Ukraine was NOT to be enrolled into NATO. Germany and France strongly objected to this plan. It was off the table long time ago. Great Britain, USA and Russia had signed agreement to keep Ukraine border intact for giving up nuclear weapon. These are very important points that were not mentioned in this speech.
The NATO expansion was just a propaganda lie to justify the invasion. Even the Russians know that NATO was not going to accept Ukraine in the near future. The same for EU membership. The country was in a to early economic and political development stage to back such decisions. The speech looks bizarre to me, because it basically states: "OK, the war is the NATO and Ukraine fault! Lets give Russia what Putin wants!". That is against the political logic of the East Europe and international rules.
@Ukraine is Russia russia stoked up the fire in donbas getting its people to rebel and then adding its own troops to fight off ukraine who wanted to keep its country in tact....lets face facts russia is geographically weak and should go with the flow of the majority....look at yourselves your not a great people.... and where would you be without oil and gass sales .....shame you forced someone to show you how nuclear worked....your not a creator you scheme your way though life.
A contract with the U.S.A. is not worth the paper its written on. They broke so many contracts over the last decade that they have lost all trust. Only power holds them in position. If this power got to be broken publicly so that all can see the Table will turn against the U.S. many many nations are waiting for that. The U.S. is not to be trusted. Russia hold all theyre contracts. They are trustworthy. Thats what media dont want us to see. Cause it would be over with the U.S.A and theyre impact. Countrys would say why listen to you? You lied and betrayed us many times and now there is a other power no.1 we dont have too any more. 🤷♂️
And let's not forget that we can have perfect music - for free. And your inner spring mattress, that nylon toothbrush, vaccines, the whole world on your color screen, the world's library in your pocket, instant communications, overweight people, long lives, airconditioning, motor cars and planes, space travel, liberal education, universal franchise and a gazillion other things shows how blessed we are in our science fiction world.
From the Far Side I reply - which is why we should be grateful for global warming. Where do expressions like 'insanely cool' come from to replace the thousands of adjectives that could be used in meaningful speech and writing?
I agree with the sentiment, but I disagree with the substance. As it stands, the United States is the best arbiter for anyone's security based off of the unparalleled force projection capabilities it has. The US can afford to guarantee and assist nations far afueld because logistically there is no where that is out of reach for the US. Russia cant guarantee nations in say, Iberia or North West Africa for example. This was seen when Russian guarantees fell short in Vietnam when China invaded them. They just can't offer any sort of tangible support beyond a few hundred kilometers of their border. Should the US be meddling? I think there is a better way personally. But be that as it may, the US is the only country in the world that can affect any measure of security to any nation anywhere in the world.
@@docprune9922 Putin likes to negotiate with America as he wants to be seen as a leader of a power equal to the US. Not to mention that Putin does not accept sovereignty of anything he can attack and wants to attack.
@@docprune9922 I concur. 120 billion dollars of aid and they still can't recapture lost territory. They're just prolonging the war to make Russia suffer, they know they'll win eventually but the longer the better for them.
Mr Graham seems to be inconsistent in his views presented here. On one hand he admits this war has been proving that Russia is weak, but on the other his whole rhetoric is built on the assumption that Russia isn’t weak. Some mind maps need to be rewritten perhaps
I guess he chooses to express himself carefully in order not to hurt any russian feelings, while at the same time trying to present the facts. Some people might also call it diplomacy or emotional intelligence
@@clover6480 No, the ambiguity is better explained if it is seen as propaganda intended to brainwash the gullible. Whereas, the truth is always paradoxical, there's no reason that Russian can't be both less dangerous than is feared yet still dangerous enough to be treated with respect.
@@jamesedwards.1069 What is so complicated ? Russia is very weak against NATO in conventional war but extremely lethal in nuclear war . Western warheads simply lack targets while russian ones would have a disproportionate effect . So there is incentive from that side to do a kamikaze move when prezented with overwhelming odds - like a NATO offensive .
@@jamesedwards.1069 A country that started an illegal war of aggression and invaded a neighboring countries twice violating treaties they signed and violating the UN Charta does deserve nothing.
He says he takes with a grain of salt any military expert’s view of what is going on. Presumably, an academic’s view of the war doesn’t have to be taken with a grain of salt?
We have General's that have Pledged Allegiance to Qanon. Military "experts" should be taken with a grain a salt unless they have a track record of making accurate predictions in the past.
Certainly "Western" military experts should get a big dose of scepticism when discussing combined arms modern war and especially as it applies to Russia,although not all Western military have been lulled into an undeserved sense of might by beating up Iraq. As Andrei Martyanov says,and repeats,no Western military(he particularly means the US) has fought a powerful enemy in combined arms war since Korea. This means they are clueless essentially,whereas Russia has 7 years in Syria to refer to.
A lot of intellectual tourism goes unchecked and is inevitably used to discredit analysts and academics for things they never said. If anything, they're too nice about it.
@@antipropo461 Russia had a 2 hour battle with American's in a SNAFU in Syria. Russia lost 200 Men and the US didn't sustain a single casualty. Russian military has proven beyond doubt they are a second rate military power with Nukes. Basically, a giant North Korea.
it started because russia hasn't got many warm water ports... and wants to protect what it had....and push hostile countries away from its ships and to control the food supplies of a large part of the world....to become a major player and respect in the world....as nuclear weapons are a dead end and become irrelevent.
Um, this is pretty strange point of view, it's the view of a war as seen from Mars. The man said it was hard to figure out what the US strategy is. I mean, really?
@@joni8090 Putin's book read better in the original German. I think you are thinking of a different book by a disgraced leader who started a little thing we like to call the 2nd World War Two...Putin's strategy to keep NATO from expanding is working like a charm! Russia will be safely surrounded by friends who are concerned about their neighbor. They will work to see that Russia stays within its own established borders.
@@widescreennavel Nothing has changed then !! But , I do think honesty in Negotiations is important don't you ! So far US and cohorts have been building castles on sand and that Never makes for Stability .
My interpretation of what Thomas Graham is arguing is that Putin is just one of many leaders striving for the future and prosperity of his country. And that the concern about NATO expansion and willingness to threaten Russia was honestly meant and the reason for the attack on Ukraine. Does Graham entirely exclude the alternative explanation that Putin rather, like many authoritarian leaders, is deeply troubled by extensive expressions of democracy at close range (Ukraine and Belorussia) that could easily spread to Russia's own population and thus threaten his mafia clan's unlimited wealth and power?
Um...yes! Do some research. Look into the last 30 pieces of legislation that Russia has enacted. You will see thinks like 1M Roubles for couples who have 3 or more children. Free housing for low income families. Free cars for people that need it. Russia is fast becoming the land that many people wish they could live in. It is just at the moment there is a lot of ignorance around Russia. Did you know that Putin is a lawyer? Did you know that he hates, I mean HATES communism? He has written a number of essays on the subject. An open mind is a highly intelligent mind. Is you mind open? Are you willing to do research and be open to the possibility that your entire perception my be blue pilled right now?
Also the recent discovery of Gas reserves in Ukraine & off Ukraine's coast line, which would have threatened Russia's dominance of natural gas supply to Europe, a weapon it is currently using very effectively. NATO expansion was just the excuse. This analysis has many gaps in it, don't think much of this Watson Institute whoever they are
Not a word about the Maidan coup, the behaviour of the Zelenski regime and the violation of the Minsk agreement. Instead they stick to Western propaganda, leaving out context.
Yes, Merkel and Hollande kept Ukraine from joining in 2008, but there has been close cooperation between NATO members and the Ukraine after 2014 in the form of military maneuvers, training and equipping forces etc. This can not be disregarded.
@@thepcfd Yanukovych run away after his men kill more than a hundred people in a broad day light. His own party disown him ffs. But even if that was a real "coup" is still doesn't give a right for another nation to annex territories.
I totally disagree. Putin is not nearly so amenable to "serious discussion" as this speaker suggests with his 20/20 hindsight. Speaking to Russia/Putin privately without our allies is a great way to erode trust in the USA.
Sounds like what Trump did with the Taliban. Didn't go over well, even if the goal was to evacuate since Biden went with the Trump agreement with the Taliban.
@lesia gutierrez Budapest Memorandum was a weak fudge - just a bunch of reassuring *sounding* crap, *containing no firm commitment from anyone other than Ukraine* , which gave up it's nuclear deterrent without demanding a sufficient quid quo pro. There was no promise or assurance that Russia, or any of the signatory nations _guaranteed_ Ukraine's territorial integrity or would ever act in support of it's defence. I wish people would actually read key background texts like that worthless document and understand it properly... And perhaps reflect on inadequate agreement statements and the weasel-word difference between such as "affirm" and "guarantee" and so on. Ukraine at the time was just excessively eager to finally free themselves from the USSR... and too trusting.
Not filled gas storage was no coincidence, it _only_ happened in those cases, where Russian / Kremlin's companies directly or through subsidiaries owned those gas facilities. This energy crisis was intentionally designed.
@@James-bs8bd Oh, that one was relatively recent and quite hilarious - Russian dummies believed themselves to be able to push around world's largest oil producers.
@@mikemorehead5794 They are working by depriving Russian usurper an dhis gan gof money , in oreder to drender Russia much less dangerous, as it will not be able to either produce or buy modern weapons (they are already lagging behind anyway). - sicerelly yours Captain Obvious
@Gregory Jones They did. Russians used an excuse, that that they are supplying according to contract, well, yes - the _minimum_ amount according to contract, but that was less than was supplied before and much less than customers were demanding at that time. Russia simply is not a reliable partner, it will screw you over at any moment whenever possible.
Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs' mission is to promote a just and peaceful world through research, teaching, and public engagement. Remember?
The Tale of Jack Kiev. Once upon a time, there was a small boy, called Jack Kiev. He was 12 years old and was an orphan. When his mother died recently, he inherited her cottage, with a little bit of land. He worked hard all day every day, cultivating his plot and producing a good yield. He had some extra vegetables and chickens, so he took them to the market for sale. At the market, the elder sons and daughters, of the Otan Family, came and bought his produce. They asked the boy, “Who is in charge of the business, as we need a regular supply? We would like to discuss business and come to some arrangement.” Jack said, “I’m in charge of the business! For I am an orphan and I will supply your needs.” So they signed a contract and Jack’s spirits were lifted, for he was quite sad and lonely. Once a week he went to the Otan household and delivered the wares that they needed and they paid him kindly. Sometime soon after, the Otan Family asked Jack to help with some chores, cutting grass and painting the shed. The Otan house, was very large with many rooms, for they had 16 sons and 17 daughters, who were always kind to Jack, so they became good friends. Jack was overjoyed with finding friendship with the Otan Family. Jack was always hardworking and never failed to be productive. As his own homestead and finance grew, he bought some sheep and reared lambs. Old Father Sam Otan was pleased with Jack. So when Jack turned 14, he made a promise to him. “When you turn 16, you can marry, whichever of my daughters that you find to be most beautiful and you will be my Son!” Jack nearly fainted and cried aloud, “Thank you Father Sam! God has truly blessed me! May Heaven and Earth hold dear to your promise.” One month later, an angry bear from the forest, came upon Jack’s cottage and ravaged his flock and stole some sheep. Jack was mortified and ran to the Otan house. “Help help! There’s a bear at my home, who’s killed my sheep!” The Otan Family were shocked and said, “Don’t worry we will stand by you and help to fight the bear.” So they sent two of the younger sons, who brought their slings and spears and went with Jack to fight the bear. But the bear was too big and strong for them to kill it. But they managed to scare the bear enough, so that it went away. “Thank you for your help!” said Jack and the two sons went back to their home. A couple of weeks passed by and the angry bear came back to Jack’s cottage, killing and eating some lambs. Jack ran to the Otans, “Help help! The bear has come back!” So three of the sons, went with Jack and they all fought against the bear. This time the bear hurt Jack and killed one of the sons and then went back to his lair. The sons went back to their home and reported the news. Two more weeks passed by and the bear came back to Jack’s cottage. It caused great damage to the chicken shed, broke some fences and killed all the chickens. Jack ran back to the Otans and this time, four of the sons, all armed with new swords and shields, went with Jack to fight the bear. They fought for many hours but the bear was too big and strong, even for all of the sons. The bear was enraged, bc it’s foot was hurt by them. It killed two of the sons and wounded the others and then went back to its lair. Two weeks later, the bear and its mate, came upon Jack’s cottage. They killed all the remaining lambs and knocked over a burning lantern, the lantern caught fire to the barn and store houses, destroying all the produce, This time the bears quickly left, before they could be attacked. Jack ran to the Otans, “Help the bears have attacked my home and the place is on fire!” So the Otan Family all quickly went and helped to extinguish the blaze. Five of the sons all stayed with Jack, “We’ll help to rebuild the farm and this time we’ll stay with you, to guard against the bears. They all worked hard to rebuild the farm and the Otans pitched their tent next to Jack’s cottage. But the bears came in the night and killed three of the sons as they slept. Jack and the other two sons ran back to Old Sam Otan and reported the news. Old Sam Otan wept bitterly in his grief and the shock nearly killed him. “Right this time, take some horses and wear armour and buy some new lances and we’ll finish the bears off for good. So six of the sons saddled their horses and went to find the bears. They rode to the forest and crossed the stream that runs from the mountains. They rode for four days and eventually found the bears trail. The eldest son said, “Right we’ll camp here for the night and at dawn we’ll attack the bears. What could possibly go wrong?” The bears caught the scent of the Otan party and came upon them in the darkness. The great bear with his mate and all their cubs with them. They killed all the horses and all of the sons as well, except one who barely managed to escape. He ran all the way home and reported the news. Old Father Otan, his wife and remaining children were stricken with grief. They held council and after many days, they came up with a plan. “Right!” said Old Sam Otan, “I’ve had enough of this great bear! I’ve lost 11 of my sons and we only have 5 left. 7 of my daughters are strong and old enough to fight, as well as any man. We’ll all go to Jack’s cottage together that makes 12 and myself 13. We’ll make traps and build strong fences and walls around the farm.” So they all went to Jack’s farm and did as they had planned and two weeks later the great bear, came to Jack’s farm with his family. The bear saw how strong the defences were, he hesitated and looked across the valley. He saw the Otan house with no walls and no one there, except some young girls and old mother Otan. He had grown tired of the taste of lambs, chickens and horses and now he wanted something else. So the great bear and his family went back to the forest and waited for night to come. He took his family to the Otan house and then charged in with speed and fury. All the bears smashed the doors and windows open and ran through the house, but there was no one there, the house was empty. All of a sudden there was a blast of hunting horns and a great cacophony of noise. The house was surrounded by Jack and all the Otans. Old mother Otan had been warned, by her pet falcon, of an approaching danger and had left with her daughters and gone to her sister’s house. She had sent a carrier pigeon to Old Sam Otan at Jack’s cottage, who ambushed the bears. “Fire!” Screamed Old Sam Otan at the top of his voice and they all hurled their burning torches at the house. Some of the bears ran out and were cut down as they ran and the house burned to the ground. Old Sam Otan and his company went through the ashes and counted all the dead bears. “They’re all here!” said the eldest son, after laying the bears bodies out. “No wait a minute, there’s one missing!” They all scouted around the area, but the mate of the late great bear, was nowhere to be found..... The end?
How do you negotiate with someone who is being disingenuous and has an agenda they intend to pursue regardless of how much you compromise. Some people are just aggressive… The mistake some people make about the kinds of people described as ‘liberals’ is that they avoid conflict at all costs. This really isn’t true. A more accurate assessment is they tend to want to avoid conflict unless it’s required to stand up to bullies. Big difference.
It might have but I would bet it didn't because the American foreign policy top of the Agenda is to destroy Russia and undermine Putins power. It's sad but our politicians have a way of not realising we are interconnected and we all need eachother. It doesn't matter what colour our skin is or what part of the world we come from, as humans we need eachother and the day we and our politicians realise that, the better our experience on this earth will be.
