished. Now almost finishing. It's an hour and 40 minutes at night was a hard part getting it down from about three and a half hours to about this. Something more manageable. And is it interviews interviews among others? But essentially we went to Russia, we went to France which is the most perhaps Advanced nuclear country in the world. Russia and the United States, you went to the
The whole laboratory and talk to the scientists there, as well as the department of energy people that are handling. This Idaho is one of the experimental Labs. United States is probably one of the most advanced and they're doing a lot of advanced nuclear there. We also, we studied. Well, Russia gave us a lot of insight be a very Cooperative because they have some of the most advanced nuclear. Actually, the probably most advanced nuclear reactor in the world that belly our skin the year.
Well mountains. So we did an exact investigation there. And in France, they haven't. They have some very Advanced nuclear reactors and they're building and now they're building again. They had owned the green party came into power and it just not into power but became a factor in France and there was a motion when Hollande was President, they started to move away from it. Actually they were beginning to just abandon. They let not complete.
They're in other words. Let close down some of the nuclear reactors. There was talk of that. But thank God. France did not do that. And Mac home came in and recently reversed it and reversed it and they're building as fast as they can. Now, especially with the Ukraine war going on. There's an awareness that Russia will not be providing may not be providing the energy Europe needs. So and then China is the other one, too. That's the other Factor. I'm talking about the big boys.
And they have doing tremendous work and fast, which is very hopeful. But of course, China is building in all directions at once. The coal continues to be huge in China and
Methane to but to basically colder coal in India in China and the biggest users of coal and we know as you know, Germany went back to Cole a few years ago. So all these factors is fascinating picture globally. So we try to achieve a consensus that where nuclear can work and where it will be working, wherein it will be used more and more. The question is how much carbon dioxide China and Russia?
We'll be putting out. France is the only one who's not putting it out. United States has not changed with all the talk and all that nonsense about Renewables and the new lifestyle and all this. It's great for your guilt complex, but it doesn't do anything for the total cumulative, accumulation of carbon dioxide in the world who's
going to lead the way on nuclear. Do you think you mentioned, Russia, France, China, United States? Who's going to leave? I don't
think it's going to be a unit United Nations kind of thing because the world doesn't seem capable.
Full of uniting. We don't we go to these conferences, Kyoto. And we talked and we agree, but then we don't actually enforce. I don't think it happened that way. I think it's going to be an individual race with countries are going to just be it. Do it for their own self-interest. Like China is doing it. China. The thing is if it works and I'm praying that it will really work on a big scale. China will back away from coal. And naturally the same thing will be true of India. They will see the benefits.
It's because if you go to India, you see the cities, the pollution, you walk around and that stuff that, you know, you get it's not, there's no hope in this and you sense it. So people will move in this direction naturally because nuclear is clean energy and the realm of casualties of nuclear is lowest on the industrial scale for energy-producing from coal down to oil. Everything the lowest casualty rate very low as point zero zero two, or something.
Nuclear, so, not that many people have died from nuclear. Not that many. I think 50 people at Chernobyl, which was the worst accident. Nobody died at Fukushima. Nobody died at Three Mile Island. And that's what you hear all over and over again. These these accidents, the environmentalists have sold as the idea that they're dangerous, and it's a lot of environmentalists. Thank God of changing it. Come off that routine.
And they have saying this, we were wrong. We've done a lot of good work Greenpeace to a lot of good work whale, whales saving this saving that, but they admit themselves, not, they don't but it's people who have been in the organization have said we were wrong in 1956. We show the the articles in the New York Times that came out the Rockefeller Foundation, which, of course, is a big producer of oil.
The Rockefeller family and the foundation came out.
With a study, which was weighted as they tipped the scale put a thumb on the scale, but it was a scientific expose of radiation in the in the, in the in the study that came out in the printed in the New York Times because the New York Times published her Souls Burger was on their board. It was one of the mat board members so they got a lot of strong publicity condemning radiation from
Killed started. The process of doubting nuclear energy, radiation levels that they pointed out. We're very minor. And, of course, if you go into a scientific analysis of this, now with what we know is just not true, but it, it tilted. The scale of back in the 50s 60s and started to question questioning the nuclear business. Do
you think that was malevolence or incompetence?
No, I think it was competition. I don't think it was conspiracy as much as it was a senseless. We don't want this nucleus.
Nuclear energy is going to end the the dominance of oil. Absolutely. And it will, and it will anyway, because it's the only sane way for the world to proceed, but the world will have to learn through adversity. So, in other words, the situation could get worse, much worse. And in certain countries are just going to have to adapt. Like we always do when things become too hard. You've got to go. You have to change your thinking.
And humans are pretty good at that. Yes, talking about human nature. They're very Adept at that, Germany. For example, I mean, they were, when they Fukushima happened, they went out of the nuclear business. That was shocking to me. They just pulled out, and they destroyed destructed, several of their nuclear reactors, who were still functioning and put up coal or, or yeah, put a coal and oil replaced it. And as a result, Germany drifted into
Is placed next to France, there? Can their electricity bills, went off and France has stayed the same. They don't have that. They have a different system in Europe. But, you know, more or less. No question of France, was doing a lot better than Germany. And now, when with his Ukrainian shoe, it's a very interesting fulcrum Point whether Germany is going what? What direction they're going to go now. How can they how can they keep going with Cole? They just can't
What's the connection routine oil, coal nuclear, and and War sort of energy and conflict. Do you see when you look at the 21st century when you were doing this documentary, where you thinking of nuclear, as a way to power the world? But is it also to avoid conflict over resources? Is there some aspect to energy being a source of conflict that we're trying to
avoid?
I have don't have the energy history of energy at the, my at my fingertips, and it's a very long history here, but I would say in my apparently, not, it does seem that it's individually. Each country can answer, its needs, if by building and up, until now we haven't had conflict accept it in this issue of Russia, supplying Europe. The the obviously the pipeline Nord stream to
Been closed and Nordstrom. One is also probably going to be phased
out and
the concept of Russia. Supplying gas to Europe is now up in the air and who knows what's going to happen. I just don't see how Europe can get away from using Russian gas. But Russian gas is not the solution because it's methane to and it goes up into the atmosphere. Methane is in in a short term is just as worse than coal.
Worse, there's all kinds of charts. We show in the film. We try not to be too over factual, but
Methane is not the answer. It's a short-term answer. The
Will countries go to
war over energy is a question that trying to think of all the wars that happened. You could say Germany, of course during WWII needed oil, very badly. And they it dictated their strategy with Romania Etc and getting the oil fields open, but I don't really catch am not. I haven't thought that one through. I have to make a documentary on it to really understand how energy and
War
The interface. It's always part of the calculation, but it's a question of how much, you know, right? That's the question. You've, I just have to ask because you mentioned, your mom is from France, you've traveled for this documentary and you traveled in general throughout the world in Russia, Ukraine, what are the defining characteristics of these cultures? Let's go with Russia. So I you know, as as I told you, I came from, I'm happy Korean have Russian. I came from that part of the world.
What are some interesting beautiful aspects of the culture of Russia and Ukraine? I
can't really speak. Honestly, if you're creating, I was there only in 1983 and when I visited the Soviet Union under the communism and I kept was beautiful. It was one of the nicer places I went, but they were very much stultified by the communist system. They all were the best places to visit in. Russia are always in the South for whether Georgia or, or
Year the Muslim countries. There's always a better culture in terms of comfort. But communism was rough and that was the end of it, pretty much Brezhnev regime and then on drop-off and Gorbachev was in three years in the future when I was there. So I can't talk about Ukraine with and they've they're not been friendly to me since Isis, of course, since I made their Putin interviews, you know, Ukraine has banned me. I believed they they've been very tough on people who are critical. I
Seen the Russian people have been very special to me and I'm perhaps because of my European upbringing, but I enjoy talking to them. I find them very open very generous and they appreciate support. They appreciate people who say, you know, I understand why your government is doing this or this. Or this is I've tried to stay open-minded and listen to both sides. The thing that I have seen as an American is, of course this American enmity towards Russia from the very beginning.
I grew up in 1940. 46. I was born in the 50s. It was, it was so anti-russian. They were everywhere. They were in our schools. They were in our state department. They were spying on us. They were stealing the country from us. That was the way the American right wing. Not even the right wing. I'd say the Republican Party pictured. The Russians. They were
actively engaged in infiltrating America and changing our
thinking. And I tell
The vision shows were based on this. It was very much the J Edgar Hoover mentality. That communism was even behind the student protests of the 1960s that this was the direction in which the FBI and the CIA were
thinking.
So I grew up with with a Prejudice and it took me many years. My father was a Republican and he was a stockbroker and he was a very intelligent man, but even he because he was a World War Two Soldier. He was a colonel had fallen under the
Influenced you. It had in order to be successful in American Business in the 1950s. You had to have a very strong anti anti Soviet line, very strong. You wouldn't get ahead. If you express any kind of, let's end this cold war, any kind of activity of that nature. You'd be cast aside as a as a Pinko or somebody who was not completely on the board with the American way of doing business, which was capitalism. Works communism doesn't
And in particular communism is embodied by the Soviet Union as the enemy. So hence
hands. That's the way you
were the narrative behind the Cold War. That's correct.