@@eekiane1921 , oh no. Another "blame it on America" guy. I suppose Putin is innocent in all that's happened. Maybe he is the one that needs to realize the interconnectedness of everything.
The biggest problem in all discussions like this one is that American “gurus” like this one judge historic events a without knowing the history. Relations between countries in Europe have hundreds and even more than a thousand years of history. And almost all have roots and live in the past. Trying to analyze today’s situation between Ukraine and Russia without knowing that past is pointless. And this “guru” does not even mentioned that history from X to XXI century. The same was true during the war Balkans in 1990s. Nobody payed any attention to the fact that for Serbians that war was a payback for losing important battle 600 years ago. American analytics may laugh at that, but ask Serbians, and they will tell you.
History is not something Americans care about, because we are afraid of looking at our own history: slavery, racism, genocide, wars, assassinations, regime changes... The more you look at America's past actions, the more convinced you would be that the US is the real aggressor and villain.
@@dznuts123 I completely disagree with you. First, hating your own country became fashionable over the last 50 years in the US, and it is completely irrelevant in this case. Second, countries of the Old World have so much blood and mistreatment of each other in their history that Americans cannot even imagine. And third, American historians do not understand the relevance and importance of the history for Europeans. For the most part, Americans look forward in their lives trying to improve it. Europeans mostly look back in attempt to find who is responsible for their problems. And this is why America is spearheading all technology advancements, and the rest of the world only follows. My point about this lecturer is very simple. He is looking at the problem between Russia and Ukraine seeing only the last 100 years or so. And the problem goes more than a millennium back to the X century, to the time of Vladimir the Great ruling that land from his capital Kiev, and bringing Orthodox Christianity into this land from Byzantine Empire in 988. Moscow did not exist at that time at all. First time it was mentioned 200 years later. And now, when Moscow want to rule this land they are trying to make historical claims, etc., but they have no foundation to claim their rights! And that is the problem for them. This is why they are trying to destroy Ukraine!!! For most of the people in the West that may sound laughable, but that points only to how much misunderstanding of Russia and what drives it there is in the US and the rest of the Western World.
@@zeigezunt6223 The problem is the US hasn’t learned from its mistakes or tried to be a better player on the international stage. This is actually the same case that you describe, albeit for different countries. History still very much influences the US’s actions.
If you are worrying about trying to "pay back" something which happened 500 years before you were born (ie didn't happen to you, wasn't perpetrated by the people you're fighting, and has no *real* effect on your life) then you are pathetic, and deserve whatever terrible result befalls you. Appealing to ancient history is even worse than just saying "because I feel like it," because at least pure selfishness as a motive is *honest*, whereas ancient history is no better than superstition. None of us were there 500 or 1000 years ago and we have no idea what really happened, only what we were told. History is an important lens to understand how things became as they are, but it is no justification to do evil.
@@thevoxdeus You are confirming exactly what I said about Americans trying to analyze European events without any understanding what is behind them, what drives people to behave the way they do. You can call people "pathetic" as much as you want, you can judge them, tell them that they are horrible and wrong, but doing so you do not gain any understanding of why people behave that way, and thus your conclusion are of no use.
BEFORE YOU ASK THAT QUESTION , why was the usa and nato son intent on Ukraine becoming a member of military alliance that justify the huge expenses on weapons thus antagonising Russia ,
If you can state the pretext for Russias invasion without spending significant time covering the Minsk agreements then I can come to only two conclusions: you don't really understand or you don't want others to understand.
NATO attacked itself when two NATO members (USA and Norway) attacked another NATO member. What does this mean for the future of NATO and how history will remember it?
I disagree with one of the last possible outcomes the lecturer about is when he says one of the negotiated settlements might include a 'security guarantee'. That is why the US and UK are so ahead in providing heavy weapons so quickly. When Ukraine was persuaded to give up the nuclear weapons (although Russia had the codes) the UK, US and ironically Russia, all agreed to guarantee immediate security in case of an incursion by another country which is exactly what we have now so I don't think Ukraine is going to fall for that 'guarantee' again anytime soon!
On the other side of the coin, the Minsk agreement was about guaranteeing the security of the Donetsk and Lugansk Regions. Ukraine took now notice, killing 14K people between 2014 and 2022 and continuing arbitrary, random shelling of the areas killing innocent civilians (including children) even days before the Special Military Operation was launched. There are always two sides to each coin.
Russia doesn't need a "buffer zone" if it does not have aggressive neighbors!! While I have a huge respect for Thomas Graham's analysis, I think he frequently bends over backwards to accommodate the Putin Regime Mentality. Are we really to take so much to heart the 19th century expansionist ambitions of what amount to a Mafia gang of profiteers? Can we not be a little more optimistic and hope for regime change after this war that is going so disastrously for the Russian side at the moment? If we can exercise a little patience while maintaining steady pressure with armaments and sanctions there is every reason to believe Putin will not survive long to remain in charge.
Was Cuba an aggressive neighbour to the USA in 1962? Your theory is compromised before you even finish writing. You need to listen to more of these shows my friend and less CNN and other MSM. .... "going so disastrously for the Russian side"..... as a sea of red slowly creeps down the Eastern side of Ukraine ....? ... sanctions that are now being wound back because they are hurting the Europeans more than Russia.... Forrest? Trees??
@@ominousbiscuit Latvia’s defense minister, Artis Pabriks: "If we were not now a member of NATO or the European Union, we would share the fate of Ukraine now. It would be guaranteed that Russia would invade us. Now they can’t do this because we are a member of NATO.”.
Neville Chamberlain = Appeasement. "We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters." - Ronald Reagan
The opening statement does not include the last 8 years of suffering of the people in the Donbas region. This omission makes all discussions untrustworthy.
If the US was fully aware of the scope and power of Russia's military capabilities and had the accurate intelligence data on Russia's imminent attack on Ukraine, why weren't they more resolute in trying to initiate diplomatic resolution of the problem? It seems that both USA and Russia were engaged in a waiting game of sorts, trying to assess and test each other's plans and ambitions. Did Washington probably think that Putin's invasion was just an effort to try to strengthen political pressure via military posturing, and that open war would probably be something that both sides would try to avoid? This would makes sense if we take seriously prof. Graham's assumption that Putin would be happy with NATO's retreat from Ukraine's territory, along with the incorporation of smaller parts od eastern Ukraine into Russia's sphere of influence. It seems to me that there's a lot of speculation on what would be the optimal scenario for everyone, but I suspect that's in part because we don't really know the crucial details of Russia's true agenda.
The Tale of Jack Kiev. Once upon a time, there was a small boy, called Jack Kiev. He was 12 years old and was an orphan. When his mother died recently, he inherited her cottage, with a little bit of land. He worked hard all day every day, cultivating his plot and producing a good yield. He had some extra vegetables and chickens, so he took them to the market for sale. At the market, the elder sons and daughters, of the Otan Family, came and bought his produce. They asked the boy, “Who is in charge of the business, as we need a regular supply? We would like to discuss business and come to some arrangement.” Jack said, “I’m in charge of the business! For I am an orphan and I will supply your needs.” So they signed a contract and Jack’s spirits were lifted, for he was quite sad and lonely. Once a week he went to the Otan household and delivered the wares that they needed and they paid him kindly. Sometime soon after, the Otan Family asked Jack to help with some chores, cutting grass and painting the shed. The Otan house, was very large with many rooms, for they had 16 sons and 17 daughters, who were always kind to Jack, so they became good friends. Jack was overjoyed with finding friendship with the Otan Family. Jack was always hardworking and never failed to be productive. As his own homestead and finance grew, he bought some sheep and reared lambs. Old Father Sam Otan was pleased with Jack. So when Jack turned 14, he made a promise to him. “When you turn 16, you can marry, whichever of my daughters that you find to be most beautiful and you will be my Son!” Jack nearly fainted and cried aloud, “Thank you Father Sam! God has truly blessed me! May Heaven and Earth hold dear to your promise.” One month later, an angry bear from the forest, came upon Jack’s cottage and ravaged his flock and stole some sheep. Jack was mortified and ran to the Otan house. “Help help! There’s a bear at my home, who’s killed my sheep!” The Otan Family were shocked and said, “Don’t worry we will stand by you and help to fight the bear.” So they sent two of the younger sons, who brought their slings and spears and went with Jack to fight the bear. But the bear was too big and strong for them to kill it. But they managed to scare the bear enough, so that it went away. “Thank you for your help!” said Jack and the two sons went back to their home. A couple of weeks passed by and the angry bear came back to Jack’s cottage, killing and eating some lambs. Jack ran to the Otans, “Help help! The bear has come back!” So three of the sons, went with Jack and they all fought against the bear. This time the bear hurt Jack and killed one of the sons and then went back to his lair. The sons went back to their home and reported the news. Two more weeks passed by and the bear came back to Jack’s cottage. It caused great damage to the chicken shed, broke some fences and killed all the chickens. Jack ran back to the Otans and this time, four of the sons, all armed with new swords and shields, went with Jack to fight the bear. They fought for many hours but the bear was too big and strong, even for all of the sons. The bear was enraged, bc it’s foot was hurt by them. It killed two of the sons and wounded the others and then went back to its lair. Two weeks later, the bear and its mate, came upon Jack’s cottage. They killed all the remaining lambs and knocked over a burning lantern, the lantern caught fire to the barn and store houses, destroying all the produce, This time the bears quickly left, before they could be attacked. Jack ran to the Otans, “Help the bears have attacked my home and the place is on fire!” So the Otan Family all quickly went and helped to extinguish the blaze. Five of the sons all stayed with Jack, “We’ll help to rebuild the farm and this time we’ll stay with you, to guard against the bears. They all worked hard to rebuild the farm and the Otans pitched their tent next to Jack’s cottage. But the bears came in the night and killed three of the sons as they slept. Jack and the other two sons ran back to Old Sam Otan and reported the news. Old Sam Otan wept bitterly in his grief and the shock nearly killed him. “Right this time, take some horses and wear armour and buy some new lances and we’ll finish the bears off for good. So six of the sons saddled their horses and went to find the bears. They rode to the forest and crossed the stream that runs from the mountains. They rode for four days and eventually found the bears trail. The eldest son said, “Right we’ll camp here for the night and at dawn we’ll attack the bears. What could possibly go wrong?” The bears caught the scent of the Otan party and came upon them in the darkness. The great bear with his mate and all their cubs with them. They killed all the horses and all of the sons as well, except one who barely managed to escape. He ran all the way home and reported the news. Old Father Otan, his wife and remaining children were stricken with grief. They held council and after many days, they came up with a plan. “Right!” said Old Sam Otan, “I’ve had enough of this great bear! I’ve lost 11 of my sons and we only have 5 left. 7 of my daughters are strong and old enough to fight, as well as any man. We’ll all go to Jack’s cottage together that makes 12 and myself 13. We’ll make traps and build strong fences and walls around the farm.” So they all went to Jack’s farm and did as they had planned and two weeks later the great bear, came to Jack’s farm with his family. The bear saw how strong the defences were, he hesitated and looked across the valley. He saw the Otan house with no walls and no one there, except some young girls and old mother Otan. He had grown tired of the taste of lambs, chickens and horses and now he wanted something else. So the great bear and his family went back to the forest and waited for night to come. He took his family to the Otan house and then charged in with speed and fury. All the bears smashed the doors and windows open and ran through the house, but there was no one there, the house was empty. All of a sudden there was a blast of hunting horns and a great cacophony of noise. The house was surrounded by Jack and all the Otans. Old mother Otan had been warned, by her pet falcon, of an approaching danger and had left with her daughters and gone to her sister’s house. She had sent a carrier pigeon to Old Sam Otan at Jack’s cottage, who ambushed the bears. “Fire!” Screamed Old Sam Otan at the top of his voice and they all hurled their burning torches at the house. Some of the bears ran out and were cut down as they ran and the house burned to the ground. Old Sam Otan and his company went through the ashes and counted all the dead bears. “They’re all here!” said the eldest son, after laying the bears bodies out. “No wait a minute, there’s one missing!” They all scouted around the area, but the mate of the late great bear, was nowhere to be found.... The end?
12:30 "You add to that the Europeans failure to fill the gas storage facilities adequately" is just wrong. Gasprom Germania - which runs the storage facilities - belongs to Russia and they let the storage empty out in a strategic move to use gas supply as a weapon.
@@stevenlight5006 Not if I was trying to win a long term peace, no. All this has done is ensure that the entire continent of Europe will wean itself off Russian energy as fast as it can, so that it can never again be held hostage. It is the biggest own goal, possibly ever. The Russian economy may never recover.
Would I have done the same if I were Putin? The same being: Attacking a neighbour to restore some 19th century imperialistic dream of a Russian empire? Preparing the war by betraying the trust of the Germans who put their strategic gas reserves in the hand of a foreign nation? Lying in the face of Western diplomats who sat at that ridiculously long table for a year although I had already decided to invade? Indiscriminately shelling civilians, hospitals and schools? No, I wouldn't have.
Not true, the delivery of gas through NS2 was ready except for the valves to be opened. When you go to the shop to buy something you only get the item after paying. The same is true in the case of gasdelivery. The problems arose when European countries refused to pay. You're totally overlooking the power of the us and their crimnal behaivour re Europe and the EU.
What makes the wheat grow and ripen makes the tanks get stuck in the mud. So, we have both a wheat and tank shortage. I'm for the wheat, and forget about replacing the tanks.
"Our interests" and "right vs wrong" coincide exactly at the 1991 borders, because any other settlement sends a dangerous signal to both Russia others with imperial ambitions that borders can be moved by force.
It always amuses me when Russia is accused of breaking international law when the US has done that numerous times since the 2nd world war without the complaint leading to any sanctions what so ever...
Good analysis, but during Q and A they should be repeating the question into the mic so viewers can hear it, or subtitle the question while its being asked.
Our speaker should have had a better mike, or else two of those lousy ones (one slightly to his left, one slightly to his right). The sound was a failure worthy of the Russian army.
agreed. they could have had somebody passing a mic between the people asking question, ive seen that done in other Q&A sessions and it works well. it was also a little bit annoying how he kept turning his head to address the room as he spoke, getting louder and quieter as he moved past the mic.
There was no analysis, imo he was only giving his thoughts leaving our or rewriting facts, history and international law. IOW the american version of the truth.
They keep repeating the nuclear threat as if it is real. Oh yeah, bio and nukes, keeps getting repeated. Putin has no need to use WMDs. Putin wants to take Ukraine intact, not destroyed. Do you think Putin could level Ukraine with conventional arms if it wanted to? Hum what do you think? Could the USA level other nations with bombs? Hum, like endless bombs in WW2. Oh wait, that happened already!
Status of Ukraine = an existential question for the fantasy world that Putin has created and sold everywhere to his high Power-Distance Index population. It's the Disneyland of FSB.
That is because there is us and there is them. We are antithetical. Why would you expect us to be sympathetic to Putin's twisted point of view. If Putin drops a book on his toe, he thinks that it is the result of a western plot. The Putin regime is just a criminal organization, how could we agreed to its continued existence?
Victim blaming, it's like Nelson (Putin) to Martin (Zelensky) from the Simpsons ... stop hitting yourself (Nelson uses Martin hand to punch himself in the face) . . . the reason that Warsaw pact countries despise and fear Russian aggression is because they lived under the Soviet jackboot after the Ribbentrop - Molotov pact and end of WWII . . . nations and their people want to live free from tyranny and this means the western model though not without flaws is infinitely preferred over the authoritarian central planning model with Moscow and it's commissars at the centre
west and new world order are dying. after they done, we'll SINGLE PICK any individual about "opinions" and "thoughts" and will be proccessed in public trials (5 mins each criminal at best) before they are hung
Hmm, like the US geriatric presidents, you seem have not noticed recent developments... the Soviet Union disappeared in the previous century... and the leadership of Ukraine has had its independence wrested from it by a bunch of thugs who cover their bodies in swastika tatoos.... clearly not the types who really object to jackboots... so long as they are the ones using them.