And if they'd laid basically lasted, I mean you saw the ups and downs of it. When Reagan came in. I was well, first of all, we had the crisis of, at 1962 with a Cuban Missile Crisis and Kennedy proved himself to be
Warrior for peace, he resolved that with Khrushchev. That was a big moment. Huge moment. And people don't give him credit enough for for really saving us from a war that could have could have affected all of mankind
but it still didn't avert.
No because the moment he was killed. Honestly there was a lot of we can talk about that and use you know, I've made a film for JFK Revisited is a documentary. We released this year about the
G.i. Made in 1991, but the moment he was killed, I would argue that, Lyndon Johnson went back immediately to the old way of thinking, the old way of doing business, which was the Eisenhower Truman way since we, which we, which we had adapted since World War Two. That was an interim. You have to think about it from Roosevelt dies in 45. Roosevelt has an interim of 16, 15 years, where
he,
he has a, he has more of a democratic regime.
More liberal. He establishes. He recognizes the Soviet Union for the first time since the Revolution and he actually has a relationship with them. He sends embassadors who are friendly and he wants, he has a relationship with Stalin Etc and Yalta and night are on rather. That's where he had the relationship.
You think of JFK lived. We would not have a cold war.
No, absolutely not. I and we go into great depth on that in the filming. I do.
Urge you to see it because it goes into all the issues around the world. Kennedy was being very much, an Anti-Imperialist. It turns out and many people would just don't understand that. But you have to look at all his policies and Middle East with NASA ever had a relationship. It was sukarno and Indonesia with Latin America. You made a big effort with the alliance for progress and when Africa above all with lumumba, he was very shocked at his death and trying to do defend.
The right, the Integrity of the Belgian Congo with dag. Hammarskjold of the UN, he made a big effort. Unfortunately. It didn't work out because they were dying, hammers, all was killed and then Kennedy was killed and Congo descended into the chaos of Joseph mbutu's dictatorship, but Kennedy was very active in terms of as a Irishman. Not as an Englishman. He was an Irishman. I say that because, well, we'll come back to that because mr. Joe Biden isn't Irishman, but it's a different kind of an Irishman. They're both.
'The Catholic Irish, but Kennedy really made an
effort to
change the imperialist mindset, that is still was very strong in America, and Europe,
Lyndon Johnson changed
back to the old policy and we were never able to really keep big taunt going with the Russians, briefly had it with Carter, but then zip Brzezinski came in Brzezinski was his National Security advisor. He was put there by
Rockefeller and Brzezinski was a pole. He got revenge from the Poland. Poland has always been attacking Russia as far as I remember. Back to another Century. I mean, the two world wars, that occupied Russian. So tragically entry points were always through Poland and Ukraine.
So
Brzezinski got his revenge and Carter ended up being an enemy of the Soviet Union
and
creating yet as Brzezinski took pride in a he created the atmosphere.
Fear of the trap, for the Soviets to go into Afghanistan. In 79. That trap was set. He says he said in 1978, so that there was never, except for brief moments of periods of Daytona with the Soviets and I grew up under that. I didn't really know anything of this going on, because I was, I was learning. I was educating myself as I was going, learning movies and trying to try to be a dramatist and this and that. So I wasn't
About this. Then when Reagan came in, I was worried again because it was, it was a beat of the old beat, which was there the most evil empire. I mean, it does it goes on in American history. It doesn't end Reagan. Got a lot of points for that. And, of course, when the, when Gorbachev came in that was a beautiful moment for the world. It was a great surprise. It was probably the best years of her America from, at least, from my point of view, in terms of this relaxation in the mood.
1986 to 1991 were great years in terms of ability to believe. Once again, that there could be a peace dividend, but the world changed again in 1991 92. There's an internal mechanism, who knows? You could blame. You can blame the United States. You could blame Russia for Gorbachev was perhaps not the right man to try to administer that country at that point. He had great Visions. He was a man of peace.
But it was very difficult to hold together. Such a huge
Empire. So vision is not enough to hold together. The Soviet Union. I think
the details are interesting. I've followed up on that a little bit because I was recently in poor countries like Kazakhstan talked about the the the negotiations are going on and the breakup of the Soviet Union. It's very interesting story because it involves everything Ukraine, of course, everything is going on. Now. Somewhat, is it 30 million Russians were left?
Outside of the Soviet Union, when it collapsed, they had no home anymore. They were homes in other countries such as in Ukraine. So it's an interesting story and with repercussions today because extent is it / is a good example of keeping a balance, keep it in neutral. Yeah, he played both sides and he because Yeltsin wanted him to join the the Russian Confederation in a certain way.
He'd be supporting a against Gorbachev. There's a hole in Word Battle error. I think the the Ukraine came along with Yeltsin as well as you'd have. I'm sorry. I don't remember now, but to other to other regions came with him and that was a block that broke up the the Soviet Union, who was yeltsin's plan to and it wasn't make the Russian Federation and they did, I
would
To return back to JFK, eventually because he's such a fascinating figure in the history of human civilization. But let me ask you fast forward in. 2000. Yeltsin was no longer president and Vladimir Putin became president. You did a series of interviews with Vladimir Putin. As you mentioned, over a period of two years from 2015 to 2017. Let's let me ask who the high-level question, what?
Your goal with that conversation. Oh,
came out in 2017. I guess I started them in 2014. At that point, the Snowden Affair had happened. I was working on a movie on Snowden that happened in 13.
Ukraine happened in 14.
And
one thing after another by 14, Pope Putin was enemy number again becoming, and wanted man on the American list. He was enemy, he was certainly in the top five or and but the the animosity towards Putin had been growing since 2007 at Munich. I remember that speech when he made it, it's in my documentary. That's a four-hour documentary for different conversations. I mean, we talked to over two years, two and a half years, but I
A that image of him at Munich making a very important speech about world Harmony about the balance necessary in the world. And I remember the sneer, the sneer on John, McCain's face. She was in Munich, obviously eyeballing, Putin and hating him. And it was so evident that McCain had no belief whatsoever that the that this he was almost treating them like this, or the Communists are back and we know that Putin was not a communist. We know that Putin is very much a market, man.
And he made, no, he made it very clear and tried to keep an open climate, a new relationship with Europe. But the United States, always certain people in the United States. Always sell that as a threat. Like, Putin is trying to take Europe away from us as if we own it as if we have the right to own it, but Putin was making, the point is very important about sovereignty and
sovereignty for
a countries is crucial to for this new world to have balance that sovereignty for China's sovereignty for Russia.
Sovereignty for Iran sovereignty, for Venezuela sovereignty for Cuba. This is an idea that's crucial to the new world. And I think the United States has never accepted
that
sovereignty, is not an idea that they kind of allow. They you have to be 0.
Obedient to the United States idea of so-called democracy and freedom, but it's much more important is sovereignty for these countries. And the United States is not a bad that is not a as not even acknowledged it. And it never comes up.
So from their perspective, United States, one power centers arise in the world. Yes, you start to oppose those big. Be good. Not because of the ideas, but because they have
But merely because they have power. Isn't that at the heart of the doctrine of the neoconservatives in the nuke? The pack for The New American Century, they wrote down in, nineteen. Ninety, six seven. They said there shall be no emergence of arrival power. It was very clear was about power and they have and they've stuck to that Doctrine. Which is if you, if you start to get dangerous in any way or have power, we're going to knock you
out
now that won't work, but I don't believe it can work.
Work. And that is unfortunately a policy of the United States is following and the neoconservatives Group, which is
very small, but
it's very strong up early. And their idea has resonated. It was it was behind the George, Bush's invasion of Iraq. It was part of not only Iraq, but cleaning out the whole world draining the swamp going to Afghanistan first. And then although Iraq had nothing to do with Al qaeda's attack going after your rocket.
and, of course, 60 some other countries that were terrorism had some had some signs of
There were wherever America judged would be a dangerous country. We had the right here either with us or against
us. Now that is a disastrous
policy and led to one thing after another of the Iraq war war. Never learned a lesson. The neoconservatives were never fired, never thrown out of office. The people who prosecuted that war are still around, many of them are still around and they're they're obviously guiding America. Now, let me return to this question of
power. Don't forget.
The sneer that I saw there that emblem Ides the United States reaction. Also, there were several other American Representatives who were laughing, kind of mocking Putin. It was very serious. I felt, I was a divide there.
So in since then, I mean, in a certain sense, the Europe
reaction to Boone is crucial
and they were, they were more with him back then. And a big
thing for America was always too.
Keep NATO to keep Europe into in its pocket as a satellite. And with this recent war, of course, they've succeeded in all beyond their dreams of the Russians have fulfilled, the fantasy of the United States to finally be this aggressor that they have pictured for years. Yeah, we can talk about that
later. But at that time, there was Europe, had significant support for Putin. Yeah, United States was sneering and Putin was that you can say that. And then,
So there's this it was there was uncertainty as to the direction as to the future of Russia. And that's exactly when you interviewed Vladimir Putin. I wanted to know
what they thought because we couldn't get the the the in the information war that the United States was fighting against Russia was in evidence background. It was full out the the condemnation of Russia on all fronts. I never
Ever saw a positive article about Putin. And although it when I traveled in the world and I travel a lot doing documentaries. It was very clear in the Middle East in Africa. In other in Asia. There was respect for him that he was a man who was getting job his job done. In the interest of Russia. He was as I said on the documentary our son of Russia very much. So in a in the positive sense, a son, a son of Russian not that he's out there.