NOT WITHOUT FLAWS' HAHAHA THE US A CORRUPT AND DECADENT MODEL OF GOVERNANCE, DESTROYING COUNTRIES AS THEY PLEASE TO STEAL AND IMPOSE THEIR RULES. US IS A ROGUE STATE, NOT WITHOUT FLAWS.
@@docprune9922 It is alive in Putins heart, as well as in hearts of his supporters. Everyone of them believes that there is a war between Russia and USA.
This certainly hasn't aged well. The "distinguished" scholar apparently gets his facts from the mainstream media and like a crow too clever by half, falls into an intellectual trap!
But it gets more following/funding/support than a more rigorous approach. After all, most people just want support for a certain narrative rather than truth.
@@MichaelKoksharov and what's the truth? What you want to believe? And this guy who has studied this stuff for decades...his views just don't matter if they don't match up with what you want to believe. And that's how it is with almost everyone. It is hard, maybe impossible, to find someone who really wants to know "the truth".
If the USA should have used negotiation as a tactic to delay Russia's deployment of a military option, then surely that's an admission that there was little expectation of good faith negotiation and therefore why imagine Russia was negotiating in anything like good faith to begin with? In the Balkans 30 years ago, the Vance-Owens negotiations achieved nothing but delay to the international response to the escalating ethnic-cleansing that was taking place - those negotiations were being held with bad faith actors and were used as cover by the Serbian forces to continue its depopulation strategies. Russia's intentions are clear: Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine. Their methods are deadly and their stock of good faith is nil. An early defeat is a less costly defeat - allowing Adolf Hitler to occupy Czechoslovakia without opposition created a much more powerful opponent that inevitably had to be faced later on. Europe has learned that lesson and that's why they are acting on the Ukraine invasion.
Take it from their viewpoint. NATO is pushing towards their borders (What for?) If they do not fight them in Ukraine, they will fight them at the gates of Moscow, just as they did couple of times before. This is about power projection, and nothing else.
@@robrob9050 NATO's been on their border since 1947, in Turkey. NATO only exists because of regimes in Russia that want to impose tyrannical regimes over other countries. NATO does not exist to invade other countries,l and never has done so. Russia has invaded Chechnya, Georgia, and Ukraine. Their intention is clear and it has nothing to do with NATO.
I've come to this discussion a little late but would like to add the suggestion that there might be another element that could be Dr Graham's assessment of Putin's "basket of opportunities" in February 2022, namely the Covid pandemic. Might he have thought that in the early post-Covid recovery period the focus of the governments of the NATO member nation's might be turned inwards towards getting their societies and their economies back on track and less outward on overseas commitments.
The Tale of Jack Kiev. Once upon a time, there was a small boy, called Jack Kiev. He was 12 years old and was an orphan. When his mother died recently, he inherited her cottage, with a little bit of land. He worked hard all day every day, cultivating his plot and producing a good yield. He had some extra vegetables and chickens, so he took them to the market for sale. At the market, the elder sons and daughters, of the Otan Family, came and bought his produce. They asked the boy, “Who is in charge of the business, as we need a regular supply? We would like to discuss business and come to some arrangement.” Jack said, “I’m in charge of the business! For I am an orphan and I will supply your needs.” So they signed a contract and Jack’s spirits were lifted, for he was quite sad and lonely. Once a week he went to the Otan household and delivered the wares that they needed and they paid him kindly. Sometime soon after, the Otan Family asked Jack to help with some chores, cutting grass and painting the shed. The Otan house, was very large with many rooms, for they had 16 sons and 17 daughters, who were always kind to Jack, so they became good friends. Jack was overjoyed with finding friendship with the Otan Family. Jack was always hardworking and never failed to be productive. As his own homestead and finance grew, he bought some sheep and reared lambs. Old Father Sam Otan was pleased with Jack. So when Jack turned 14, he made a promise to him. “When you turn 16, you can marry, whichever of my daughters that you find to be most beautiful and you will be my Son!” Jack nearly fainted and cried aloud, “Thank you Father Sam! God has truly blessed me! May Heaven and Earth hold dear to your promise.” One month later, an angry bear from the forest, came upon Jack’s cottage and ravaged his flock and stole some sheep. Jack was mortified and ran to the Otan house. “Help help! There’s a bear at my home, who’s killed my sheep!” The Otan Family were shocked and said, “Don’t worry we will stand by you and help to fight the bear.” So they sent two of the younger sons, who brought their slings and spears and went with Jack to fight the bear. But the bear was too big and strong for them to kill it. But they managed to scare the bear enough, so that it went away. “Thank you for your help!” said Jack and the two sons went back to their home. A couple of weeks passed by and the angry bear came back to Jack’s cottage, killing and eating some lambs. Jack ran to the Otans, “Help help! The bear has come back!” So three of the sons, went with Jack and they all fought against the bear. This time the bear hurt Jack and killed one of the sons and then went back to his lair. The sons went back to their home and reported the news. Two more weeks passed by and the bear came back to Jack’s cottage. It caused great damage to the chicken shed, broke some fences and killed all the chickens. Jack ran back to the Otans and this time, four of the sons, all armed with new swords and shields, went with Jack to fight the bear. They fought for many hours but the bear was too big and strong, even for all of the sons. The bear was enraged, bc it’s foot was hurt by them. It killed two of the sons and wounded the others and then went back to its lair. Two weeks later, the bear and its mate, came upon Jack’s cottage. They killed all the remaining lambs and knocked over a burning lantern, the lantern caught fire to the barn and store houses, destroying all the produce, This time the bears quickly left, before they could be attacked. Jack ran to the Otans, “Help the bears have attacked my home and the place is on fire!” So the Otan Family all quickly went and helped to extinguish the blaze. Five of the sons all stayed with Jack, “We’ll help to rebuild the farm and this time we’ll stay with you, to guard against the bears. They all worked hard to rebuild the farm and the Otans pitched their tent next to Jack’s cottage. But the bears came in the night and killed three of the sons as they slept. Jack and the other two sons ran back to Old Sam Otan and reported the news. Old Sam Otan wept bitterly in his grief and the shock nearly killed him. “Right this time, take some horses and wear armour and buy some new lances and we’ll finish the bears off for good. So six of the sons saddled their horses and went to find the bears. They rode to the forest and crossed the stream that runs from the mountains. They rode for four days and eventually found the bears trail. The eldest son said, “Right we’ll camp here for the night and at dawn we’ll attack the bears. What could possibly go wrong?” The bears caught the scent of the Otan party and came upon them in the darkness. The great bear with his mate and all their cubs with them. They killed all the horses and all of the sons as well, except one who barely managed to escape. He ran all the way home and reported the news. Old Father Otan, his wife and remaining children were stricken with grief. They held council and after many days, they came up with a plan. “Right!” said Old Sam Otan, “I’ve had enough of this great bear! I’ve lost 11 of my sons and we only have 5 left. 7 of my daughters are strong and old enough to fight, as well as any man. We’ll all go to Jack’s cottage together that makes 12 and myself 13. We’ll make traps and build strong fences and walls around the farm.” So they all went to Jack’s farm and did as they had planned and two weeks later the great bear, came to Jack’s farm with his family. The bear saw how strong the defences were, he hesitated and looked across the valley. He saw the Otan house with no walls and no one there, except some young girls and old mother Otan. He had grown tired of the taste of lambs, chickens and horses and now he wanted something else. So the great bear and his family went back to the forest and waited for night to come. He took his family to the Otan house and then charged in with speed and fury. All the bears smashed the doors and windows open and ran through the house, but there was no one there, the house was empty. All of a sudden there was a blast of hunting horns and a great cacophony of noise. The house was surrounded by Jack and all the Otans. Old mother Otan had been warned, by her pet falcon, of an approaching danger and had left with her daughters and gone to her sister’s house. She had sent a carrier pigeon to Old Sam Otan at Jack’s cottage, who ambushed the bears. “Fire!” Screamed Old Sam Otan at the top of his voice and they all hurled their burning torches at the house. Some of the bears ran out and were cut down as they ran and the house burned to the ground. Old Sam Otan and his company went through the ashes and counted all the dead bears. “They’re all here!” said the eldest son, after laying the bears bodies out. “No wait a minute, there’s one missing!” They all scouted around the area, but the mate of the late great bear, was nowhere to be found.... The end?
The Western media and policy establishment would call a nuclear strike on Moscow "defensive", in their opinion Russia has no right to do anything except sit there while NATO prepares to encircle and destroy them.
No, for Russia there is nothing to fear from NATO as long it does not attack one of its members because its a defensive alliance. The Europeans have much better things to do with their money then playing war in remote places. That time of Empires is gone. The European major powers finished that game with WW1&2. Thats why you have diplomacy and economy. BTW, the same game that China is playing! Remember Iraq and how Bush needed the "Coalition of the Willing?" that alone shows you the unwillingness of European NATO member states to play war. Yes, the UK played along and what did it get out of it? NOTHING! Say what you want about US military adventures, at least they dont threaten nuclear exchange when things go south for them. Regarding your question what Russia should do, get its house in order. Russia is on paper super wealthy but has the same GDP as Italy! Seriously? Neither are the Russians dumb or lazy but with the current system in place which promots corruption and oppression this will not end well for the Russian people. Major mistakes were made after the disolvement of the Eastern Block and the US is a good deal to blame for that but also Europe was distracted by the Yugoslavian Civil War and Iraq. Instead of sending business consultants to Russia they rather should have send lawyers and NGOs to promote the development of civic society. There is much, much more to say on that topic but this is to long for a YT comment section. PS The one thing one can do as a Russian is to support the brave Russian citizens who demonstrate against this stupid war. When I go to the streets to demonstrate, nothing happens to me, they are risking life and limb by showing up!
3:08 "to contain USSR that is Russia" - this distinguished gentlemen doesn't understand that it is not even close to same. An expert for western Europe wouldn't say "United Kingdom that is England" or "US that is Texas" or "EU that is Germany". Can not even listen that simple man hegemonic thoughts further.
I agree. USSR is NOT Russia today ! Russia a free and sovereign state that returned the priesthood of the church that the USSR killed entirely in its time.
Great response, Guzjebesku. The Ukrainian ambassador to Norway pointed this out clearly. He said that the Red Army that liberated northern Norway in 1945, was something completely different from the Russian aggressors that are invading Ukraine now.
When you are running a "Q & A" session it always pays to pass a microphone around the audience. (Assuming, of course, that you're even interested in hearing the question in the first place.)
Where on Earth people assume Russia´s plan was to take Kiev in a few days? When a single Russian official even suggested taking Kiev was in their plans? I have not heard or read a single source citing a Russian authority admitted that was their original plan. Hours before the invasion, Putin in its speech set up four goals, and they have been working in them. And none of them was taking territory in central or western Ukraine.
I made it only to the 24th minutes. That was plenty enough. There is no proof whatsoever Russia used chemical weapons in Syria. Actually, the Syrian forces were accused, but it was quickly disproof as a propaganda maneuvering by the revels. The first speaker repeated too many Western points lacking any substance.
Why do I never come across the assertion, or assessment that Putin could simply not stand the fear that Ukraine would do better then Russia on all fronts, under democracy, and that this would contaminate Russia to also want democracy. (and to some extend that Putin also wanted to punish Ukrain for wanting to abolish autocracy.) Sure, Ukraine is also tremendous food supplier and geographicly important, but if Russia had decided to compete with usa on grounds of less hypocrisy in matters of humanitarian and democratic goals - it would have won all the sympathy of the world it feels humiliating and is furious about not to have.
I did. I think it was an analysis by some Polish expert. He said almost exactly what you are saying: that it is insult for the Russian leaders, that people who are mentally so close to Russians can chose western values and political system, and do much better thanks to that. Perhaps we, Poles know Russians better. We fought with them, we were occupied by them, but also loved them. For instance my grandfather was Polish and grandmother was Russian :-)
@@marek-kulczycki-8286 why you are saying that Ukrainians are close mentally to Russians? That what Russian propaganda would say. And how recent events are backing your point?
@@vanone8454 Firstly: I was quoting somenone which was clearly indicated. Secondly: For the matter discussed it's more important how Russian powers are seeing this topic, then what is the real picture. And lastly: I knew closely people of many origins. From my experience Russians are very similar to us - Poles, while I can tell the same about Ukrainians. If you take an average German, Englishman, Aussie - there will be a noticeable difference in behavior. I am talking about averages, because there are for instance extreme Russian nationalists with whom I can't find a way to communicate. If we take two persons of a totally different social background - this can play a more significant role then ethnic origins. This is the war of the systems, not mentalities. Civil wars tend to be the bloodiest ones.
I do appreciate these discussions, as it shows what the line of thought is from a western perspective regarding the lead-up to the war and where we are now. However, their proposed solution of an eventual partition of Ukraine, as well as its rejection to NATO as a compromise for ending the war is a fatal mistake. In the annals of Russian power, displays of strength and brutality are what make and break empires. Concession would only reinforce Putin's (and the Russian elite) conviction that now is the time to push hard at dismantling the liberal international order. Appeasement, just as in WWII, would bring Russia closer to direct confrontation with NATO.
thanks John, I think you are right, much as Biden and NATO don't want to hear that. Eventually to save Ukraine from a rout, it will mean boots on the ground, planes in the air, and A-10 Warthogs going after all that Russian artillery and rocketry. From wherever it is firing. Had the US, Briton, France and Poland even sent a regiment each before the invasion - since their intelligence proved so accurate - sent them to the vicinity of the major cities but not right to the Russian border, Putin might not have done it. Putin has read us and especially Biden and Germans the way the Nazi leadership read the West, 1935-1939, especially the failure to intervene in the Spanish Civil War, 1936-1938. Now it's hell to pay, with the bill mainly due in Ukrainian blood and structures, all of civil society in ruin in many parts of their country. I'm on the left, but I break with them on this issue.
(Disclaimer: I’m not the lady in the helmet, but she hangs w/ me a lot.) The complaint about “institutes” being off-base is utterly clueless, and typical of ignorant Yanks who demand definitive facts about deeply nuanced situations, and recklessly disclaim responsibility for contributing to sort out the fog of (not so much war as typical INTERnational) affairs. …One is tempted to invoke the model of “praying in one’s own closet.”
Actually, the situation is quite opposite. Russia has done a lot to reset relations with the collective West after the Cold War: they dismantled the Warsaw Pact, abandoned communism, dismantled USSR, allowing former Soviet Republics to become independent, stopped flying strategic bombers next to NATO borders, allowed western experts to inspect nuclear installations, signed a treaty to decrease the number of nuclear weapons, opened up its market to western capital and goods. etc. The West, on the other side, continued flying strategic bombers next to Russian borders, thus showing they still considered Russia an enemy, published online the locations all ex-Soviet nuclear facilities, financed anti-Russian propaganda in ex-Soviet republics, trying to lush them away from Russia, armed and financed radical muslim terrorists from Caucasus, organised a coup in Ukraine, and installed a puppet anti-Russian government in Kiev, encouraged them to start and continue an 8-year-long war in Donbas against their own Russian speaking citizens, and armed and trained their army. The West also broke the agreement not to expand NATO over ex Warsaw Pact countries several times, installed launchers that can fire nuclear missiles in Poland and Romania, and talked about accepting Ukraine in NATO, too, which would allow NATO to put launchers that could reach Russian nuclear missiles in just 5 to 20 minutes. So, it was not concession and appeasement that brought West and Russia to the brink of WW3, but continuous hard line policy of hostility and ignoring any Russian interests or security concerns. That showed Russia that concessions to the collective West were mistake, and that they need to start talking the language of the West - the language of force.
Hardly anybody takes the Kremlin propaganda seriously anymore so spare yourself the trouble. Russia is a mafia state run by a brutal dictator who poisons his political opponents. He is trying to rebuild the Russian/Soviet empire. Fortunately, it looks like his kleptocratic regime (corrupt to the core, based on lies and oppression) will not be able to achieve this.
I don't really like the "if things had been different in the past, would they be different now?" question, because that's just impossible to know and will probably be answered with "obviously yes" and "obviously no" depending on what position you want to argue for. (Personally I would just say that I don't have a reason to believe that things being different in the past would make it different now.)
If Ukraine had been left to its own devices it would remain in Russia's sphere of influence, trade etc. It's was the NATO empire's attempt at pulling it into theirs which split it in Two. The coup of 2004 was reversed because the majority are pro russian. In the 2014 madian coup the west and their ultra nationalist fractions/militias made sure that would not happen. Remember Zelensky elected on a strong peace platform and mandate to implement the Minsk accords but of course our empire couldn't let democracy run it's course. They WANTED this confrontation by proxy and they want to bleed Russia down to the last Ukrainian. Putin took the bait
so, what do you think of all the wars started by the USA since the fall of soviet union? if we want to get to the root of the matter, all the wars since the end of ww2?
Yes, he kinda carefully pointed out that what the first speaker brought up is nonsense to put it politely. Tbh I watched only the first 5 minutes of that and skipped to 39:22 in the hope of finding something more encouraging, I did. Other scholars, particularly those familiar with the inner workings of Russian during the last 20 years, have pointed out in multiple ways that the reason and trigger for Russia‘s Ukraine-war is solely found in the 21st century. That whole Nato-extension variant has been debunked extensively - in particular there were never treaties or promises forbidding independent countries to join Nato. The idea that bigger countries get a say about who their neighbor’s friends may or may not be is history. Also Putin himself is on the record stating that Ukraine in its borders is untouchable - that however must have been before 2006. At some point he found out that to western leaders he is a goon and Putin just didn’t deal well with it. What are a couple of ten-thousand dead compared to an imperator‘s hurt ego after all?
Its simple really: diplomacy only works when it is backed by military (and economic) power. Russia has to feel considerable pain before they will enter into negotiations.
@@tommyodonovan3883 Most of the country will be vapourized within half a day if they do and they know it. Their boomers under the ice are probably already being tracked. The planet community could survive it. Russia could not. If China is smart they'll stay the hell out of it.
I have a lot of Ukrainian friends who are fighting for their lives right now and the Western values that most of us believe in. If Russia takes Ukraine it destablizes Eastern Europe, NATO, and the existing World Order. I think Western interests overlap entirely with Ukrainian interests! I did not enjoy Thmas Graham emphasizing the Russian point of view at the start of this presentation. It could be looked at from a number of other angles. None of them are positive. The participant's later question on what would have happened without NATO expansion was very revealing as far as Russian aggression is concerned. Finally, the only comment Graham made about Ukraine was Zelensky's unpopularity. There was no real sensitivity or analysis on who they are and what they are fighting for. Just that the US and the Russians should settle the deal. It's really too bad that no educated Eastern European was there to challenge Graham's self-satisfying views. I would not go so far as to describe him as a ''fellow traveller'' but this presentation stuck in my throat.
sorry for my english , but any way i am understandable , i swear if not exoantion nato no one russia would aproove even crimea . We do not nead ukrain . they have nothing in comparrison damages and expeneses we face npw amd in a future . But now for us it is war for existence , like probable lounching war by US in carribean crisise . Pure and simpe . If you have a flate you do not have rights to keep explosives . be like switzerland and srtive .
Russia must not lose, the world order must change. The USA chose Ukraines destruction for their own ends. I lost my in Mar Mariupol and may lose the one in Kiev. I didn't want any of this. When you accept the US doesn't give a damn about Ukraine lives, or the country. That you've been shafted by the USA, then you will understand the picture
Why are your friends fighting for their lives NOW.... They have lived peacefully along side Russia since 1991, and been trading partners? Their families are intertwined? Only since the Vampire States Brainwashed them with their evil propaganda did they become destabilized... Russia will NOT TAKE Ukraine? Al they are there for is to DENAZIFY Ukraine, get them to declare NEUTRALITY and be INDEPENDENT of the VAMPIRES/NATO and the George Soros MAFIA? Russia bent over backward to prevent any bloodshed by sticking to the Minsk agreement, right until Donetsk and Luhansk declared Independence..When they agreed to send in a Peacekeeping Force to protect Donetsk and Luhansk that had been smashed, demoralised, terrorised. mutilated, raped and murdered for EIGHT YEARS from when the USA paid to foment trouble and create a regime change?.... Is your friend a Nazi? Explain if you can, how do Western interests overlap with Ukrainian? Do you mean they have given over all their untapped resources to the USA investors who have already paid their deposits, and agreed to give up all their young people to die in the Vampire's Proxy War for God only knows what? A medal? A cold grave? Or a mutilated body and mind?
@@Alexey1967And what about Sweden and Finland entering NATO. Are they existential as well for your survival??? No, the war is only existential for the survival of Putin and the nationalist extremists that support him. What you really fear in Ukraine is a successful democratic state which would humilate a totalitarian Russia. Please look yourself in the face and realize just how narrow and biased your arguments are!!!
@@barrylane1055 1. Wordl oder in you way is the freedom west to invaid in any countries , like iraq, lybia, syria ( us are still there ) , posibility to Push any country to accept you conditions . Ucrain had had not any rights to bobm donbass . Ucrain was de facto has began part of nato , and they had no any poroblem not provoke russians in ukrain , like in Belgium the manage language problems . They reale impose Nazi ideology . This fact you could not deny . They were instigated by US to try expell aour fleet from crimea. We just used time after coup in 2014 and ssisted crimea to select it's future. Finland and sweeden . That is not the same . They are realy peacefull . And we hope their membership is still on the table. Negociations wll be in a future . As we see we are not weak and for us it is decolonisation of russia. Saudies and Turkey request to be new members of BRICS . ISOLATION OF Rissia is going on)))) we glad how Venezuela and Arabs ignore USA . JUST BECAUSE OF ROSSIAN EXISTENCE . We are garant of realization of the Minsk treaties . Ukrain ignore them and terrorise donbass . So we are using compultion . Pere and simple . As usa do , when they allowed to do that . Drunk obedient poodle Eltsin wos friend of the west . Who argue ? We will crush ukranian NAZI regime , and we will back about where NATO should be in 1997 . We have differetn opinions . What is the reason and what the concecuence . It is sad if your friend will be dead or crippled . If Putin have leaved russians on donbass and crimea with NAZI without protection we would have not to vout for him . He knows that . Now we support his policy . In 1918 i escaped from hospital to vote for him. He is our leader , although i am not agreed with him in some steps, and priorities . But newer the less hi knows what hi does.
exactly, it doesn’t make sense to pretend Russia would respect diplomacy or reality any more than the mexican cartels would or Kim Jong Un for that matter.
@@skodalaskoda8754 Agreed. I think he mixed the two up. He needs to go over to Ukraine and meet the Azov Nasties. Organised crime and mafia pale in comparison to that sub-human group of people.
Please do yourself and everyone else a favor and invest in a headset microphone !!! It's very annoying when the volume varies drastically up and down every time you turn your head or lean forward / backward ect.ect. !!! People might be less inclined to tune out and move on and listen to what your subject matter is about !!!
Is Watson Institute an Israeli based NGO Think tank or a US based one? Either way this guy's assessment seems to be a resume for a job at the Used State Dept .. Would love to read their assessment of Afghanistan a year before it fell to the Taliban.. Or how Assad would be taken out within weeks of US involvement in Syria..
This guy thinks Putin was in this to negotiate? This was never just about NATO. This is about Russian nationalism, Ukrainian nationalism, and the belief in the Kremlin and certain other Russian military and intellectual circles that believe Ukraine as a nation should never have existed. He's completely glossing over the ideological portion of this war.
German would be the lingua franca and maybe "official" language of the world, most Jews would have been exterminated, there wouldn't even be a "Ukraine" or a "Russia" because of lebensraum...well you get the gist...
I'd love to start squatting on his land with guns and see if he negotiates or calls the cops to forcibly remove me. Then would he say the resulting shootout was could've been negotiated? Negotiation only works when both sides have a respected baseline. Academics...smh.
This guy would be in Berlin, talking about Hitler and how it was unfair what is being done to Germany both now and during the aftermath of WW1. In 1941 this guy would be on Hitlers side.
While it sounds like a dumb ad hitlerum, there is actually a plausible scenario that's fairly similar. Except it would involve the Allies not protecting Poland, so there's no war in the west. Germany and its fascist allies form a de facto EU (without France or the Low Countries). They hate "Russia" with a passion, which in turn is already a sworn enemy of the Allies. So the Allies had good reason to join the "EU" in an effort to take down the USSR. There's even some similarities in timeline: Russia had collapsed ~25 years before, was partially restored in a brutal civil war. Its current leader, Stalin, was a beast who had massacred millions, plotted to restore all of Russia, and ultimately (openly) wanted to take the world, and the USSR had done a lot more to try that, than Russia has. So there's a higher justification then than there is now. Ukraine's situation is slightly different: it was under Stalin's tyranny. Other than that, there was major Ukrainian nationalism, and a significant group that did join the nazis more fully, which is analogous. Finally, the situation has some comparison in the Winter War (likewise a Russian disaster, where the "EU" helped out Finland), so it's a thinkable scenario. For better analogy, we'll assume Hitler agreed to deport the Jews to Palestine (solves that morality) and is willing to let the Slavs die to natural population decline instead of a policy of sterilization. His ambitions were to incorporate a regime-changed European Russia into the Reich, which is a thinkable objective for our EU. Finally to launch the scenario, we assume Ukraine revolts while Russia is weakened by the Winter War, and grabs its current territory. Come 1941, Stalin attacks. The Reich ships arms, and is considering to intervene militarily. To what extent should the Allies, in this scenario, join Hitler in his efforts to at least help Ukraine, and probably take down Stalin's tyranny, and collapse the USSR?
Well, sanctions against the Russian Federation have caused the Russian GDP to drop by an estimated 10%. If the Russians lose in Ukraine, their GDP will drop by approximately 50%. This being the case, it's safe to say that sanctions are small potatoes. By the same token, western investment in Ukraine is a major factor in the run- up to this conflict- primarily because of the large reserves of natural gas discovered there in 2012. This is one of the two major reasons for the conflict.
@@turquoiseowl No you wake up from your conspiracy far right/left (either way it is bad) trip. People who think everything is a conspiracy are just lazy with a very weak educational background. Please start educating yourself outside of far right/left garbage on the internet.
@@fuerstmetternich1997 is the leaked recording of Victoria Nuland planning the next government leadership of Ukraine in Feb 2014 three weeks before the violent putsch that resulted in those very people becoming leaders a lazy conspiracy theory? how does an educated person such as yourself interpret that call out of interest?
@@turquoiseowl Dude I am pro democracy and anti-authoritarianism. I dont care by what means but I want every single oppressive corrupt governent including the Russian and Chinese government toppled. The corrupt pro Russia regime in Ukraine was rightly overthrown. Nobody needs fascist wannabe dictators! Also it was violent because the state shot at protesters, thats why it was violent.
Actually Putin only chose war after spending 8 years holding off on war in the hope that Ukraine would keep to it's commitments in regards the Minsk agreements. Now look at how quicky Bush Jnr chose to go to war against Iraq, which was far more brutal, murderous & destructive. The double standards & hypocrisy of the west in these regards are over the top.
Anyone who says they have the Russian playbook isn't worth listening to. -Colonel Douglas McGregor Anyone who thinks the Russians were trying to sack Kiev with 50000 troops doesn't know what they're talking about. -Everybody that knows anything about war.
Early on, he said Russia could never have hoped to join the EU. Why? A Russian leadership with a more democratic perspective could certainly have joined the EU and been an incredibly valuable member.
There would have been no money to be made for the Western arms industry like that, the American and other Western countries political system is almost completely lost to big Military, Pharma, Money, Food, Media who do control the levers of power.
On March 5, 2000, in an interview on the BBC, he stressed that "Russia is part of European culture" and that he had difficulty presenting NATO as an enemy, noted that Russia had a negative attitude towards NATO expansion, but did not ruled out Russia's entry into NATO, subject to the mutual interests of the parties. In 2010, in an article in the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, timed to take part in the annual economic forum, Putin suggested that the European Union create an economic alliance on the territory from Vladivostok to Lisbon, starting with the unification of customs tariffs and technical regulation, the abolition of the visa regime with the EU. In the European Union, by this time, they were busy with their own project aimed at involving the countries of the post-Soviet space in their orbit - the Eastern Partnership initiative, which involves the development of ties with Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. So draw your own conclusions.
JSC Early on Russia didn't want to join the EU, But then President Putin's Government decided it was a good idea, but they were then blocked.... Just as they were blocked from NATO, and now we know why. Because NATO was devised with the express purpose of "PUSHING BACK THE RUSSIAN HOARDS AND DISMANTLING IT" Those same hoards who lost 22 MILLION souls helping to eradicate the Nazis and keep Europe safe! And will do again. But this time the US have shown their true face as has the UK. We are now SUPPORTING THE NAZIS.
Agree with most of your points. The Perun TH-cam channel has published a series of videos on the Russian- Ukrainian conflict that goes in-depth on numerous related topics. Even if Putin was to succeed in regime change, at this point Russia has lost on the strategic front by unifying Ukraine as a nation state, unifying the EU, EU NATO membership military expenditure increases, Finland and Sweden applying to join NATO, long term infrastructure builds will change EU usage of Russian energy forever, western corporations leaving Russia for years to come, Russian educated population leaving Ukraine, etc. PS - Russia did sign on to respecting Ukrainian borders which Russia, USA, UK and France acted as guarantors PS2 - Trump administration spent 4 years interfering with Ukraine and undermining things in general. It is a miracle that Russia didn’t win outright. PS3 - will any European country / politician ever trust Russia?
The agreement also included that foreign governments wouldn't interfere in their politics and military which US violated from 2013 to now. So the agreement was voided due to the actions of corrupt politicians in Ukraine and the US violating the agreement.
If Russia wins the eastern side Dinieper river of Ukraine the Russian speaking people will support Russia overwhelmingly therefore Russia will have full control there. That in 2014, Russia did not help the aspirations of Russian speaking people of Ukraine less Donbas n Crimea, this time when special operations was launched by Russia they didn’t show outwardly support as they were not sure if Russia real wanted real estate in Ukraine. Whatever other might propagate on all people of Ukraine uniting is not true.
@@ExCommie yes US violated moment Victoria Nuland declared on her alleged speech tape given out by Russia that they have spent more than five billion dollars for installing their choice of regime in Kyiv.
What happened to the questions that were in the “speed round”? The video jumps over all of these and goes to the end where Graham is responding to a question not in the video.
Please read history, it would be helpful for a responsive and responsible guy like you. After all , it is guys like you and me who fix a policy. No offense, bro but a suggestion. Thanks and Peace.
Peter - EXACTLY!!! And the same old rhetoric that preceded Iraq/ Afghanistan/Libya and Syria. Not to mention Lebanon/Egypt/Etitrea/Somalia/Ethoipia/Yemen. The Vampire Parasites and their attack dogs NATO and the MAFIA will never be content until they own ALL the world's resources and are left with only a few slaves to work their precious metal/diamond/opal mines and oil drilling rigs. What is so special about Ukraine all of a sudden? Open Wiki and see what they are sitting on. Billions in untapped resources that the investors have already paid a deposit on. That's why they won't negotiate with Russia. For after Ukraine it will be on to Russia that has more minerals and precious resources than ALL THE REST OF THE WORLD PUT TOGETHER. Never forget the role of Rothschild and Rockefellers who actually control the whole shebang.....
interesting and I agree that we didnt reach out a hand to Russia when we could have .. we were triumphalist BUT the idea that we just had over millions of humans to this heinous capitalist yet autocratic regime just because they might kill us all is utter nonsense... we have chosen a reasonable if cowardly strategy to support a nation which has proven its determination and now alas pushing Russia beyond what they may consider acceptable is inevitable. if irrationality kills us all ..it wont be our irrationality, the reality is, as with all human resistance is that its better to be dead than a Russian citizen under this regime I regret to say .