Trying to destroy the interests of other of other countries, know that he was out there to sell the promote the interests of Russia, but at the same time, keep a balance. Keep it, keep it keep the world into a Harmony. This is always been his picture piece was always his idea in hours. He always referred to United States in all these interviews as our partners. And I said, will you stop using that word? They're not
while and he was a little bit slow and waking up
to
What the United States was doing? Well?
That said, he's one of the most powerful men in the world. He was at that time, and let me ask you the human question as the old adage goes power corrupts and absolute power corrupts. Absolutely. Did you see?
Any corroding effects of power on the man, forget the political leader. Unjust, the human being that carries that power on his shoulders for so many years. Keep in mind that he's been on,
unlike most modern leaders. He's been in office off and on, because of, there was a Medvedev was president, and he was not literally in charge. He was, he was, he was he took another appointment at that point and he but he was still very much involved, but for
Many years more or less, he's been at the administrator of the state, the protector of the state and he's apparently done a good enough job that the Russian people have kept them there because contrary to what many people think, I really believe that if the Russian people didn't want him. He would be out. I firmly believe that. I don't think you can let you can go against the will of the people. Now, it expresses itself in many ways at The Ballot Box and so forth, but also in other ways in Russia, there's a strong
Strong, currents of opinion. So, contrary to what the position of him as a dictator, he wouldn't last if he was unpopular. Number one. Number two, Russia is much more divided than people know there's other factors in Russia. He is, there's they're always tensions in around, the Kremlin who has power, who doesn't have power that's been going on for a hundred years, but the factions in Russia are very much there. So, when people refer to Russia,
As Putin, they're mistaken. When and they do this regularly in the New York papers and all this they say Putin. Did this Putin? Did that Putin's doing that? But it's Russia, that's doing it. And that's what there's a distinction there that I it's changed in the old days. I would read about Khrushchev, but it was never Khrushchev personally. It was about the Soviet Union.
There was
respect for a country. And
now, when I started to get personal with Putin, it changed and the are thinking changed in a negative way. We, we no longer respected as a country were seen as a man. And the man, we had trashed, repeatedly repeatedly as a poisoners a murderer and none of which has ever been proven, but which is always been repeated and repeated to the point at which it becomes like, an or well Mantra. It becomes like, he is, of course, the bad.
I can I just ask you as a
great filmmaker as a human being, what was the like talking to one of the most powerful men in the world
for honestly? And I'm not naive, I've talked to a lot of powerful people in the movie business. There are powerful people and many of them are corrupted. I've talked to many people in my life. I've been in the military and I've seen, I've had other jobs. I have to say, I found him to be a human being, just found them to be reasonable.
Be calm. I never saw him lose his temper. And I mean, you have to understand that most people in the most people in the western way of doing business, get emotional. I don't see that. I saw him as a balanced man as a man who had studied this like you had there's a calmness to you that it comes from studying the world and having a rational response to it. His, it's interesting his two daughters. One of them is very scientific and the other ones doing very well in another profession.
But they are thinking there are thinking family. His wife to was I can't talk for the new wife because I don't know about it. But he's he kept his family with great respect. He's raised his daughters, right? He served Yeltsin the way he looked out and he served Yeltsin well, and he said he never trashed. Well Jansen, certainly a lot of people did but you know, I asked him repeatedly, you know, was he an alcoholic this or that, but he wouldn't even go that far just respect and
This man, you know, it's and it was in it was in many ways, a ridiculed. But in by the Russians and he turned over the power because he felt like he was overwhelmed. He turned over the power to this man, because why, how many people are the fired before him? Several several prime minister's, is that why did he turn power over to Elsa to mr. Putin? Because he respected him for his work ethic and his balance his maturity. And that's what I can say is, I saw it.
Poor person poor from a poor family, who worked his way up through the KGB of Americans. Keep saying he's a KGB agent but it's like saying, you know, George Bush was a CIA agent, but you know, he became a print you grow, you grow in your life and he went from this KGB to this technocratic position here at he dealt with many problems, including the chechnyan war, which is a very difficult situation, as well as the Russian.
Marine probably several things happened. Early in his that balance that gave him a lot of experience and he handled them all pretty.
Well, do you think he was an honest man?
I do now, of course, the question of money. I've the charges that he's the richest man in the world are ludicrous. Certainly doesn't live like it or act like it. If you're rich, i-i've had been around a lot of rich people in my life. You'd probably have to in America, you run into them. So many of them are arrogant. I'm actually good friends now with the richest.
In the world. Oval course, I saw your interview with mr. Musk, cool. I appreciate at least he speaks freely. I am, I'm positive about him owning Twitter because Twitter is become censorship. City has has all the major Tech. The censorship that we are now seeing in the United States and so on American and shocking to me,
and he is a resistance to that. That is, yeah. I like that. I
like musk for that. Just for that only, but I also appreciate him. His
Adventuresome his nature and his desire to explore the world and to ask questions. Yeah, there's certain
ways. You sound when you speak freely. There's certain ways. You sound a man sounds when he speaks freely. Yeah, he speaks freely, and it's refreshing. No,
no matter whether you're
rich or not. It doesn't matter when you speak freely. It's a beautiful actually, a
musket and a major point on nuclear going back to nuclear energy. You know, he was
He never believed in it at first. Apparently he was going for Batteries, right? And he didn't put a lot of money into batteries. He made them bigger and bigger batteries, but it just won't as Bill Gates has said. It's just, it's not going to get us there. Yeah, and now I think mascius on another path. He understands the need for nuclear.
Yeah. He's a supporter of nuclear. We're jumping around
who never asked for one thing. Never he was an interview. It was freeform. Ask anything. You want. No, no.
Directions, no rules. As with Castro, frankly Castro did the same thing as their Chavez. So I've had good luck in interviewing free-ranging subjects. People willing to express themselves. He's much more guarded than Castro or Chavez because as you know, he he said in government policy, when he speaks and anything he says is can be taken out of
context, but there was no restrictions on what to talk of not, none of
that or any desire to see anything before we published it. No need to
Ticket with them. It was a completely.
Do you think he watched the final product?
Yes, I do. But I don't think he made judgments on and I think he was pleased. I'm he doesn't go either way. You see it. It's he's pleased. I mean went well and he's happy for us and I don't think he had great enthusiasm. Expressed it to me. He trusted me and you can see the way he dealt with me. Each time. He warmed up to me, four times. You know, the first time I might have been a little
All stiff. You're asking a you don't know what who you're dealing with and so forth. I understand that but he's used to it. Now. He's done a lot of press the worst press he's done. Frankly has been the American Press and not because of his fault, but because of the way they have treated him. If you look at the interviews, they're awful. They put. First of all, I noticed one thing as a filmmaker right away. They use a double and overdub. They put a Russian speaker. Yeah. For everything you said who is much harsher?
He speaks Russian and much harsher manner than actually Putin does. Yeah. Who's very if you on my interview I left him in his original language with translator and I think that's important because he expresses himself very clearly and calmly. They're there. When you listen to the American broadcast. It's a belligerent person who looks like he's about to bang his shoe on the table. And the, secondly, the questions are highly aggressive from the beginning. There's no, there's no sense of Rapport. There's no sense of well.
It's why? Mr. Boone, did you poison? This version? Why? Mr. Boone, did you kill this person? Why are you a murderer and
immediately? It's blunt
blunt - television. Yeah, it's not just aggressive.
So I obviously speak Russian. So I get to appreciate both the original and the translation and it's not just aggressive. It's very shallow. They're not looking to understand. To me aggression is okay, if that's the way you want to approach it, but it should be
Should be underlying kind of empathy for another human being in order to be able to understand. And and
so the the some of the worst interviews I've ever listened to is by American Press Vladimir
Putin. So NBC and all those kinds of organizations. It's very painful to watch
and you saw the reception to the Putin interviews in America was hostile without seeing it. So many people criticize my Series without having seen
Seen it even. Even I want on a show, a television show where this famous Colbert, you know, he's very famous American and I was shocked on the show to find out that he hadn't seen anything of the four hours. He was just attacking Putin. And through me, I was complicit. Therefore. I was a I was Putin supporter and he assured the show was a disaster. It's one of my worst television shows. I'll actually I had to just shut up and get off the air. I mean, it's some point Who's embarrassed
Machine because the audience to was clapping for go beyond anything. He
said well as an interviewer in that situation because between you and Vladimir Putin North camaraderie, there was joking. There were. Are you
worried? Do you
put that into the calculation when you're making a film with somebody that could be lying to you? That could be evil that we talked about.
Castro you talk about there. So, are you worried about how Charisma of a, man across the table from? You can
do exactly that into account. I absolutely take that into account. I know. Can I mean doing Castro's? He's a wonderful speaker is charismatic. So as Chavez think it is. Look at those reviews. I took it into account but Putin isn't play that game. He doesn't charm you. He doesn't try to overwhelm you with his
Bona me at all. He just said, okay, ask your question. I'll give you my answer straight. Here it is. This any analyzes it? This is the history of NATO. This is a history of our relationship with the United States. How many times have we tried to talk to them about such and such and such and such an each time we get nowhere. In fact, it's a very, I would like to get along with United States so much. He saying it, he saying it so clearly in all his words. So, to play Devil's Advocate, but he's not making.
Making a big deal about it. But there is a
Charisma and the calmness. Yes, there is. So like, let's just calm everything down. It's simple facts that you can. Yes, you can, you can call. So there's like the Hitler thing which is screaming being very loud, charismatic, strong message and so on and then there's a Putin style. I'm not comparing those two. There's the police without communication of calmness and and that at least, to me, my personality, that can be very can.