It's never been about Russia being concerned about NATO. It's always been about Russia wanting Ukrainian oil, gas, coal, and manufacturing. Russia didn't invade Georgia because they were worried about Georgia joining NATO. This is just the current excuse. Russia wants two things: Russia wants money and Russia wants all the old Soviet satellites back. Russia wants her empire back along with the prestige and power that goes along with it. Everything else is just Russia denying, deflecting and misleading. I believe it's referred to as the Russian firehose of falsehoods. We couldn't have reached out to Russia to placate them. The Russians ignored the diplomatic agreements they already had in place. The sooner the world figures out that the Russians are lying, murdering, thieves and that any and all diplomatic agreements are absolutely pointless, the better for all. Except for the Russians failing militarily this all went exactly according to plan. And that's where Putin really failed. It will be decades before corporations and countries trust the Russians and invest there again. The money is gone and it's not coming back.
I disagree. Europe more than any other has bent over backwards to appease Russia for decades, the USA in the 90s did many things to try to make Russia's transition easier. I'm not saying they were well thought out or that there weren't things the US to to also make it worse, but to act as if it never happened is to misrepresent what was done. See link for a timeline 2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/85962.htm
1. he's right about the failure of the US in the earlier negotiations with Russia well before the war began, all the way back to the early 2000's: we did not take Russian Russia seriously, the imbalance of power was too great in our favor. 2.He never refers to Professor Mearsheimer, who is the outspoken and serious defender of balance of power and spheres of influence and other nation's claims to "Monroe Doctrine's" of their own...if he doesn't take Mearsheimer seriously there is no hope for a citizen like me. 3. And there is no sense of historical movement - that Putin's internal conduct towards critics, or towards Syrians or Chechnya is a factor in how the former satellites look at this dynamic since 1989-1991...this pushes them towards NATO obviously...at what point NATO says no we have to live with Russia... 4. there has been a Civil War between the US and Russian inside Ukraine since...at least 2004, in many ways resembling the Spanish Civil War between 1936-1938 just as brutal on a smaller scale but which escalates in 2014... 5. He doesn't seem to evaluate the military aid given to Ukraine accurately: always too little too late and done with the primary eye not to escalate or anger Putin... 6. I've framed this as a war between the US and Russia by Ukrainian surrogate: very much like the losing of the Spanish Civil war to Franco and the Fascists when the Republican government was overthrown... 7. A smug indifference to the nature of the Russian conduct inside Ukraine since feb 24th and the scope of Ukrainian losses...kind of like upper middle class Americans and the top10% to the impacts on working people under Globalization, lack of medical care and dental care...tough luck, life is cruel... 8. No mention of the Food Crisis nor how Ukraine could survive a settlement which gives Russia Crimea, the coastal corridor and the Donbas - survive economically except as a Ukrainian Appalachia. 9. And of course, given the actual date of the speech, no sense of where the war is on June 9 with the Russian's winning the war of attrition.
I will express my opinion. Russia has been warning Ukraine and the EU about its Red Borders for quite a long time, if my memory serves me right, it started with Putin's Munich speech. Now the USA and its vassal Europe have crossed these lines, so let's get ready for World War III, gentlemen, dig bunkers and buy oatmeal!
- Agree current events and history has shown Meirsheimer's theories to be foolish and lacking many considerations. - Disagree its US v Russia because a) if this were so then US would not have hesitated to give heavy weapons earlier in the war b) even Meirsheimer says that US doesnt want to be bogged down in Europe in order to focus on Asia / China and c) russia is not a peer power to the US. So this arguement has no basis in reality - As an extension, the Ukrainians have been fending off russian aggression and insidious cultural subversion for 300 years, this is just an extension of that - agree with your point (5) appeasement never works and it angers me to no end - Ukraine wont give up even Crimea, this is still their territory under internationally recognised borders. Maaaaybe they will if there is full russian withdrawal and reparations but UA will ask for a high price for Crimea - now its 15 July and its not apparent than russia is winning anything. Likely losing in Izium region, parity in east, and gaining territory in Donbas at a slowing rate in Donbas. This is with the 60k of ammunition being thrown at UA daily!
@@dro355 "Ukrainians for 300 years repelled Russian aggression and insidious cultural sabotage" - you live in a parallel world, however, like most Ukrainians. It is foolish to pretend to be a person from the West, you are a person from the western part of Ukraine, or a Banderite from the eastern part. You've been so brainwashed that it's hard to sort out the varieties of your shit. They interfere with you with mud, they burn you in the trenches, you have almost 70,000 soldiers killed and captured, and you write like that here?
agree 100%. # 1 is the biggest problem, but the reason for it -- well, you added insights about Establishment attitudes -- the attitude of ivy league faux tough guys could be summed up simply as 'life is cruel', etc. Its driving alot of US hegemonic policy. its very scary that the US is forcing not merely inviting conflict right on the Russian border.
Just a thought, more of the same old fear and appeasement analysis. The brave people of Ukraine deserve a more thoughtful analysis one With a complete return of all territories and Marshall plan to rebuild🤔
Thank you for this deep analysis. However, the speakers seem to underestimate the deep divisions within Ukraine and their possible influence upon the final outcome. Ukraine is divided into three very distinct parts, not two. The western one-third of the country used to be a part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for hundreds of years, and thus belonged to an entirely different cultural and religious environment than the other two-thirds of present Ukraine. That is where Ukrainian nationalism was born, and - one must not forget about this fact - a large part of Ukrainian population sided with the nazis during the second world war, even forming a Ukrainian SS Division "Galizien", and that's where genocide was committed against the Polish, Russian and Jewish populations. The central part of Ukraine is inhabited by people many of whom call themselves "real Ukrainians", who are not friendly towards the "zapadniks" ("westerners", inhabitants of the formerly Polish part of present Ukraine), and the language they speak sounds more like Russian. This is the part of Ukraine that suffered from the famine under Stalin's rule, then suffered under German occupation during the second world war, and fought against the nazis in the Red Army. The easternmost part of present Ukraine consists mainly of lands conquered by Catherine the Great from Mongols, including Crimea and is inhabited by considerable, indigenous Russian population. After 1945 Poland lost the present western third of Ukraine to the Soviet Union, and after the fall of the latter, the Ukrainian SSR was transformed into the independent state of Ukraine within artificial borders, consisting of very different three parts which could hardly be expected to ever form a uniform, stable country.
@@MrJamespeyton No, the country was thoroughly corrupt, the level of living was dropping, people were earning meagre salaries, and several million had to leave seeking jobs abroad. Check your facts.
@@ShawnJonesHellion Historia magistra vitae. Or rather "Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future" (George Orwell, 1984). If you conceal the past, you can manipulate the future. It doesn't work long-term, though.
So prosperous that they are the poorest country in Europe with only 1/3 of GDP per capita of Russia. Ukraine is also Europe's most corrupted country. They were so stable to have a color revolution.
It ain't about what Putin want and can demand cause he got nuclear weapons those countries have a right to choose democracy over communism and oppression and Dictators !
The problem for Russia is not Ukraine itself, but NATO expending to their frontdoor. In addition to that: since 1991 Communism in Russia failed. Since those days, they have private industry, church could rise up again. But yes, they dont love liberalism.
@@mariajurgens9889 Ukraine had already been denied entry to NATO before this war and the new invasion has caused Sweden and Finland--who borders Russian to join that alliance...
So does our states that was involved in election fraud but yet we still get push back from the left and don't forget the laptop from HELL on the Bidens ....
@@kjj26k No, Ukraine wants to enter NATO and in the US--Ukraine charter on strategic partnership form November 2021 says, that USA wants to help them, get in. I believe, that is a mainfactor for the war.
I say turn over Luxembourg to Russia to keep their Medieval Russian brains happy. It was never the same after Radio Luxembourg stopped playing the Beatles. The bloke talking here should just give Luxembourg to Russia.
You are expecting too much. This is a mediocre college and mediocre professors. We already hear the best experts of our world in media. Humans aren't that smart. Temper your expectations
How many times USA decided to make a war in the last 30 years and how many wars Russia started, and how many died in those wars, can I have a answer for my knowledge please someone ?
When dealing with a complex and multi-faceted situation like the current Russia-Ukraine war, it is very important that discussions should be broad-based and should cover a full range of views and opinions. I found myself disagreeing with many of the points presented by Dr Graham and would have welcomed a panel discussion by specialists and experts with alternative views and opinions to those of Dr Graham. The presentation seemed to be very one-sided although I may have missed any challenge to his views at the end of the discussion. I also have to say that the war in Ukraine has now moved on from the situation on the 17th May and prognostications about the future given at that time do not now seem of much value (early August). Situation reports on an ongoing war have a very short useful lifespan and are of limited value in making long-term predictions about the future. Again, I feel a panel discussion which could have discussed a range of possible outcomes and scenarios would have been more useful.
If this professor's house was invaded by a gang and the police showed up to negotiate what parts of his house the gang could keep, maybe then he would understand how his comments look to Ukrainians.
Playing the legalistic game between USA and Russia has very little credibility in the eyes of the world. We all know that the USA can no more claim to have a clean hand in this domain than Russia. Playing dirty games is very much the practice of both powers.
The US hasn't attacked a European democracy for no other reason than nationalistic vanity. I'm assuming you live in a democracy. If you do, have a think about all that means in terms of personal freedom and standards of living. If you don't, then enjoy your government directed propaganda and stay off western media comments sections.
Misreading or not or open door for negotiations or not is totally irrelevant,Miniput have had these plans for making Russ.great again ( havent I heard these words before from another presi?) since he started out as a kgb agent in Germ.,he has never been interested in negos!!
The USA should appreciate more what a friendly country neighbor Mexico is. Despite the immigration and drug issues. Those issues are purely socioeconomic, no ideology or national ambitions involved.
Canada says it's like living on top of a crack house, Mexico says the best friend you never wanted. 😂 That is what our neighbors think of us. We the USA is the old man sitting on the lawn with a shotgun and a case of beer. Avoid him at all costs.
Mexico hasn't got a bloody comedian, like Zelensky for a president, who does not care how many thousand of his countrymen are killed, provided he gets a chance to fufill his own ambitions.
To be fair, we had a bit of it during our early days. Course, America won just by offering more independence to the north Mexican settlements, and trying to take them back didn't end well for Mexico.
"Significant European allies, the German and the French". What about all us Brits have done. Absolute slap in the face. We've lead the European and to some aspects, NATO response to Russias invasion. Notwithstanding the military assurances we've unilaterally given Sweden and Finland during their application.
I think the UK is viewed with suspicion because of the huge influence that Russian money has in London and the various UK dependencies. It the UK effort sincere, or just a superficial show? I think a lot of people are unsure how close certain people in the UK government are to Russian intelligence officers.
@@rogerwilco2 given the frequency Russia threatens to nuke the UK, far more than the whole of the west combined, I'd say our efforts are legitimate. Granted we have a lot of dirty Russian cash in London but to my knowledge we've been at the forefront of rectifying this, including sanctioning and tracing said property.
putins russia has no valid claims or points. They are the true enemy of humanity because of their non stop threats to nuke the world if they cannot attack their neighbors at will.
Scott Ritter said the preliminary "attack" of Kiev was a feint to keep the bulk of the Ukrainian troops away from the Donbass which has always been the main objective of Russia!
Thank you Dr Graham, a rather scolarly presentation of the Russian arguments for this conflict. However, as an observer of this affair I feel that Putin's mindset, Russia's massive investment in millitary hardware over the past ten years and the economics of Russia facing a reducing dependence on fossil fuels as Europe transitions to renewables were the governing factors in his decision to go to war at this time. No doubt, the target was influenced by recent history as you describe. But IMHO the NATO/European expansion and regime change (a calculated replaying of US arguments) were just the pretext, very much as the bombing of Moscow apartments was a pretext for the second Chechen war. As you rightly observe, there was little chance of Putin not millitating to recreate the Soviet era spheres of influence, even had NATO limited it's expansion as he wanted.
You just saved me one hour of my life; I've leas than zero tolerance for consuming fearful propaganda under the guise of academia and/or journalism. NATO is not without flaws but the preponderance of evidence going back DECADES indicate very clearly that this has always been a part of the Russian long-game
Even Thomas Graham is falling for the russian NATO Propaganda BS. Putin said cleary at the beginning of the war: Ukraine is not a nation. Ukraine is part of Russia, Ukrainan Culture does not exist. All the NATO BS was for us to believe. Ridiculous that those propaganda BS is part of this Analysis without CALLING IT OUT
This is about oil and gas earnings, and Russia infiltrating itself, as always, into the fabric of European society to influence strategic dependencies on the few things it sells - oil and gas. Ironically, Russia has now shown its hostility to European peace and democracy, its willingness to de-stabilise world food and energy markets, and as a result, accelerated that very transition of Europe to renewables by decades, reducing it to mere years. Putin has shown himself to be a total loser, not as clever as he would like his own propaganda to portray himself as.
Why wars end. 1. one side runs out of men and material and no longer has the resources to prosecute the war: ends in surrender. 2. one or both sides recognize that the cost is greater than anything that is to be gained: ends in truce or cease-fire or terms of surrender. 3. removal of authority prosecuting conflict by assassination, putsch, coup or other action. I'm probably missing something here; If it comes to mind I might update this.
Strange that Graham would not mention that Russia was interesting to controlling Ukraine because of the Russian pipelines running through it which supply oil and gas to Europe.
Not with Nordstream 2 which had by-passed Eastern Europe with a direct supply to Germany... And btw. Despite the on-going war: German gas storage level in February: around 24% German gas storage level in late June: around 55% If this is a shortage...and the largest one wasn't even put to use because it was still controlled until recently by a Russian company. After this strategic infrastructure was sold to Gazprom. "Germany will temporarily take control of a unit of Gazprom PJSC in the country as it seeks to safeguard security of gas supply. Gazprom Germania GmbH -- owner of energy supplier Wingas GmbH and a gas storage firm -- will come under the trusteeship of the German energy regulator until Sept. 30, Economy Minister Robert Habeck told reporters in Berlin."
I did like some parts of the speech but the whole "Putin needs a victory he can sell to the people or he could threaten to use nukes" discourse is dangerous because it makes the need for some "victory" for Putin necessary which sets a dangerous precedent: any nuclear power can do whatever and get a part of what they're asking for as part of an agreement. Also it's not true, from the inside perspective as a person in Russia: people have no agency, and pretty much total control over the media makes it easy to present anything as a victory, even a defeat. Also it leaves out the atrocities commited by Russia (including systemic repressions against Crimean Tatars since 2014) out of the question, and I believe we shouldn't do it
Russia will use toxic-gas munition on Ukraine! They allready did in Mariupol and in several instances against cities in Syria. The strategy is basically to force a surrender by threatening with total or at least massive annihilation of everyone alive in Ukraine...or just sterializing certain regions of Ukraine with chemical weapons. At this point the question is how will Nato react! Options: 1. Nato could close the Ukrainians skys and find themselves in a low intensity conflict with Russia and shield Ukraine from chemical weapons attacks. 2. Nato could switch to chemical weapon production, and deliver cruise missiles armed with chemical weapons to Ukraine, so Ukraine could target Russian centers of population, creating a balance of mass destruction capabilities...so Russia would hold back. 3. Nato could just watch how Ukraine gets genocided or how it get's forced into surrender after the gassing of some hundredthousends or millions of people.
Western polls show a majority of the Crimean Tartars now prefer being part of Russia to being part of Ukraine. Not to dismiss atrocities altogether but it's hard to imagine overall Tartar support for Russia would be possible if atrocities were on a large scale.