The wedding is bringing everything down, the facts are simple, but then when you say the facts are simple, you can now start lying and you don't know what's true. And what's
lost it. Behooves you to do some research. Yes. And frankly, when it comes to research, you're going to have a problem. Because if you go to the Americanized versions of Russian history, you're going to run into a problem in that includes even Wikipedia, they will tell you things that are just not factually supported. So, it was a problem in terms.
Terms of, if you read all the books in the American, the library about Putin, there's nothing positive about it. They awful, they're awful and a lot of them. I had a good relationship with Professor. Steven Cohen, who's the most I think one of the most informed men on Russia, he done a lot of research all his life and new Gorbachev very well and was very and analytical about all these situations that happened before his death in 20.
19, I'm not quite sure when Stephen Dodd, but I knew him. Well, and he was the, he gave me the best information I could get, I would go to Steven and I'd say, I'm confused here, tell me the history of this accusation of poisoning against this person and so forth. And he'd explain it to me. And I think very the clearest ways that I understood. And he said to me, once he said, most of these people who go to Russia and write this stuff about who are going off internet. The internet has really been a source of a lot of
pictured facts here. He said, pure analysis. You have to go back to the text all the documents and to really fully understand but he under he want he spoke Russian and his wife and him Katerina. Katharina, Von Who-ville, who's the editor publisher of the nation magazine would go to Russia several times a year and talk to their friend Gorbachev and garbage shops. An interesting character. I talked
Mm interview them, not interview them, but talk to him at length and I like him very much. And I saw that divide, as you saw in the Putin interviews between Gorbachev and Putin early on in the interviews. You sense, Putin doesn't particularly care for well cover chopped, because he and his point of view. He screwed up the administration of Russia and is responsible for so much of the disaster of leaving all those people outside the Soviet Union. So these are problems that continue into the future
but
He at the they see each other at the or he sees he knows he's there at the May Day Parade II. We filmed and he is, is
he?
His attitude is funny. It's very human. He says I you know, he's welcome. He's got his, he's got his pension. He's a pension here. He's done his duty. He's there's no, there's no animus towards it. Even when Gorbachev in the early days. You remember, criticized for his manners in terms of democracy, but
Don't know that, that, you know, that becomes a coral but frankly by the, by the end of the situation. It's very clear that Gorbachev is now moved closer and closer to the says, Russia is now really under attack. This is he sees he sees where the United States has made a concerted effort to undermine Putin and he does. And he's repeated this several times about Ukraine. I think you've seen what he said. You can quote it.
And Gorbachev, is we have no respect for Gorbachev. Even even at this juncture at one. Can you see Gorbachev's ideas printed in most American newspapers? Very rarely, very rarely, and not n recently, not at all. So Gorbachev, who was our hero back in in the American hero back in the 1980s 80s, has now been condemned to the garbage can so to speak of History.
Well, in this complicated, geopolitical picture you just outlined. Can we talk about
A recent invasion of Ukraine. So you wrote on Facebook a pretty eloquent analysis, I think on March 3rd. Let me just read a small selection of that just to give context and maybe we can talk a little bit more about both Russia and the man Putin.
You wrote. Although the United States has many wars of aggression on his conscience. It doesn't justify. Mr. Putin's aggression. In Ukraine, a dozen wrongs. Don't make a right. Russia was wrong to invade. It has made too many mistakes. One under estimating, Ukraine resistance to overestimating the military ability to achieve its objective 3 under estimating Europe's reaction, especially Germany, upping, his military contribution to Nato.
They've resisted for some 20 years. Even Switzerland has joined the cause Russia will be more isolated than ever from the West for under estimating. The enhanced power of NATO which will now put more pressure on Russia's borders. Five. Probably putting Ukraine into NATO six under estimating, the damage to its own economy and certainly creating more internal resistance in Russia. Seven, creating a major Readjustment of power and
Nats oligarch Class, 8, putting cluster, and vac and bombs into play, nine and under estimating, the power of social media worldwide. And you go on for a while giving a much broader picture of the history and the geopolitics of all of this. So now a little bit later.
Two months later. What are your thoughts about the invasion of Ukraine?
Well, it's very hard to be honest in this regard
because the,
the West, the West is brought down a curtain here. And anyone who questions the invasion of Ukraine and its consequences is is an enemy of the people. It's become so difficult. We I've
I've seen in my lifetime ever such a wall
of
propaganda as I've seen in the west and that includes France to because I was there recently in England, England is, of course, really sepphoris. It's shocking to me how quickly Europe moved in this direction and that includes Germany. I have German friends who expressed to me their shock over Ukraine. I have Italian.
Unfriend same thing and Italy of course has been the perhaps the most understanding and compassionate of countries. So it's quite evident that there's a United and this attests to the power of the United States. And of course, you have Finland, Finland, which is generally been reasonable jumping and talking about joining NATO and Sweden to generally. There's been some more restraint in the, in the world in Europe. That's what surprise.
The most Europe, their how quickly they fell into this NATO basket, which is very dangerous for Europe. Very dangerous. This goes back to my dear. What I was saying earlier about sovereignty, these countries have don't really give me a sense that they have sovereignty over their own countries. They don't feel up to European nation. I'm obviously intuition here is working. I just don't feel that they have freedom to say what they really.
Really think and they're scared to say it when me and I'd States invaded, Iraq, in 2003.
I remember with
great hat in a sense satisfaction. Then at least
France Chirac who I had not really know much about stood up and said, the United States. We're not going to join you in this Expedition basically into madness Schroder and Germany. Same thing, of course, Putin, condemned The Invasion and kupuna had been an ally of the United States since 9/11, if you remember correctly. Yes, and it called bush, in it. They were getting along. So even Putin said,
I won't go. No, don't go into Iraq. This is, this is not the solution. He, he didn't oppose Afghanistan, but he opposed the Iraq. So, Chirac and Schroeder, stood, for the Old Europe. I'm I remember de Gaulle Charles de Gaulle and he was independent of the United States Charles de Gaulle pulled, France out of NATO, because he saw the dangers of NATO, which is to say, you have to fight an American War when they say, and they put nuclear weapons on your territory in.
London, France, and Italy, and Germany. When they do that, your hitched to this superpower. And you have no say in what they're going to do. If they declare war from the and they use your territory. You're going to be involved in a major conflict. I'm talking about sovereignty. Where is that sovereignty? They don't have it and that has influenced their mindset for years. Now since 1940, since well, de Gaulle was the 60s. He was he actually
First, the whole flow and he was it was I think it was Sarkozy who put the France back into NATO. And now it's macro. I I hope because he was talking to Putin. Would at least have an independent view point that could be helpful here, but he, so he rolled it up. He may have told Putin something else. But within days you'd rolled it up and gone along with United States position, which was enforced by the United States in a very Fierce way. The
And as I say, I don't know how much time you spent in America, but it was a vicious and everything was anti-russian, Russia were killing all these people were shooting down civilians. Although there was no proof of it. There was just, these are the accidents of War but all of a sudden it was a campaign of criminality and they were talking about bringing Putin into war crime trial. Well, why didn't they talk like that with Iraq was going on and Bush was killing far more people over.
That matter. Why were they not talking about the killings in donbass and lugansk during that 2014 to 2020 to period? That is what is it's a crime? There was so many people that were killed, many of them innocent, many of them in it.
So what would be the way for Vladimir Putin to Stop? The Killing In donbas? Without the invasion of Ukraine?
Yeah. That's a very good question.
Best that several times and I don't have the I have not talked to him since about two years now.
It's a very good question. What's the
mistakes? What the human mistakes and the leadership mistakes. Maids are very good
question. You see what the American Press has? Not said and the Western press has not said, is that on February 24? Was it, that was on that day when they invaded, they were the day before if you check the logs of the European organization that was you supervising, the was in the field in Ukraine. These are neutral. Observers. They were seen heavy, heavier and heavier.
Artillery fire going into into donbas from the Ukrainian side. So they had apparently, Ukraine had a hundred and ten thousand troops on the border. They were about to invade donbas. That was the plan. That's what I think Russia as a as because of the buildup on the border of donbas brought 130. They say 130,000 troops to the area near
Don't pass, right? So you have a buildup of forces on both sides, but you wouldn't know that from reading the press in the west. You would be you'd believe that the Russians suddenly put all these men into into the situation with the with the idea of invading Ukraine, not only donbas, but invading all of Ukraine and getting rid of the decapitating, the government there, which is all assumption. We don't know what they would intended to do, but you at the time as it, a
lot of people thought that the
All the talk of the invasion Russian invasion. Ukraine is just propaganda, is no, it's not going to happen very well. And I
think many of us thought that the United States is building this up into an invasion. In other words. That's that is the nature of false flag operations. When you you create this propaganda, they are going to invade, they are going to invade and then when they invaded, they were United States was completely ready and all their allies were completely ready for the invasion, correct. So why did Putin do that? He fell into this.
This, theoretically, into this trap, set by the United States, that hear you telling all your allies across the port. There are going to invade but you
why do you think he did it? So here, is it Madness, or is it normal? It's not a strategic calculation. Perhaps
this one. I cannot answer you Faithfully because first of all, we don't know what he was told if he was indeed getting the right intelligence estimates. From what I said earlier on that art, and that
In that essay, I
wrote you would think
he was not, well, informed. Perhaps about the degree of cooperation. He would get from the rush, the Ukrainian Russians in, in, in, in Ukraine. I that would be one factor that he wasn't, didn't assess the operation correctly. Remember this. Mr. Putin has had this cancer and he's I think he's licked it, but he's also been isolated because of covid-19.
It. And some people would argue that the isolation from normal activity, which he was, he was meeting people face-to-face, but all of a sudden, he was meeting people across the table, a hundred yards away or whatever 10 yards away. It was very hard. Perhaps he lost touch with contact with people. So it's not just power. It's the very
simple fact that you're just essentially, I'm
speculating. I don't know. I'm, I see that. And I also, perhaps he thought in his mind that there would be a
A faster resolution that the Ukrainian because the evidence had been that the Ukrainian
Russians
with the Ukrainian Army had folded, so many times in the, and that they were only backed up and they were stiffened by the resistance of the not, see or not see oriented as off battalions. That was what factor? Of course. And that is a big factor for the Russians because these people are very tough. They Rush see what people don't understand. Is that Ukraine since 2000?
14 has been a terrorist State. They've been run anytime a Ukrainian has expressed
any any understanding of a
Russian of the russian-ukrainian position. They've been threatened by the state from 2014 to 2020. To there's been a set of hideous murders that people don't even know about in the west journalists, people who speak out liberals people who I interviewed Victor Medvedev who they make out.
To be some kind of horrible person. But Medvedev was a was very important figure in the administration of kushma. The first Ukrainian prime minister and the 1990s, and he did a great job on the economy. He was very thoughtful, man. If you'll see my interview, it's called Ukraine reveal. He's very thoughtful about the future of Ukraine. He doesn't want to go back and join Russia. He wants it to be an independent country. Ukraine is independent, and he wants it to be a functioning economic democracy, more or less a democracy. If you can get that.
But between that exist in a neutral state in neutral state, which new crane used to be before 2014, it was neutral from 1991 to 2014 neutral, very important under a Porsche. Anko. It just immediately went into an anti-soviet Cold War position as an ally of the United
States. And
my point was that it was a very dangerous place Ukraine. I people were being killed death. Squads were out there Medvedev. They stripped him of his television stations very suddenly. This is olenski. The new
president said he was unless he was elected on a piece
platform. Remember that he seventy percent of the country was for him to make peace with Russia. He did he ever have even trying to make peace with Russia. Did he attend any of them into agreements?
Did he did he visit, did he pay any attention to? Who did
he go to Russia? No, not at all the moment. He got into office. I'm convinced that the, the the militant the militants sector of the right sector parties of the Ukraine. Let him know that you will not make a deal with Russia. There'll be no concessions to Russia. This is very dangerous. This is where this attitude, that's very, very hostile to Russia has heard us the whole way.
World is being hurt by this, and no one calls them out. No one calls them out to sulesky backed off from his platform as a running for president. And as president has been ineffective, did nothing to promote on the contrary. I went the other way and seemed to support the Ukrainian aggression.
Well, he found his support. In this war. You've revealed through your work, some of the most honest and dark aspects of War.
Nevertheless, this is a war and there's a humanitarian crisis millions of people as refugees escaping Ukraine. What do you think about the human cost of this war initiated? By it's horrible. Whoever just as you write, whatever the context, whatever NATO whatever, pressure as you wrote. Russia was wrong to invade.
Okay. Yeah, we're you, let's get back to the original question. You said, what was he thinking at that time? We never answered that. Yeah. Now, by the way, you know, you among those people who are, who have been ruined by this war, you have to include the for 2014 to 2020 to, yes, Ukrainian Russians 14,000. We're killed not necessarily by some of them by maybe accident this and that. But certainly a large number that is
As well as well to the Ukrainian military and the Nazi related battalions, who have done a good job of death, squatting that whole area. And remember I did a film about Salvador. I know a little bit about death squads and how they work. And I know about paramilitaries because in South America, they're all over the place. America supports hates. Venezuela goes on about Venezuela, but then it did they tell you anything about Columbia. It's next door, neighbor Columbia for years has been plagued by paramilitaries that are right wing and the United States has said nothing about
Out them except occasionally. There's a newspaper report now. So this is a, this support of death, squads by the United States is all over the world. It's not just in South America and Central America where we seen plenty of evidence of it. It's here too. And this is what's horrible about this whole thing at this point, Epoch recei of America that they can support such evil such evil. Now going back to your larger question about. Yeah. It's a terrible Refugee disaster. But again we have to
The numbers, let's get the numbers and get evidence because I would ask you. I'm not sure at this point, whether more civilians were killed before 2022 in donbas than have been killed in this latest. So we can't talk about this without. We can't talk about
the invasion Ukraine without considering the full war between Russia and Ukraine. Since 2014. That's correct.
Absolutely. And take the toll on both sides and you might be surprised by the result. I
The Russian military, of course, I'm not there and I'm not this could this speculation. The Russian military has slowed down and part of that reason is not to keep the civilian Corps doors opened. And I think that Ukrainian military has, made it more difficult on purpose, especially some of these battalions that are death squad. Battaglia's have gone out of their way to keep the civilians locked into these cities in danger because it's in their interest to do so, so there's no reason why your cranium military would have killed Ukrainian civilians.
Four years would change their policies. They would have no compunctions about wiping out. For example, people with white arm bands and Bucca.
Okay, as to what Putin was thinking at the time, I wondered this, I still do. I said, okay. So Putin can say when Don let's say the Ukrainian government wants to now invade donbas. This is on February 23, and they have artillery that pepper in the whole place. They're going to go in and they're going to get donbas back. What do you do? And you you have a Russian separatists, who are Russians ukrainians, who are on?
Who are going to fight?
How far do you go in supporting them? Can Rush at this point say, well, we can't help you. You have to get along. You have to somehow, you have to be absorbed by the Kev. You're going to be absorbed by them and they're going to be. They're not going to give you autonomy and you have to live with them and there's going to be a price to pay. You could do that. And you can also say, well. We open our borders to don't ask, you can come into our account, you can leave and we will help you to, to resettle. And that's, that would be a reasonable approach. So you take it to the next.
Stage is Putin's that, can you take it to the next stage? You you stall it harder for your and people, of course, use this pressure on Putin from inside his own
government to
say, what are you going to do? We mean, you can't do this tonight and there's a lot of nationalists in Russia. They would certainly bring he would be to his they'd say Putin is weak. And that's the biggest rap. You can. Never give a Russian. Leader is your week. You can't get anything done. So they would have been some damage. But let's say he goes with that and he says, okay, we know what the United States.
Is its to get rid of me regime change and to get another Yeltsin in. That's what they want and they will go to any ends. They will destroy Ukraine if necessary, but they want regime change in Russia. And then after they do that, of course, I'll go after China, but that's the ultimate policy of the United States. This is a country that has no compunctions about going all the way and it will use hypocrisy in all the news propaganda in the world, to get what it wants. This is the equivalent.
Likely of Germany's goals in World War Two world domination. There's no question in my mind, but we're going about it in our way as opposed to Hitler's. Way. Do you know, just to finish your thought? Where do they go? What stage to? Okay, you let's say they take. Ukraine, takes back donbas. Let's say people get killed in in large quantities. So, we now to the next stage. We're finished with the Minsk to agreements that were never adhered to. So, what is Russia?
Do they wait for the next aggression? Which is going to come in one form or another? Perhaps, in Georgia. /? I don't know what happened, what the us is thinking, but they would have. The u.s. Cannot say Russia is has done anything. They have not use violence to stop donbas from belonging back to Ukraine. Right? So you're in a new setup. Now, it's a whole thing rearranges now you have, but you still have nuclear weapons.
You still have a Russian nuclear weapons and they're serious. Weapons are very well developed crude, but not as refined as the American nuclear force, but powerful that becomes another game. Then you open another chess board and know what you still haven't been condemned. The sanctions have been imposed. That's a new. It's a new game. Could he have done could have lived without? That's the question. I asked
myself to you. See, ultimately Ukraine today as a Battleground for the proxy war between Russia and the United.
States, the United States would have then NATO allies to NATO allies Ukraine or certainly put more weapons. And, you know, the United States has already done a lot in Ukraine with intelligence with training advisors. The the intelligence aspect of the Ukrainian Army has been raised enormously by the United States contribution.
Is it possible for you to steal man, to play Devil's Advocate against yourself and say that Latimer zalenski. It's fighting for the sovereignty of his nation and
And in a way against the Russia, but also against the United States is just happens that for now. The United States is a useful Ally but ultimately the man the leader is fighting for the sovereignty of his Nation.
I would think he thinks oh, yes, and he could be, he could say that but he's not acknowledging that the sovereignty was nation was stolen but in 2014 when with a coup d'etat that brought that brought this second this right sector into power and they have
The country since then it's his it's thuggery. What they've done. The Medvedev case is a case in point. They just take what they need. They go to a house and they have a, how many people have been killed serious? People journalists killed by the these battalions. That's what people don't realize. In other words. You can't speak out. You can't a person like me would have been on the death list on day three, day four, five, you don't yet. There's no opposition to zalenski so he doesn't have a real.