@@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311 Russia did just imprison every enemy of Russia. Many people living in Crimea fled that place as it helps not getting imprisoned or they would have to feign love for Putin to be save in Crimea. Also Putin doesn't allow information that doesn't help his case into Russia or Crimea. Crimean people are completely unaware of what is actually going on. They think Russia is actually in conflict with the Nazi party in Ukraine freeing Russians from concentration kamps and gaschambers.
The West is most likely to attack with Nukes! Biden said it himself, regime change. If Putin is outside catching a tan in Moscow, what is the likelihood that Moscow is nuked to take him out? Stealth cruise missiles????
Europe's borders are not like the USA with a clear border for political power, economic power and military power. The gigantic shift right now is making the NATO almost Europe' s military power, covering the EU economic power and thus empowering Europe' s political power. Making Europe more Europe as an entity to reckon with regarding China and India. That is the main reason Sweden and Finland are joining now, because when else would a window of opportunity appear again. Russia was just 'a gas station' according to late McCain. The problem with Europe is, it is not a trinity of economy, military and politics yet. The moment Putin overstepped his calculations, all Europe's countries flocked to the common goal of unity in any of these paths. Next stop China and/or India for further integration?
Nobody can safely set foot in India without stepping in human feces. They have fiercely and patriotically protected their land by a combination of throwing garbage everywhere they have not as of yet literally shit. You could probably do half a billon dollars in infrastructure improvements to the place by nuking it.
McCain was hanging out with NAZI logo wearing dudes. McCain died while in office for his own protection. And protect his family by being one of the elites.
McCain was an insane power hungry insane lunatic. He was a major participant in the coup in Ukraine. He also met and supported terrorists in Syria, literally. He's a genocidal lunatic, the only good thing he did in his entire life was die.
Ukraine was NOT to be enrolled into NATO. Germany and France strongly objected to this plan. It was off the table long time ago.
Great Britain, USA and Russia had signed agreement to keep Ukraine border intact for giving up nuclear weapon. These are very important points that were not mentioned in this speech.
The NATO expansion was just a propaganda lie to justify the invasion. Even the Russians know that NATO was not going to accept Ukraine in the near future. The same for EU membership. The country was in a to early economic and political development stage to back such decisions.
The speech looks bizarre to me, because it basically states: "OK, the war is the NATO and Ukraine fault! Lets give Russia what Putin wants!". That is against the political logic of the East Europe and international rules.
Russia wanted this to be in written form but the west declined
The USA wanted that war to sanction Russian gas supply to EU.
@Ukraine is Russia russia stoked up the fire in donbas getting its people to rebel and then adding its own troops to fight off ukraine who wanted to keep its country in tact....lets face facts russia is geographically weak and should go with the flow of the majority....look at yourselves your not a great people.... and where would you be without oil and gass sales .....shame you forced someone to show you how nuclear worked....your not a creator you scheme your way though life.
A contract with the U.S.A. is not worth the paper its written on. They broke so many contracts over the last decade that they have lost all trust. Only power holds them in position. If this power got to be broken publicly so that all can see the Table will turn against the U.S. many many nations are waiting for that. The U.S. is not to be trusted. Russia hold all theyre contracts. They are trustworthy. Thats what media dont want us to see. Cause it would be over with the U.S.A and theyre impact. Countrys would say why listen to you? You lied and betrayed us many times and now there is a other power no.1 we dont have too any more. 🤷♂️
It's actually insanely cool that we can watch stuff like this for free today. What a world we live in
Watch and exchange our impressions and thoughts, being in - perhaps - very remote parts of the Globe :)
And let's not forget that we can have perfect music - for free. And your inner spring mattress, that nylon toothbrush, vaccines, the whole world on your color screen, the world's library in your pocket, instant communications, overweight people, long lives, airconditioning, motor cars and planes, space travel, liberal education, universal franchise and a gazillion other things shows how blessed we are in our science fiction world.
Not completely free. I pay$50/mo. for Internet
This guy is just parotinjkikk
From the Far Side I reply - which is why we should be grateful for global warming. Where do expressions like 'insanely cool' come from to replace the thousands of adjectives that could be used in meaningful speech and writing?
Why was the Minsk agreement not addressed in this presentation?
Exactly 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Shame on the US! The US has no dog in the fight and should be leading the arguments for peace.
Hear hear!
That is quite an audacious claim by the Professor that only the US is in a position to negotiate European security with Russia.
I agree with the sentiment, but I disagree with the substance. As it stands, the United States is the best arbiter for anyone's security based off of the unparalleled force projection capabilities it has. The US can afford to guarantee and assist nations far afueld because logistically there is no where that is out of reach for the US. Russia cant guarantee nations in say, Iberia or North West Africa for example. This was seen when Russian guarantees fell short in Vietnam when China invaded them. They just can't offer any sort of tangible support beyond a few hundred kilometers of their border.
Should the US be meddling? I think there is a better way personally. But be that as it may, the US is the only country in the world that can affect any measure of security to any nation anywhere in the world.
He is simply restating US arrogance and desire for a unipolar world. That is what this is all about.
@@docprune9922 Putin likes to negotiate with America as he wants to be seen as a leader of a power equal to the US. Not to mention that Putin does not accept sovereignty of anything he can attack and wants to attack.
@@TorianTammas That is why Austin asked Shoigu for a ceasefire, because Ukraine is 'winning' .. get a grip, you muppet.
@@docprune9922 I concur. 120 billion dollars of aid and they still can't recapture lost territory. They're just prolonging the war to make Russia suffer, they know they'll win eventually but the longer the better for them.
Mr Graham seems to be inconsistent in his views presented here. On one hand he admits this war has been proving that Russia is weak, but on the other his whole rhetoric is built on the assumption that Russia isn’t weak.
Some mind maps need to be rewritten perhaps
sounds like they a plagiarising their opinions from the toilet paper times.
I guess he chooses to express himself carefully in order not to hurt any russian feelings, while at the same time trying to present the facts. Some people might also call it diplomacy or emotional intelligence
@@clover6480 No, the ambiguity is better explained if it is seen as propaganda intended to brainwash the gullible. Whereas, the truth is always paradoxical, there's no reason that Russian can't be both less dangerous than is feared yet still dangerous enough to be treated with respect.
@@jamesedwards.1069 What is so complicated ? Russia is very weak against NATO in conventional war but extremely lethal in nuclear war . Western warheads simply lack targets while russian ones would have a disproportionate effect . So there is incentive from that side to do a kamikaze move when prezented with overwhelming odds - like a NATO offensive .
@@jamesedwards.1069 A country that started an illegal war of aggression and invaded a neighboring countries twice violating treaties they signed and violating the UN Charta does deserve nothing.
He says he takes with a grain of salt any military expert’s view of what is going on. Presumably, an academic’s view of the war doesn’t have to be taken with a grain of salt?
We have General's that have Pledged Allegiance to Qanon. Military "experts" should be taken with a grain a salt unless they have a track record of making accurate predictions in the past.
Certainly "Western" military experts should get a big dose of scepticism when discussing combined arms modern war and especially as it applies to Russia,although not all Western military have been lulled into an undeserved sense of might by beating up Iraq. As Andrei Martyanov says,and repeats,no Western military(he particularly means the US) has fought a powerful enemy in combined arms war since Korea. This means they are clueless essentially,whereas Russia has 7 years in Syria to refer to.
He strikes me as having an agenda beyond that of an acedemic.
A lot of intellectual tourism goes unchecked and is inevitably used to discredit analysts and academics for things they never said. If anything, they're too nice about it.
@@antipropo461 Russia had a 2 hour battle with American's in a SNAFU in Syria. Russia lost 200 Men and the US didn't sustain a single casualty. Russian military has proven beyond doubt they are a second rate military power with Nukes. Basically, a giant North Korea.
Putin’s openness and honesty prior to invasion is remarkable. Washington should withdraw and stop fuelling this conflict.
Interesting that he didn't even mention why and how this conflict started.
Yeah pretty funny
he actually said it, you have to rewatch. at the beginning of the lecture
@@andreasfromsanandreas1268 he said that Ukraine has been bombarding the Donbass for 7 years and were ammasing a lot of troops for some reason?
it started because russia hasn't got many warm water ports... and wants to protect what it had....and push hostile countries away from its ships and to control the food supplies of a large part of the world....to become a major player and respect in the world....as nuclear weapons are a dead end and become irrelevent.
@@jpgpearson nukes are definitely not a dead end
Um, this is pretty strange point of view, it's the view of a war as seen from Mars.
The man said it was hard to figure out what the US strategy is. I mean, really?
share us your great philosophy ?
@@coshyno Buy my book.
@@widescreennavel
The last line of your book ends:
The complete destruction of Russia .
@@joni8090 Putin's book read better in the original German. I think you are thinking of a different book by a disgraced leader who started a little thing we like to call the 2nd World War Two...Putin's strategy to keep NATO from expanding is working like a charm! Russia will be safely surrounded by friends who are concerned about their neighbor. They will work to see that Russia stays within its own established borders.
@@widescreennavel
Nothing has changed then !! But , I do think honesty in Negotiations is important don't you !
So far US and cohorts have been building castles on sand and that Never makes for Stability .
My interpretation of what Thomas Graham is arguing is that Putin is just one of many leaders striving for the future and prosperity of his country. And that the concern about NATO expansion and willingness to threaten Russia was honestly meant and the reason for the attack on Ukraine. Does Graham entirely exclude the alternative explanation that Putin rather, like many authoritarian leaders, is deeply troubled by extensive expressions of democracy at close range (Ukraine and Belorussia) that could easily spread to Russia's own population and thus threaten his mafia clan's unlimited wealth and power?
Um...yes! Do some research. Look into the last 30 pieces of legislation that Russia has enacted. You will see thinks like 1M Roubles for couples who have 3 or more children. Free housing for low income families. Free cars for people that need it. Russia is fast becoming the land that many people wish they could live in. It is just at the moment there is a lot of ignorance around Russia. Did you know that Putin is a lawyer? Did you know that he hates, I mean HATES communism? He has written a number of essays on the subject. An open mind is a highly intelligent mind. Is you mind open? Are you willing to do research and be open to the possibility that your entire perception my be blue pilled right now?
Also the recent discovery of Gas reserves in Ukraine & off Ukraine's coast line, which would have threatened Russia's dominance of natural gas supply to Europe, a weapon it is currently using very effectively. NATO expansion was just the excuse. This analysis has many gaps in it, don't think much of this Watson Institute whoever they are
Quite right, it is a one-sided view of the war in Ukraine and its origin, in line with John Mearsheimer's argument.
Well for him the alternative explanation doesn't make sense (for me also). So I guess you can make your point, but others make their own point.
The falicy in your argument is the fact that theleader of the free world fought number of wars for oil, energy, etc, over the last 2 decades.
Not a word about the Maidan coup, the behaviour of the Zelenski regime and the violation of the Minsk agreement. Instead they stick to Western propaganda, leaving out context.
Yes, Merkel and Hollande kept Ukraine from joining in 2008, but there has been close cooperation between NATO members and the Ukraine after 2014 in the form of military maneuvers, training and equipping forces etc. This can not be disregarded.
USA and communist Russia - both must fall to free Europe!
Hmmm... And what happened in 2014?
@@Figlosof coup in ukraine.
@@thepcfd Yanukovych run away after his men kill more than a hundred people in a broad day light. His own party disown him ffs. But even if that was a real "coup" is still doesn't give a right for another nation to annex territories.
Sarkozy was the President of France in 2008, not Hollande.
I totally disagree. Putin is not nearly so amenable to "serious discussion" as this speaker suggests with his 20/20 hindsight. Speaking to Russia/Putin privately without our allies is a great way to erode trust in the USA.
Sounds like what Trump did with the Taliban. Didn't go over well, even if the goal was to evacuate since Biden went with the Trump agreement with the Taliban.
It is simple you have to tell Putin that any aggression to another country will be his very last and then fullfill your promise.
@Tom: yes, it's little like having some other country fight our wars for us?.
@@TorianTammas You need a history lesson. America has had a difficult time winning.
@lesia gutierrez Budapest Memorandum was a weak fudge - just a bunch of reassuring *sounding* crap, *containing no firm commitment from anyone other than Ukraine* , which gave up it's nuclear deterrent without demanding a sufficient quid quo pro. There was no promise or assurance that Russia, or any of the signatory nations _guaranteed_ Ukraine's territorial integrity or would ever act in support of it's defence. I wish people would actually read key background texts like that worthless document and understand it properly... And perhaps reflect on inadequate agreement statements and the weasel-word difference between such as "affirm" and "guarantee" and so on. Ukraine at the time was just excessively eager to finally free themselves from the USSR... and too trusting.
Not filled gas storage was no coincidence, it _only_ happened in those cases, where Russian / Kremlin's companies directly or through subsidiaries owned those gas facilities. This energy crisis was intentionally designed.
Check into the Russian-Opec oil war
@@James-bs8bd Oh, that one was relatively recent and quite hilarious - Russian dummies believed themselves to be able to push around world's largest oil producers.
How are those sanctions working? We are led by children in the west.
@@mikemorehead5794 They are working by depriving Russian usurper an dhis gan gof money , in oreder to drender Russia much less dangerous, as it will not be able to either produce or buy modern weapons (they are already lagging behind anyway).
- sicerelly yours Captain Obvious
@Gregory Jones They did. Russians used an excuse, that that they are supplying according to contract, well, yes - the _minimum_ amount according to contract, but that was less than was supplied before and much less than customers were demanding at that time. Russia simply is not a reliable partner, it will screw you over at any moment whenever possible.
Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs' mission is to promote a just and peaceful world through research, teaching, and public engagement. Remember?
The Tale of Jack Kiev.
Once upon a time, there was a small boy, called Jack Kiev. He was 12 years old and was an orphan. When his mother died recently, he inherited her cottage, with a little bit of land.
He worked hard all day every day, cultivating his plot and producing a good yield. He had some extra vegetables and chickens, so he took them to the market for sale.
At the market, the elder sons and daughters, of the Otan Family, came and bought his produce. They asked the boy, “Who is in charge of the business, as we need a regular supply? We would like to discuss business and come to some arrangement.”
Jack said, “I’m in charge of the business! For I am an orphan and I will supply your needs.”
So they signed a contract and Jack’s spirits were lifted, for he was quite sad and lonely.
Once a week he went to the Otan household and delivered the wares that they needed and they paid him kindly.
Sometime soon after, the Otan Family asked Jack to help with some chores, cutting grass and painting the shed. The Otan house, was very large with many rooms, for they had 16 sons and 17 daughters, who were always kind to Jack, so they became good friends. Jack was overjoyed with finding friendship with the Otan Family.
Jack was always hardworking and never failed to be productive. As his own homestead and finance grew, he bought some sheep and reared lambs.
Old Father Sam Otan was pleased with Jack. So when Jack turned 14, he made a promise to him. “When you turn 16, you can marry, whichever of my daughters that you find to be most beautiful and you will be my Son!”
Jack nearly fainted and cried aloud, “Thank you Father Sam! God has truly blessed me! May Heaven and Earth hold dear to your promise.”
One month later, an angry bear from the forest, came upon Jack’s cottage and ravaged his flock and stole some sheep. Jack was mortified and ran to the Otan house. “Help help! There’s a bear at my home, who’s killed my sheep!”
The Otan Family were shocked and said, “Don’t worry we will stand by you and help to fight the bear.” So they sent two of the younger sons, who brought their slings and spears and went with Jack to fight the bear. But the bear was too big and strong for them to kill it. But they managed to scare the bear enough, so that it went away. “Thank you for your help!” said Jack and the two sons went back to their home.