T. It was a stolen sovereignty.
Do you think president is the Lansky would accept an interview with you today? Actually, from
since I made Ukraine on fire documentary, which perhaps you've seen, which records, the the incidents of 2014 and the and the maidan demonstrations and shows you the dishonesty behind it. No, I think that they've been very and - and they would kill me if I
In Ukraine, I mean, they don't have any,
these people are very tough. These are as rough as they
come, in my opinion. And I've seen rough in my life. I mean, these guys are not playing with fair at all. They these are death squads. No, I don't think and zelanski would have nothing to do with it. But of course, it would be dangerous for me and, and they've been very hostile in their, in their policies to any any ukrainians abroad are also threatened. And I was, you could be in Paris, but if you're if you speak out too much,
CH you I think ukrainians know that they're going to be targeted and I think that's part of the reason they don't talk a lot of them, you know, you have to take the anti-russian line, but I think a lot of them are
divided. See you think you would be killed as Alaska wouldn't even know about it. So there is
well, I'd because I don't think I do. If I was killed, certainly broad. No, they wouldn't kill me abroad. I think they
figure out. Oh no. If you travel to Ukraine, I mean
until I went I wouldn't get in it except through donbas. I'd come through. There are some
Atkins in donbas, who are reporting on the war there. And I read their reports. Actually, they're pretty interesting because they show you the cruelty of what's going on, but never mentioned in the west
never. That's what's so strange about
this. This this is the modern world were living and yet that's information is not coming out to the mass of the people. And on the contrary the United States has closed down.
All the all the proper, all
the RT, all the, all the information centers that are possible alternative news getting to the American people.
They've seriously made an effort and the BBC English and France. I was shocked when France closed RT down because our tea is actually pretty good. They, yes, they met you, it's called, there are distortions. But, you know, as well as I do because you hear you speak that Artie has done a very brave job of putting correspondence into the field in very dangerous positions and they've gotten great footage of some of the violence is going
on. Well given the wall of propaganda in the west. I also see the
Of propaganda in Russia, the wall of propaganda in China, the wall of propaganda in India. What do we do with these walls of propaganda? It's also talk about Russia because I you and you would know
more about it. But my last experience their newspapers, there was some more interesting. There's put it this way when I went to Venezuela. The United States was saying back then that Chavez controlled the Press. I get to Venezuela and there's nothing for criticism of Chavez. In the press. It was owned by the the oligarchs of
Venezuela and who hated him. So, it was across the board. That's why Chavez opened. The, the state television, spend more money, one, and advertise his point of view, through State television, but this in Russia, there is what I saw was criticism. I met with a publisher of got the Nobel Prize of that famous newspaper and his point of view. At that time. When I spoke to him a few years ago was we're operating with there is criticism of him, but you know what,
You can't call for the overthrow of the government, nor in Venezuela, nor in the United States for that matter. If you call for the overthrow of the government of the United States, you're going to be in deep trouble.
Well, alright, so to push back on that. It's interesting. It's so interesting because we mentioned Elon Musk and there's a way that people sound when they speak freely. When I speak to, I family in Ukraine, at Family in Russia. When I speak to people in Russia, let's put my family aside when I speak to people in
Russia. I think there's fear. I think they don't sometimes when you call for the overthrow of government that's important not because you're necessarily believe for the overthrow of the government, but you just need to test test the power centers and make sure they're responsive to the people and I feel like there's a mix of fear and apathy.
That is has a different texture than it does in the United States.
That worries me because I, I would like to see the flourishing of a people in all
places. As I said, my impression was it, this far more freedom in the president was was pictured by the west and that means different points of view, because the Russians are always arguing with himself. I've never seen a country. That's so contentious. There's more, there's more intellectuals in Moscow and the cities, and then you can believe and, you know, the Russian people there.
They've been fighting government for years before back from the 1870s was ours times. They always plotting against the government and the intelligence he has known through history is being contentious and anti-government many ways and we see the same thing educated people turning against Russia. I don't appreciate those people because I think they're very spoiled and they don't understand some of the stuff that's going on in the west. But we have a lot of Russians in in in the Europe and America that attack Russia.
And sometimes don't understand that they are under pressure from the United States, and they don't understand the size of the pressure. And it, that's why Putin connects with the people. Because he, he represents the common more. The common man whose Hussein to your interests are threatened. Russia is threatened. We are representing only the interests of Russia. Not we're not an Empire. We're not going to expand. We he has no in Empire. Intentions all the West Point painted as Empire. I see no evidence of
Why didn't he do something in all these years? Nothing? He did nothing except defend the country in Georgia and in chechnya.
So the imperialist imperative is coming more from the West aerialist.
It's the imperialist, agenda going back to, I'm sorry where we left our discussion off. I mean, I was going to go on with America, not only being censored as a closed down now, closed down, and you say it's not fear. Well, it is fear. I am scared because if you get your face,
Facebook page to spend it or your YouTube, your Twitter account, thrown off a lot of good. People are getting their thrown off. You can't say, you can't speak out. It affects your business, goes back to the 1950s when my My Father's World, when you could not express any sympathy for a Soviet Union without endangering your job without basically, being not trusted. You had to be part of the program to get along to go along same thing when UK the United Kingdom. I mean, for all
They're talked is Boris, Johnson is an idiot, but all their talk about. Do you remember with their policies with the IRA in Ireland, when Ireland was threatening them? They cut off the IRA. Completely Gerry Adams who was a wonderful guy. I met him was not allowed to even be heard in Britain during certain years. In France, all constantly through the Algerian War. The algerians are not allowed to be heard the Algerian war for independence, divided, France. Greatly. You could not even show Paths of Glory, where War
R1 film in France for I don't know 20 years after it came out. Censorship is a way of life when democracies also feel threatened. They are much more fragile, and they pretend to be a healthy democracy. Would take all the criticism in the world and shrug it off and say, okay. That's what's good about our country. Well, I'd like to see that in America. He used there are times. It's been like that, but it's so scary now, so it is scary. That's what I was trying to say. It's not unscary to me.
In China, I would say to you. Yes, it's much scarier to me because there is the internet wall that they cut off and I got no problems in China to because I said something in years ago about you have to discover your own history. You have to be honest about. Now, you have to be, you have to go back and let's make a movie about Mao that upset them, you know, and show his negatives.
So China has been much more sensitive than Russia about criticism much more and it is a source of problems. But on the other hand China has a lot of grievances. A lot of going back to the 19th century and the British imperialism of that era and the American imperialism.
If you could talk to Vladimir Putin once again, now, what kind of what kind of things would you talk about here? What kind of questions would you ask, huh?
Well,
one thing I've certainly ask is what you were thinking on February, 23 and I would ask him to reply to my question about, what if you took this to face to you? You surrendered in donbas, you know, no ego about it. You just surrendered. It's in your interest to your country and you invited all the refugees from donbas into Russia as much as they can. What would you do now? What's the, what's the u.s. Next move? And in your opinion? How are you going to?
Okay, where are we going to go? That's that would be the key question because it's, but he didn't go that way. He chose to take the sanctions and and to go this way. Why he did? That is a key question for our time. Perhaps it was a mistake. Perhaps it was his judgment perhaps as I said, but I don't knowing the man I did, I don't think so. I think it was calculated.
Now this is projection and speculation, but there's something different about him in the past.
Several months. It could be the covid thing that isolation that you mentioned. Yo, I listen to a lot of interviews and speeches and Russian and there's there's something about power over time. They can change you. They can isolate you when I was there.
Now II, he been in office for already 15 years. He had power, he didn't miss use it in my opinion. He was very even. I saw him go on television and talk to his fellows, the same way. You always talk to them, he grew with it.
He grew and intelligence and knowledge because he had dear dealings was the whole world. Now, people had come to him. He was very well-known and Africa, and Middle East, certainly Syria.
And
I just never saw misuse of his bow. I saw humility and him actually,
so, perhaps there was a calculation and he calculated wrong in terms of what happens if he doesn't invade,
Perhaps there was a calculation, perhaps he had a calm and clear mind and he calculated
wrong. Well, he also made the point that he, they were told their talk of solinsky saying, nuclear weapons were going to come into Ukraine. It was talk about that right before the invasion, to a certainly that would have set off alarms. You know, the United States is already kind of doing that by not only putting its intelligence and it's heavy Weaponry into Ukraine, but you've got to deal with a question. The next question that comes
The most immediate question is is the United States going to start? And I'm saying this is good. They making a lot of noise United States the Press about Russia using nuclear weapons and chemical weapons. That's a lot of noise again going back to my analogy when the United States starts that it starts the conversation going. It's in the interest of the United States for Russia to be pinned with any kind of
Chemical or nuclear incident. Except for example, would be very, not simple, but it would be possible to explode. A nuclear device in donbas in donbas and kill thousands of people and we would not know right away who did it, but of course, the blame would go right to Russia, right to Russia, even if it didn't make sense, if there was no motivation for it. It would just be blamed on Russia. The United States might, well, be the one who does that false flag.
Operation. It would not be Beyond them. They would, it would be a very dramatic solution to ceiling in this war off as a major victory for the United States. It's terrifying. Nobody can happen. It can happen at 1, kiloton device low-yield this. It's possible. It's when
you walk across that line, you can potential never walk
back. Well, I think the United States is calculating that. It's a dangerous. Yes, I agree, but I think the
It of arrogance is such that they really believe they can push their advantage to the max now that because of all these propaganda successes up to now, the Ukrainian Army could be wiped out for all we know there's all is left is our neon nasty brigades, but they're being advised very well by us and they're sending the weapons in our huge amounts of weapons. What about American budget? No one talks about how much money we're giving to Ukraine. We're, it's a billion dollars already in weaponry, and not most of it just poured in.
About you know, the, you know, the Russian budget is defense. Budget is 60 some billion dollars a year. It's nothing compared to the United States 1/15 of it, but yet week, we put so much Weaponry into Ukraine. At the money we've spent on Ukraine is all equivalent, almost to what we spent on covid, in our, in our own country. It's astounding the Distortion of our priorities.
Is also chemical. Don't forget chemicals, probably easier way to go. But in Syria, there was far too many incidents of a of America in its quest to demonize Assad and the Russians of all these chemical attacks that were happening that they were valuing came from Russia. And in spite of the fact that Russia is pulled out of the sign, the agreement on chemical arms and not and apparently destroyed its stock several.
Ago, it's strange that the strangest incidents happened in Syria. You go back to him, Trace. Everyone. Good journalism was done. The white helmets. Got a lot of Fame, but they were corrupted and many good journalists. Tried to point out the inconsistencies in the American accusations, Robert Perry among them, who was one of my mentors at Consortium, press a lot of goods. Are you'd have to go
back but Trace each like you would
Trace each time
they made an accusation against Putin of murder. You need that same kind of
Sherlock, Holmes, intensity
investigation and they don't do it. Because the United Nations, or the chemical, not the United Nations. As much as The Chemical People. The the organization has been tampered with, if you remember correctly, there was accusations that the chemical chemical investigative unit. I don't know the name of engine was tampered with and people. Quit people who are
Working on that commission, quit and said that this is not legit. So very interesting that serial story is wacko. So the United States is willing to use chemical in Syria. Freely. Did it three? Four times, you remember correctly? Trump was challenged that he did not attack after a chemical incident in Syria. All these newscasters in the United States, the most heaviest of them were saying, well, President Putin is a President Trump is now, finally acting like a real president. When he attacks, when he drops.
Missiles in Syria. They actually said that, in other words, they wanted the Trump to go to war on Syria, but he didn't chemical weapons
chemical and nuclear is really terrifying. Do you think now combine this with the fascinating choice in your interviews with Vladimir Putin to watch Stanley,
Kubrick's Doctor Strange, dr. Strangelove or how I
learned to stop worrying and love the bomb in given
the fact that that you did that.
Now, looking at the fact that the word nuclear and it feels like the world, hangs on the brink of nuclear war, would do you think that? That's an overstating, the case? No, that's what
worried me from the beginning. And that's probably why I got involved in all this stuff because I go back to the 60s. When I was a, you know, when we so close to nuclear war, I lived through that period And I thought has, as many people did that this was
So it was kind of it was going to come now. So I've lived through that and some I didn't sense the period in 83 when Reagan took us to the edge. If you remember correctly, Able Archer, it was an exercise that almost brought us to an acquittal Russians worse. Really paranoid at that point and they were they were responding to our military exercise. On Able Archer. There was also the Korean airliner. They went down. There were numerous incidents in the 80s, but I never felt the fear.
I thought Reagan was
Testing the limits but perhaps if I've been younger I would have felt it. But anyway, no we come close. United States is risk. This several times if I told you it would be hard for you to believe if I could set a scene for you, in a drama in a in 1962, when Kennedy has a meeting with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the CIA. And they talk about a plan, a military plan to First Strike the Soviet Union and China.
Okay, it was called he was an Eisenhower plan that had been put in to operate, put into our protential operation in the in early 60s or 50s. You're late. 50s SI o p 62. This was an attack on the Soviet Union first strike these. That's why the United States has never given up the concept of First Strike.
It's interesting that the Russian polish nuclear policy posture is more defensive than the American one which leaves options open. It's a the same options are open and neoconservative agreement. That we see from the late 90s where they say
the emergence of a rival power will not be tolerated. That's a very broad statement
and allows you to do a lot including nuclear. So you have to understand the United States is
Always first of all, and it breaks so many treaties over the, we know that from the Putin story about the anti-ballistic missile treaty in 2002. And then the INF Treaty of the break. They broke that one. That was the intermediate missile. That was 2019. I don't know when they broke it off, but the United States has not been very faithful on its Nathan nuclear agreements.
And so, I don't know that we can even
deal with you that I'd say. So diplomatically, it seems to be impossible now.
Now brings me to Biden. Yes, and this is another Irishman. This is the opposite of Kennedy. Kennedy was a Catholic Irish
Anti-Imperialist
behind the seems to be the opposite. He seems to be a go-along get-along. Go-along guy who's been not only old, but he's also gone along with this program, which I voted for Biden because I feared Trump, but I thought buying at a certain age would mellow. I really did. He's not mellowed. Apparently. He's still listening to these people and he believes them.
And it seems that his that horrible woman Victoria nuland who was under Secretary of Sadie appointed her to 82 these to this sector of the
world. She's very influential and she's been one of the
worst people on Ukraine. She obviously is behind the coup and she's she was the one who posted that, you know, we got our man in Yachts. Whatever's. Yeah, that's an oak. And
also remember said
the famous statement, fuck the EU, all these things. She's but she's back and she's
The other day about, if the Soviets, if the Russians use nuclear weaponry of any kind, there's going to be a horrible price to pay, that was that she was out of the blue. I said, what the hell is she doing? She's talking nuclear all of a sudden and then since that day, everybody and the u.s. Press all the shows have gone. Talk nuclear nuclear nuclear. Secretary of state has done it blinken
this.
It scares you, if you think about it. The United States scares me. So that's the military-industrial complex machine fully, functional fully operational behind this whole thing. Sir. Is that is that what's to blame? Certainly? That's why I showed him Strangelove because I wanted him
to show him. I wanted mr. Putin to say, look at this film. You never saw it. How can you not say, you know, it's a seminal film in American history to those people who care and it shows you the Kubrick had a anti. Had a pacifist. Thank God
anti.
War Simpson
mentality, which he showed in powers of Glory, as well as
Strangelove and it's such a dire. Well, done
scenario that I wanted. Mr. Putin to be aware of the way the United States thinks.
Yeah, the absurdity of escalation, the absurdity of War at the largest scale. The absurdity of nuclear war, especially, can we walk back from the brink of nuclear war?
Can we can we? Yes, yes. What's the path to walk bison? Reason between Hawaii's and and diplomacy. There's no reason. I mean talk to the
guy. Mr. Biden. Why don't you? Calm down and go and talk to? Mr. Putin in Moscow? Why don't you just sit across the table from him and try to have a discussion without falling into ideologies and stuff like that.
Can I ask you for advice? You did some of the most difficult interviews ever? You have a device that you can give to someone like me or anyone hoping to understand something about a human being sitting across from them. About what it takes to do a good interview. You're doing one.
Well, no, but there's a listen there's levels to this
game and interviewing somebody like Vladimir Putin. Also.
Language barrier sit across in the man tried to keep an open mind.
Try to also ask challenging questions but not challenging with the, with an agenda but seeking to understand and understand deeply. How do you do that seeking the truth? It's very
simple. Seeking the truth being a question or like you are you want to know what is really going on? I could not get anywhere with Biden or bush or for that matter Obama. They be opaque with me. There's no interview possible with the president of the United States because he's got to stand for all the stuff that they stand for.
Which is imperialism, which is control of the world. How can you defend that? You can tell no one's going to come out and say that they're always going to blame the enemy. They're going to blame your on they're going to blame China.
So some people it may not be possible to break through the opaque and care.
I mean, have you ever seen an interview with the president besides being personable?
Where he actually discussed American
policy? Yeah, I mean, not really, but maybe after their president, I could see Obama being able to do such an interview. I could see George W being able to do such an interview, or are they not able to reflect that all on the George W hasn't shown much conscience in terms of
thinking about what he's done. You've seen that, it was you ever see my movie W. I think that's one of my best movies because it shows a man who's just out of his depth
and has. No, he
hasn't
Which is at the end of the movie. If you remember correctly. He talks to his wife and he says, I don't get it. I'm trying to do good in the world. I've done I believe in good and right and why do people not understand that, you know, that kind of complaint as if he can't get outside himself to understand. The way other people think empathies walking like a dramatist, is what I do. You walk in the footsteps of other people. When I did a movie about Richard Nixon, it wasn't because I liked him was because I wanted to I think I understood a part of her.
Because my father and I think, I wanted to walk in his footsteps. That's not to say I sympathize with him because I didn't, I don't think he helped the American cause at all, but it was a thighs as opposed to
sympathize. Same thing with bush people were
shocked. When I did the bush movie. They said, how can you be in any way?
Anyway, it receptive to this guy,
that's wrong dramatist, don't
have political positions. They walk in the shoes of that's why Bush movie. Perhaps was surprising to me and maybe we'll didn't care for it. Maybe that's what. But that's you've got to go there. No you if you did a movie about a villain you have to go there.
You have to walk in their
shoes. Yes, so see them because they usually villains usually
See
themselves as the hero. Yes. So you have to consider. What is it like to live in a world where this person is the hero? Yes.
Well, the burden is that
hard? Not for George w--
Bush. He's bitching because they didn't understand them, but he had a good Vision, he said of democracy and, you know, democracy forgives a lot of
sins casca hard question on that. Yes. Sure. So, because
Is so important to a great interview. Let's ask the most challenging version of empathy which is when you're sitting across
from a man on the brink of war.