A couple of weeks passed by and the angry bear came back to Jack’s cottage, killing and eating some lambs. Jack ran to the Otans, “Help help! The bear has come back!” So three of the sons, went with Jack and they all fought against the bear. This time the bear hurt Jack and killed one of the sons and then went back to his lair. The sons went back to their home and reported the news.
Two more weeks passed by and the bear came back to Jack’s cottage. It caused great damage to the chicken shed, broke some fences and killed all the chickens.
Jack ran back to the Otans and this time, four of the sons, all armed with new swords and shields, went with Jack to fight the bear. They fought for many hours but the bear was too big and strong, even for all of the sons. The bear was enraged, bc it’s foot was hurt by them. It killed two of the sons and wounded the others and then went back to its lair.
Two weeks later, the bear and its mate, came upon Jack’s cottage. They killed all the remaining lambs and knocked over a burning lantern, the lantern caught fire to the barn and store houses, destroying all the produce, This time the bears quickly left, before they could be attacked.
Jack ran to the Otans, “Help the bears have attacked my home and the place is on fire!” So the Otan Family all quickly went and helped to extinguish the blaze. Five of the sons all stayed with Jack, “We’ll help to rebuild the farm and this time we’ll stay with you, to guard against the bears.
They all worked hard to rebuild the farm and the Otans pitched their tent next to Jack’s cottage. But the bears came in the night and killed three of the sons as they slept. Jack and the other two sons ran back to Old Sam Otan and reported the news.
Old Sam Otan wept bitterly in his grief and the shock nearly killed him. “Right this time, take some horses and wear armour and buy some new lances and we’ll finish the bears off for good. So six of the sons saddled their horses and went to find the bears. They rode to the forest and crossed the stream that runs from the mountains. They rode for four days and eventually found the bears trail. The eldest son said, “Right we’ll camp here for the night and at dawn we’ll attack the bears. What could possibly go wrong?”
The bears caught the scent of the Otan party and came upon them in the darkness. The great bear with his mate and all their cubs with them. They killed all the horses and all of the sons as well, except one who barely managed to escape. He ran all the way home and reported the news.
Old Father Otan, his wife and remaining children were stricken with grief. They held council and after many days, they came up with a plan. “Right!” said Old Sam Otan, “I’ve had enough of this great bear! I’ve lost 11 of my sons and we only have 5 left. 7 of my daughters are strong and old enough to fight, as well as any man. We’ll all go to Jack’s cottage together that makes 12 and myself 13. We’ll make traps and build strong fences and walls around the farm.”
So they all went to Jack’s farm and did as they had planned and two weeks later the great bear, came to Jack’s farm with his family. The bear saw how strong the defences were, he hesitated and looked across the valley. He saw the Otan house with no walls and no one there, except some young girls and old mother Otan. He had grown tired of the taste of lambs, chickens and horses and now he wanted something else. So the great bear and his family went back to the forest and waited for night to come.
He took his family to the Otan house and then charged in with speed and fury. All the bears smashed the doors and windows open and ran through the house, but there was no one there, the house was empty.
All of a sudden there was a blast of hunting horns and a great cacophony of noise. The house was surrounded by Jack and all the Otans. Old mother Otan had been warned, by her pet falcon, of an approaching danger and had left with her daughters and gone to her sister’s house. She had sent a carrier pigeon to Old Sam Otan at Jack’s cottage, who ambushed the bears.
“Fire!” Screamed Old Sam Otan at the top of his voice and they all hurled their burning torches at the house. Some of the bears ran out and were cut down as they ran and the house burned to the ground.
Old Sam Otan and his company went through the ashes and counted all the dead bears. “They’re all here!” said the eldest son, after laying the bears bodies out. “No wait a minute, there’s one missing!” They all scouted around the area, but the mate of the late great bear, was nowhere to be found.....
The end?
I fear they have been misnamed or lost their way
My favorite line is how you say the US should have sat down with Russia in secret bilateral communications. How could we know that hasn't occurred?
Please watch Andrei Illarionov. He not only talks about these communications, but discloses what was in them. It isn't pretty.
How do you negotiate with someone who is being disingenuous and has an agenda they intend to pursue regardless of how much you compromise. Some people are just aggressive…
The mistake some people make about the kinds of people described as ‘liberals’ is that they avoid conflict at all costs. This really isn’t true. A more accurate assessment is they tend to want to avoid conflict unless it’s required to stand up to bullies. Big difference.
Which video is that?
It might have but I would bet it didn't because the American foreign policy top of the Agenda is to destroy Russia and undermine Putins power. It's sad but our politicians have a way of not realising we are interconnected and we all need eachother. It doesn't matter what colour our skin is or what part of the world we come from, as humans we need eachother and the day we and our politicians realise that, the better our experience on this earth will be.
@@eekiane1921 , oh no. Another "blame it on America" guy.
I suppose Putin is innocent in all that's happened. Maybe he is the one that needs to realize the interconnectedness of everything.
Lets trust the Council on Foreign Relations shall we, and let our brains fall out!!!
And The Trilateral Comission and The Bilderberg Conference. They will make the world a better place! /sarcasm
Don't forget the WEF!!!
Assassins accusing the Assassin
@@pcuimac and mickey-mouse schwab-klaus, and great daddy soros, and bill gates,...!
Bunch of scared babies in this chat. Invisible boogie-men who fulfil every scapegoat for you.
The biggest problem in all discussions like this one is that American “gurus” like this one judge historic events a without knowing the history. Relations between countries in Europe have hundreds and even more than a thousand years of history. And almost all have roots and live in the past. Trying to analyze today’s situation between Ukraine and Russia without knowing that past is pointless. And this “guru” does not even mentioned that history from X to XXI century.
The same was true during the war Balkans in 1990s. Nobody payed any attention to the fact that for Serbians that war was a payback for losing important battle 600 years ago. American analytics may laugh at that, but ask Serbians, and they will tell you.
History is not something Americans care about, because we are afraid of looking at our own history: slavery, racism, genocide, wars, assassinations, regime changes... The more you look at America's past actions, the more convinced you would be that the US is the real aggressor and villain.
@@dznuts123 I completely disagree with you. First, hating your own country became fashionable over the last 50 years in the US, and it is completely irrelevant in this case. Second, countries of the Old World have so much blood and mistreatment of each other in their history that Americans cannot even imagine. And third, American historians do not understand the relevance and importance of the history for Europeans. For the most part, Americans look forward in their lives trying to improve it. Europeans mostly look back in attempt to find who is responsible for their problems. And this is why America is spearheading all technology advancements, and the rest of the world only follows.
My point about this lecturer is very simple. He is looking at the problem between Russia and Ukraine seeing only the last 100 years or so. And the problem goes more than a millennium back to the X century, to the time of Vladimir the Great ruling that land from his capital Kiev, and bringing Orthodox Christianity into this land from Byzantine Empire in 988.
Moscow did not exist at that time at all. First time it was mentioned 200 years later. And now, when Moscow want to rule this land they are trying to make historical claims, etc., but they have no foundation to claim their rights! And that is the problem for them. This is why they are trying to destroy Ukraine!!! For most of the people in the West that may sound laughable, but that points only to how much misunderstanding of Russia and what drives it there is in the US and the rest of the Western World.
@@zeigezunt6223 The problem is the US hasn’t learned from its mistakes or tried to be a better player on the international stage. This is actually the same case that you describe, albeit for different countries. History still very much influences the US’s actions.
If you are worrying about trying to "pay back" something which happened 500 years before you were born (ie didn't happen to you, wasn't perpetrated by the people you're fighting, and has no *real* effect on your life) then you are pathetic, and deserve whatever terrible result befalls you.
Appealing to ancient history is even worse than just saying "because I feel like it," because at least pure selfishness as a motive is *honest*, whereas ancient history is no better than superstition. None of us were there 500 or 1000 years ago and we have no idea what really happened, only what we were told.
History is an important lens to understand how things became as they are, but it is no justification to do evil.
@@thevoxdeus You are confirming exactly what I said about Americans trying to analyze European events without any understanding what is behind them, what drives people to behave the way they do. You can call people "pathetic" as much as you want, you can judge them, tell them that they are horrible and wrong, but doing so you do not gain any understanding of why people behave that way, and thus your conclusion are of no use.
BEFORE YOU ASK THAT QUESTION , why was the usa and nato son intent on Ukraine becoming a member of military alliance that justify the huge expenses on weapons thus antagonising Russia ,
If you can state the pretext for Russias invasion without spending significant time covering the Minsk agreements then I can come to only two conclusions: you don't really understand or you don't want others to understand.
This talk was superficial garbage. Mearsheimer is the gold standard if you wanna understand this war.
@@daysjours absolutely agree.
Totally agree with you Minsk is the key and the West committed at Minsk to support Ukraine.
NATO has changed from Defence Into Offence.
NATO attacked itself when two NATO members (USA and Norway) attacked another NATO member. What does this mean for the future of NATO and how history will remember it?
where have they invaded? ask the people of Lithuania Estonia and Latvia, Poland, Ukraine, etc. I think your sentiments are upside down.
I disagree with one of the last possible outcomes the lecturer about is when he says one of the negotiated settlements might include a 'security guarantee'. That is why the US and UK are so ahead in providing heavy weapons so quickly. When Ukraine was persuaded to give up the nuclear weapons (although Russia had the codes) the UK, US and ironically Russia, all agreed to guarantee immediate security in case of an incursion by another country which is exactly what we have now so I don't think Ukraine is going to fall for that 'guarantee' again anytime soon!
On the other side of the coin, the Minsk agreement was about guaranteeing the security of the Donetsk and Lugansk Regions. Ukraine took now notice, killing 14K people between 2014 and 2022 and continuing arbitrary, random shelling of the areas killing innocent civilians (including children) even days before the Special Military Operation was launched. There are always two sides to each coin.
@@ashecbtb9509 Its a good thing that there were no Ukrainian casualties and there was no invasion of Ukraine in 2014. You are a bot or a sheep!
Immediate security? - The US interfered in the Ukraine and Russia Response..
and Russia responded
yeah giving a military Guarantee in our modern age is a god damn huge nono
End of US hegemony. Africa, Latin America and Asia want US to stop their so called rules based order.
Russia doesn't need a "buffer zone" if it does not have aggressive neighbors!! While I have a huge respect for Thomas Graham's analysis, I think he frequently bends over backwards to accommodate the Putin Regime Mentality. Are we really to take so much to heart the 19th century expansionist ambitions of what amount to a Mafia gang of profiteers? Can we not be a little more optimistic and hope for regime change after this war that is going so disastrously for the Russian side at the moment? If we can exercise a little patience while maintaining steady pressure with armaments and sanctions there is every reason to believe Putin will not survive long to remain in charge.
Indeed, Russia is not surrounded by aggressors. Its aggressor sits a few thousand miles away dictating to Russia's neighbors.
Was Cuba an aggressive neighbour to the USA in 1962? Your theory is compromised before you even finish writing. You need to listen to more of these shows my friend and less CNN and other MSM. .... "going so disastrously for the Russian side"..... as a sea of red slowly creeps down the Eastern side of Ukraine ....? ... sanctions that are now being wound back because they are hurting the Europeans more than Russia.... Forrest? Trees??
What I hear from this guy is ...
Chechnya war - Appeasement
Georgian war - Appeasement
Crimea Annexation - Appeasement
UKRAINE WAR - APPEASEMENT!!!
The world would be a better place for everyone if the Angloids had just left Germany alone
@@ominousbiscuit Nazi Germany-USSR Molotov Ribbentrop Pact started WW2.
@@ominousbiscuit
Latvia’s defense minister, Artis Pabriks: "If we were not now a member of NATO or the European Union, we would share the fate of Ukraine now. It would be guaranteed that Russia would invade us. Now they can’t do this because we are a member of NATO.”.
Neville Chamberlain = Appeasement.
"We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters." - Ronald Reagan
You are right except the Chechen war. Chechnya is part of Russia and Russia has acted as Ukraine did in the Donbas case.
The opening statement does not include the last 8 years of suffering of the people in the Donbas region. This omission makes all discussions untrustworthy.
If the US was fully aware of the scope and power of Russia's military capabilities and had the accurate intelligence data on Russia's imminent attack on Ukraine, why weren't they more resolute in trying to initiate diplomatic resolution of the problem? It seems that both USA and Russia were engaged in a waiting game of sorts, trying to assess and test each other's plans and ambitions. Did Washington probably think that Putin's invasion was just an effort to try to strengthen political pressure via military posturing, and that open war would probably be something that both sides would try to avoid? This would makes sense if we take seriously prof. Graham's assumption that Putin would be happy with NATO's retreat from Ukraine's territory, along with the incorporation of smaller parts od eastern Ukraine into Russia's sphere of influence. It seems to me that there's a lot of speculation on what would be the optimal scenario for everyone, but I suspect that's in part because we don't really know the crucial details of Russia's true agenda.
The Tale of Jack Kiev.
Once upon a time, there was a small boy, called Jack Kiev. He was 12 years old and was an orphan. When his mother died recently, he inherited her cottage, with a little bit of land.
He worked hard all day every day, cultivating his plot and producing a good yield. He had some extra vegetables and chickens, so he took them to the market for sale.
At the market, the elder sons and daughters, of the Otan Family, came and bought his produce. They asked the boy, “Who is in charge of the business, as we need a regular supply? We would like to discuss business and come to some arrangement.”
Jack said, “I’m in charge of the business! For I am an orphan and I will supply your needs.”
So they signed a contract and Jack’s spirits were lifted, for he was quite sad and lonely.
Once a week he went to the Otan household and delivered the wares that they needed and they paid him kindly.
Sometime soon after, the Otan Family asked Jack to help with some chores, cutting grass and painting the shed. The Otan house, was very large with many rooms, for they had 16 sons and 17 daughters, who were always kind to Jack, so they became good friends. Jack was overjoyed with finding friendship with the Otan Family.
Jack was always hardworking and never failed to be productive. As his own homestead and finance grew, he bought some sheep and reared lambs.
Old Father Sam Otan was pleased with Jack. So when Jack turned 14, he made a promise to him. “When you turn 16, you can marry, whichever of my daughters that you find to be most beautiful and you will be my Son!”
Jack nearly fainted and cried aloud, “Thank you Father Sam! God has truly blessed me! May Heaven and Earth hold dear to your promise.”
One month later, an angry bear from the forest, came upon Jack’s cottage and ravaged his flock and stole some sheep. Jack was mortified and ran to the Otan house. “Help help! There’s a bear at my home, who’s killed my sheep!”
The Otan Family were shocked and said, “Don’t worry we will stand by you and help to fight the bear.” So they sent two of the younger sons, who brought their slings and spears and went with Jack to fight the bear. But the bear was too big and strong for them to kill it. But they managed to scare the bear enough, so that it went away. “Thank you for your help!” said Jack and the two sons went back to their home.
A couple of weeks passed by and the angry bear came back to Jack’s cottage, killing and eating some lambs. Jack ran to the Otans, “Help help! The bear has come back!” So three of the sons, went with Jack and they all fought against the bear. This time the bear hurt Jack and killed one of the sons and then went back to his lair. The sons went back to their home and reported the news.
Two more weeks passed by and the bear came back to Jack’s cottage. It caused great damage to the chicken shed, broke some fences and killed all the chickens.
Jack ran back to the Otans and this time, four of the sons, all armed with new swords and shields, went with Jack to fight the bear. They fought for many hours but the bear was too big and strong, even for all of the sons. The bear was enraged, bc it’s foot was hurt by them. It killed two of the sons and wounded the others and then went back to its lair.
Two weeks later, the bear and its mate, came upon Jack’s cottage. They killed all the remaining lambs and knocked over a burning lantern, the lantern caught fire to the barn and store houses, destroying all the produce, This time the bears quickly left, before they could be attacked.
Jack ran to the Otans, “Help the bears have attacked my home and the place is on fire!” So the Otan Family all quickly went and helped to extinguish the blaze. Five of the sons all stayed with Jack, “We’ll help to rebuild the farm and this time we’ll stay with you, to guard against the bears.