The that leads to tens of millions of deaths, which is Hitler. So if you could interview Hitler in 1939 as the drums of War start to beat or 1941 when they're already full-on War, but they're still a lot of passive. Is there still a lot of people? Unsure? What are the
Motivations behind what Hitler's doing? How did you do that interview? What depends when you do it? If you do it in
38, I certainly want to know you have to. If you sit down across from Hitler, you empathize. What is your beef? What do you, what do you, where have you been? What is your Consciousness? Why do you hate Jewish people? Why why, what is, you know, all these questions have come up, his sense of grievance, as a result of World War One. There's justification.
Issues there Etc. But if I and by the way, Churchill was trying to make a deal with him in 38, that's a fact that people don't know is Churchill himself and, you know, there was still the desire in England to make peace with Germany and he was seen as a possible.
What hit, what? Churchill really wanted was Hitler to go against Russia and he anything to destroy the Bolsheviks. So he was using Hitler as much as he could to go after Russia and but Hitler was too elusive to get to pin him down. But if you remember, Hitler was very kind, at the end of the kind is not the right word
was,
did not go after the British Empire when he had France and he could have, he had another objective, which was
See the East. So Hitler is goal. I think he always had an admiration for England. It's interesting, story always and the Empire. Yeah, that's early church. What we have no doubts now from history revisionism. That Churchill's interest main interest was not Germany. It was a British Empire. Yes, and to preserve and 2nd the road to India and all that. And Middle East, Churchill fought, the entire.
War with the concept of preserving, the British Empire, all his goals. He sent America on a goose, chase in to Italy. You could argue instead of establishing a sincere, second
front in Western Europe.
Interesting man, so I would have tried to get. No, I think I would approach it the same way in 1939. It would've been a different story because at that point he'd attacked Poland and in 1940 France, so they'll say it's another ballgame, but certainly if whatever at whatever point you talk to him, you I would try to understand his point. So I would I'm not judging you Hitler. I'm saying to you tell me what you're thinking. Why are you invading Russia? What's your thought? That's all an interviewer should do. We shouldn't be?
Expressing his contempt for Hitler, which, like an American journalist interviewing Putin. It's I'm getting brownie points for expressing my contempt. Yeah, for you. Then that does. I don't. That doesn't wash with me. That's
ugly. Yeah, seek to understand. Yes. This is a technical question, but was language a barrier as an interviewer to some degree. It's very hard to
learn Russian, but I had very they have excellent translators in the Kremlin. Excellent. They are people who are trained.
Very seriously freedom for months or years before they, these people are young and they're very bright. I was very impressed with a Russian drug.
It's interesting. I mean,
I'm impressed as well. But
there's a humor that's lost. There's a wit, a dry wit their stuff said, between the lines. That's not actually, how much content? But it's more kind of the things that make communication more frictionless. It's the
The there's a, there's a kind of sadness to a Russian humor that permeates all things and that sometimes is Lost in Translation. The translation is a little bit colder, meaning it's just conveys, the facts,
you call it sardonic humor, I would say. So, yeah,
and so it's interesting. But I think you could see that from facial expressions when you're sitting across from the person and you can see that you can feel it. Let me ask you in general.
What's the role of Love In The Human Condition in your life in life? In general? You talked, you looked at some of the darkest aspect of human nature. What's the role of this? One of the most beautiful aspects of
human nature? I think, without love, I wouldn't, I don't think I'd be able to carry on. I think that love is my love is the greatest. The ability to love is the greatest virtue. You can have. Its it's the ability to share.
There was another with your family, with your children, with your wife, with your lover, your partner. It's an ability to extend yourself into the world and it brings empathy with it. If you love, well, I think you expand it to the human race to and it's the strength behind the great novelists, the great artists of our time, I think.
Part of the reason I suppose we're scared of science. Sometimes is because the scientists sometimes, don't express that,
clearly. You can lose that. When you focus on the facts on empirical data on the science of things. You can lose this. The humanity. Be that's between the
lines. I'm often struck by when I talk to scientists and I've talked to a few and how arrogant they can be about. They don't talk to you if you don't understand their world and they talk to each other and there's an arrogance of clothes sir.
All kind of thing. Well, he's not at my level. I can't there's no discussion to be had with this person. He's a human being
that arrogance is terrifying to me because it's, it's next door, neighbor to close-mindedness, which then can be used by charismatic leaders as it was in Nazi Germany to commit. Some of the worst atrocities. The scientist can be used as Pawns in a very in a very cruel game. Yeah. What advice would you give to young people you?
I've done first of all, some of the greatest films ever. You've lived a heck of a life. You've were fearless and bold and asking some really difficult questions of this world. What advice would you give to young people today? High school college about career? How to have a career? That can be proud of, or how to have a
life that can be proud of. Well. I have three children. So obviously, I'm not necessarily the
Best advisor in the world. I and they, I do find that the children. I've raised him with sense of freedom, and they do what they want in the end. It's their life. Their Destiny, their character. That's what comes out. You can try to influence it, but you see. You can try to get your daughter to wake up at a certain hour and the day, but it never works, you know, so I long ago gave up on that, and my children are all grown now.
Now. But aside from that, I think if I was a teacher in a school and teaching film, I'd say to the students, get an education. You can't just look at film you. Look at it because it's not a full education. It's not the Spectrum. I don't think you should teach film as a. I think you need a base in other. In other worlds. One of the greatest courses. I took an NYU was and I was a war veteran on the GI bill, so I was older than the others.
And one of the great, I took a class outside the film School in Greek Classics because I hadn't had much history or. And I wanted to know more about the world of Homer and so forth. And the teacher opened my eyes to so much in that class. And I wrote about it in my Memoir. It's called chasing the light about the professor Leahy. And what he did to me. He just he gave me the concepts clearly of Consciousness, which is the homeric theme for of Odysseus.
And and also length a la th e LL e th e which is sleep. And how most of the crew a dish is crew were experiencing left a and how necessary it was to stay awake. So it's not just film. It's just you have to learn the world as much as you can when you're young and
So that I think is the basis of any good education and a classic one is important, a basis. I think then you go on and you can learn computer if you want, but that's specialization. You know, if you're a computer geek is had a life. Does that give you enough satisfaction? Do you get to Joy out of out of people?
Now, just like filmmaking as a skill? Yes, really? You need to have the broad? Yes, back on time.
Stand the world literature. Yes, history. Absolutely. So, one of the things about being human is life, is finite it ends. Do you think about your death? Are you feeling of your death? Sure.
Absolutely. You have to come to terms with death. And that's a tough one. For many people. It's always there. I'm older than you, obviously. And I'm getting closer to it couldn't happen. Any day. Actually, you are, when you get to a certain age,
Age. You can't assume that you're going to be alive tomorrow. So I try to deal with
it. Are you afraid of it?
Much less so, than I was, when I was younger. I remember, I was in Vietnam, but I thought I dealt with it there, but when I came back I realized that I wanted to live. So yes, I've learned over time to get more and more used to it and get ready for it.
What's a good answer to the question of why I live? So the realization that you wanted to live.
What was the reason to live
because it was better than being one of those corpses that I saw in the jungle. You know, I saw how finite death is.
Other things in your life, you regret? Oh sure.
Is there something you wish you could have done differently? Like if you could go back to do one thing
differently or the regrets, always muscular some curious. What do you say off
offline, all the time?
No, no, you be curious to know and he's an engineer to, and Engineers really value. Mistakes Engineers value as mistakes and errors because that's an opportunity to learn. They, I mean, this is what you do with systems as you test on the test them and test them. And errors is just information. He did. The same thing was true in its way of filmmaking. If there are certain
things you learn as you build films and you make mistakes. It's like putting an engine together.
You do, the film is flawed in that way. You know, it, the people may or may not see it, but the car runs or made money, or didn't make money. It can be good, and it didn't make money, but it didn't. The point, is that everything is a build. Every film is a construction. Same thing, as he goes through on a Tesla, we go through on each fill,
but films are art. It's a, you
know, the thing is one film does not lead to a lifetime guarantee.
You copyright. Well, yeah, you have.
The movie game as you've called it. Yeah, it is.
It's a complicated and cruel game but it takes an enormous amount of work
enormous amount of work to make a film people understand. Underestimate that it's extremely complicated to have something be successful because it has to so many elements of luck involved, reception and so forth.
What do you think? I apologize for the Absurd question, but what do you think is the meaning of life? Why are we here?
The why I think to
realize ourselves to realize more of what you are to realize, what life is to appreciate it to grow to honest, honor our life to honor the concept of life and to understand how precious life is. The preciousness of life is the Buddhists say and of course the immediacy of death all around us, the causes of death are all around us and our life is like a as they say is like a
Lantern in a strong Breeze among existing among the causes of death. So life is so precious and at the same time, we immediately of death. And then, of course, the continuation of life in whatever form it's going to take.
But in this life to wake up to the preciousness of it, to the precious, the yeah,
that's wonderful thing. By the way. I didn't have that when I was young. I took it for
granted.
Oliver, like I said, I'm a huge fan. You're an incredible human being one of the greatest artists ever. So, it's a huge honor that you sit with me and talk so deeply and honestly, about some very difficult topics. Again, you're an inspiration. Is an honor that you will spend your valuable tiled me. Thank you very much. Thanks for Takin. Excellent being here.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Oliver Stone to support this podcast. Please. Check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Oliver Stone in The Untold History of the United States to fail is not tragic to be human is
Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