They all worked hard to rebuild the farm and the Otans pitched their tent next to Jack’s cottage. But the bears came in the night and killed three of the sons as they slept. Jack and the other two sons ran back to Old Sam Otan and reported the news.
Old Sam Otan wept bitterly in his grief and the shock nearly killed him. “Right this time, take some horses and wear armour and buy some new lances and we’ll finish the bears off for good. So six of the sons saddled their horses and went to find the bears. They rode to the forest and crossed the stream that runs from the mountains. They rode for four days and eventually found the bears trail. The eldest son said, “Right we’ll camp here for the night and at dawn we’ll attack the bears. What could possibly go wrong?”
The bears caught the scent of the Otan party and came upon them in the darkness. The great bear with his mate and all their cubs with them. They killed all the horses and all of the sons as well, except one who barely managed to escape. He ran all the way home and reported the news.
Old Father Otan, his wife and remaining children were stricken with grief. They held council and after many days, they came up with a plan. “Right!” said Old Sam Otan, “I’ve had enough of this great bear! I’ve lost 11 of my sons and we only have 5 left. 7 of my daughters are strong and old enough to fight, as well as any man. We’ll all go to Jack’s cottage together that makes 12 and myself 13. We’ll make traps and build strong fences and walls around the farm.”
So they all went to Jack’s farm and did as they had planned and two weeks later the great bear, came to Jack’s farm with his family. The bear saw how strong the defences were, he hesitated and looked across the valley. He saw the Otan house with no walls and no one there, except some young girls and old mother Otan. He had grown tired of the taste of lambs, chickens and horses and now he wanted something else. So the great bear and his family went back to the forest and waited for night to come.
He took his family to the Otan house and then charged in with speed and fury. All the bears smashed the doors and windows open and ran through the house, but there was no one there, the house was empty.
All of a sudden there was a blast of hunting horns and a great cacophony of noise. The house was surrounded by Jack and all the Otans. Old mother Otan had been warned, by her pet falcon, of an approaching danger and had left with her daughters and gone to her sister’s house. She had sent a carrier pigeon to Old Sam Otan at Jack’s cottage, who ambushed the bears.
“Fire!” Screamed Old Sam Otan at the top of his voice and they all hurled their burning torches at the house. Some of the bears ran out and were cut down as they ran and the house burned to the ground.
Old Sam Otan and his company went through the ashes and counted all the dead bears. “They’re all here!” said the eldest son, after laying the bears bodies out. “No wait a minute, there’s one missing!”
They all scouted around the area, but the mate of the late great bear, was nowhere to be found....
The end?
12:30 "You add to that the Europeans failure to fill the gas storage facilities adequately" is just wrong. Gasprom Germania - which runs the storage facilities - belongs to Russia and they let the storage empty out in a strategic move to use gas supply as a weapon.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Would not you do the same?
@@stevenlight5006 Not if I was trying to win a long term peace, no. All this has done is ensure that the entire continent of Europe will wean itself off Russian energy as fast as it can, so that it can never again be held hostage. It is the biggest own goal, possibly ever. The Russian economy may never recover.
Would I have done the same if I were Putin? The same being: Attacking a neighbour to restore some 19th century imperialistic dream of a Russian empire? Preparing the war by betraying the trust of the Germans who put their strategic gas reserves in the hand of a foreign nation? Lying in the face of Western diplomats who sat at that ridiculously long table for a year although I had already decided to invade? Indiscriminately shelling civilians, hospitals and schools? No, I wouldn't have.
Not true, the delivery of gas through NS2 was ready except for the valves to be opened. When you go to the shop to buy something you only get the item after paying. The same is true in the case of gasdelivery. The problems arose when European countries refused to pay. You're totally overlooking the power of the us and their crimnal behaivour re Europe and the EU.
What makes the wheat grow and ripen makes the tanks get stuck in the mud. So, we have both a wheat and tank shortage. I'm for the wheat, and forget about replacing the tanks.
We need to stop to figuring out what our interests are and start looking at what is right vs wrong
Try telling a global arms dealer that selling weapons is Wrong 🤣
@@joni8090 It is actually very simple. Mind your own business.
Please go tell United States of Arsenal (aka USA), every foreign policy of USA is basing on its SELFISH interest at all cost of OTHERS.
"Our interests" and "right vs wrong" coincide exactly at the 1991 borders, because any other settlement sends a dangerous signal to both Russia others with imperial ambitions that borders can be moved by force.
@@russellwilliams3209
Oh I'm so Sorry I didn't know I had to ask for your Permission to respond to TH-cam !! Did I touch one of your Nerves ! 🤣
It always amuses me when Russia is accused of breaking international law when the US has done that numerous times since the 2nd world war without the complaint leading to any sanctions what so ever...
Who cares what cheap gas station of Russia wants?
Moderator: please repeat the question for the online audience. thx
Good analysis, but during Q and A they should be repeating the question into the mic so viewers can hear it, or subtitle the question while its being asked.
Our speaker should have had a better mike, or else two of those lousy ones (one slightly to his left, one slightly to his right).
The sound was a failure worthy of the Russian army.
agreed. they could have had somebody passing a mic between the people asking question, ive seen that done in other Q&A sessions and it works well. it was also a little bit annoying how he kept turning his head to address the room as he spoke, getting louder and quieter as he moved past the mic.
what analysis?
There was no analysis, imo he was only giving his thoughts leaving our or rewriting facts, history and international law. IOW the american version of the truth.
They keep repeating the nuclear threat as if it is real.
Oh yeah, bio and nukes, keeps getting repeated.
Putin has no need to use WMDs. Putin wants to take Ukraine intact, not destroyed.
Do you think Putin could level Ukraine with conventional arms if it wanted to?
Hum what do you think?
Could the USA level other nations with bombs? Hum, like endless bombs in WW2. Oh wait, that happened already!
„It’s not an existential question for russia“ That totally disqualifies the speaker in geopolitics
Status of Ukraine = an existential question for the fantasy world that Putin has created and sold everywhere to his high Power-Distance Index population. It's the Disneyland of FSB.
This talk starts well and then devolves into the usual 'us or them' projection we always hear from the US.
That is because there is us and there is them. We are antithetical. Why would you expect us to be sympathetic to Putin's twisted point of view. If Putin drops a book on his toe, he thinks that it is the result of a western plot. The Putin regime is just a criminal organization, how could we agreed to its continued existence?
always been
Victim blaming, it's like Nelson (Putin) to Martin (Zelensky) from the Simpsons ... stop hitting yourself (Nelson uses Martin hand to punch himself in the face) . . . the reason that Warsaw pact countries despise and fear Russian aggression is because they lived under the Soviet jackboot after the Ribbentrop - Molotov pact and end of WWII . . . nations and their people want to live free from tyranny and this means the western model though not without flaws is infinitely preferred over the authoritarian central planning model with Moscow and it's commissars at the centre
west and new world order are dying. after they done, we'll SINGLE PICK any individual about "opinions" and "thoughts" and will be proccessed in public trials (5 mins each criminal at best) before they are hung
The USSR is gone.
Hmm, like the US geriatric presidents, you seem have not noticed recent developments... the Soviet Union disappeared in the previous century... and the leadership of Ukraine has had its independence wrested from it by a bunch of thugs who cover their bodies in swastika tatoos.... clearly not the types who really object to jackboots... so long as they are the ones using them.
NOT WITHOUT FLAWS' HAHAHA THE US A CORRUPT AND DECADENT MODEL OF GOVERNANCE, DESTROYING COUNTRIES AS THEY PLEASE TO STEAL AND IMPOSE THEIR RULES. US IS A ROGUE STATE, NOT WITHOUT FLAWS.
@@docprune9922 It is alive in Putins heart, as well as in hearts of his supporters. Everyone of them believes that there is a war between Russia and USA.
This certainly hasn't aged well. The "distinguished" scholar apparently gets his facts from the mainstream media and like a crow too clever by half, falls into an intellectual trap!
Yes, the US acted as if it can change regimes at the cost of thousands of lives worldwide.
But it gets more following/funding/support than a more rigorous approach. After all, most people just want support for a certain narrative rather than truth.
@@MichaelKoksharov and what's the truth? What you want to believe? And this guy who has studied this stuff for decades...his views just don't matter if they don't match up with what you want to believe. And that's how it is with almost everyone. It is hard, maybe impossible, to find someone who really wants to know "the truth".
@@mattcrosby2310 no...you're right because you've almost certainly got it all figured out a priori without doing any study at all.
If the USA should have used negotiation as a tactic to delay Russia's deployment of a military option, then surely that's an admission that there was little expectation of good faith negotiation and therefore why imagine Russia was negotiating in anything like good faith to begin with?
In the Balkans 30 years ago, the Vance-Owens negotiations achieved nothing but delay to the international response to the escalating ethnic-cleansing that was taking place - those negotiations were being held with bad faith actors and were used as cover by the Serbian forces to continue its depopulation strategies.
Russia's intentions are clear: Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine. Their methods are deadly and their stock of good faith is nil.
An early defeat is a less costly defeat - allowing Adolf Hitler to occupy Czechoslovakia without opposition created a much more powerful opponent that inevitably had to be faced later on. Europe has learned that lesson and that's why they are acting on the Ukraine invasion.
What happened to Minsk ?
Take it from their viewpoint. NATO is pushing towards their borders (What for?) If they do not fight them in Ukraine, they will fight them at the gates of Moscow, just as they did couple of times before. This is about power projection, and nothing else.
@@robrob9050 NATO's been on their border since 1947, in Turkey.
NATO only exists because of regimes in Russia that want to impose tyrannical regimes over other countries.
NATO does not exist to invade other countries,l and never has done so.
Russia has invaded Chechnya, Georgia, and Ukraine. Their intention is clear and it has nothing to do with NATO.
@@xcrockery8080 So it's okay with US if the regime is in own country, without invading anybody?
@@robrob9050 Correct! You have the right to ruin your own country, until your regime becomes a problem for other countries.
I've come to this discussion a little late but would like to add the suggestion that there might be another element that could be Dr Graham's assessment of Putin's "basket of opportunities" in February 2022, namely the Covid pandemic.
Might he have thought that in the early post-Covid recovery period the focus of the governments of the NATO member nation's might be turned inwards towards getting their societies and their economies back on track and less outward on overseas commitments.
He Saw a chance the world being weakened by the epidemic and all the problems following i Think you are right this was a huge part of it
The Tale of Jack Kiev.
Once upon a time, there was a small boy, called Jack Kiev. He was 12 years old and was an orphan. When his mother died recently, he inherited her cottage, with a little bit of land.
He worked hard all day every day, cultivating his plot and producing a good yield. He had some extra vegetables and chickens, so he took them to the market for sale.
At the market, the elder sons and daughters, of the Otan Family, came and bought his produce. They asked the boy, “Who is in charge of the business, as we need a regular supply? We would like to discuss business and come to some arrangement.”
Jack said, “I’m in charge of the business! For I am an orphan and I will supply your needs.”
So they signed a contract and Jack’s spirits were lifted, for he was quite sad and lonely.
Once a week he went to the Otan household and delivered the wares that they needed and they paid him kindly.
Sometime soon after, the Otan Family asked Jack to help with some chores, cutting grass and painting the shed. The Otan house, was very large with many rooms, for they had 16 sons and 17 daughters, who were always kind to Jack, so they became good friends. Jack was overjoyed with finding friendship with the Otan Family.
Jack was always hardworking and never failed to be productive. As his own homestead and finance grew, he bought some sheep and reared lambs.
Old Father Sam Otan was pleased with Jack. So when Jack turned 14, he made a promise to him. “When you turn 16, you can marry, whichever of my daughters that you find to be most beautiful and you will be my Son!”
Jack nearly fainted and cried aloud, “Thank you Father Sam! God has truly blessed me! May Heaven and Earth hold dear to your promise.”
One month later, an angry bear from the forest, came upon Jack’s cottage and ravaged his flock and stole some sheep. Jack was mortified and ran to the Otan house. “Help help! There’s a bear at my home, who’s killed my sheep!”
The Otan Family were shocked and said, “Don’t worry we will stand by you and help to fight the bear.” So they sent two of the younger sons, who brought their slings and spears and went with Jack to fight the bear. But the bear was too big and strong for them to kill it. But they managed to scare the bear enough, so that it went away. “Thank you for your help!” said Jack and the two sons went back to their home.
A couple of weeks passed by and the angry bear came back to Jack’s cottage, killing and eating some lambs. Jack ran to the Otans, “Help help! The bear has come back!” So three of the sons, went with Jack and they all fought against the bear. This time the bear hurt Jack and killed one of the sons and then went back to his lair. The sons went back to their home and reported the news.
Two more weeks passed by and the bear came back to Jack’s cottage. It caused great damage to the chicken shed, broke some fences and killed all the chickens.
Jack ran back to the Otans and this time, four of the sons, all armed with new swords and shields, went with Jack to fight the bear. They fought for many hours but the bear was too big and strong, even for all of the sons. The bear was enraged, bc it’s foot was hurt by them. It killed two of the sons and wounded the others and then went back to its lair.
Two weeks later, the bear and its mate, came upon Jack’s cottage. They killed all the remaining lambs and knocked over a burning lantern, the lantern caught fire to the barn and store houses, destroying all the produce, This time the bears quickly left, before they could be attacked.
Jack ran to the Otans, “Help the bears have attacked my home and the place is on fire!” So the Otan Family all quickly went and helped to extinguish the blaze. Five of the sons all stayed with Jack, “We’ll help to rebuild the farm and this time we’ll stay with you, to guard against the bears.
They all worked hard to rebuild the farm and the Otans pitched their tent next to Jack’s cottage. But the bears came in the night and killed three of the sons as they slept. Jack and the other two sons ran back to Old Sam Otan and reported the news.
Old Sam Otan wept bitterly in his grief and the shock nearly killed him. “Right this time, take some horses and wear armour and buy some new lances and we’ll finish the bears off for good. So six of the sons saddled their horses and went to find the bears. They rode to the forest and crossed the stream that runs from the mountains. They rode for four days and eventually found the bears trail. The eldest son said, “Right we’ll camp here for the night and at dawn we’ll attack the bears. What could possibly go wrong?”
The bears caught the scent of the Otan party and came upon them in the darkness. The great bear with his mate and all their cubs with them. They killed all the horses and all of the sons as well, except one who barely managed to escape. He ran all the way home and reported the news.
Old Father Otan, his wife and remaining children were stricken with grief. They held council and after many days, they came up with a plan. “Right!” said Old Sam Otan, “I’ve had enough of this great bear! I’ve lost 11 of my sons and we only have 5 left. 7 of my daughters are strong and old enough to fight, as well as any man. We’ll all go to Jack’s cottage together that makes 12 and myself 13. We’ll make traps and build strong fences and walls around the farm.”
So they all went to Jack’s farm and did as they had planned and two weeks later the great bear, came to Jack’s farm with his family. The bear saw how strong the defences were, he hesitated and looked across the valley. He saw the Otan house with no walls and no one there, except some young girls and old mother Otan. He had grown tired of the taste of lambs, chickens and horses and now he wanted something else. So the great bear and his family went back to the forest and waited for night to come.
He took his family to the Otan house and then charged in with speed and fury. All the bears smashed the doors and windows open and ran through the house, but there was no one there, the house was empty.
All of a sudden there was a blast of hunting horns and a great cacophony of noise. The house was surrounded by Jack and all the Otans. Old mother Otan had been warned, by her pet falcon, of an approaching danger and had left with her daughters and gone to her sister’s house. She had sent a carrier pigeon to Old Sam Otan at Jack’s cottage, who ambushed the bears.
“Fire!” Screamed Old Sam Otan at the top of his voice and they all hurled their burning torches at the house. Some of the bears ran out and were cut down as they ran and the house burned to the ground.
Old Sam Otan and his company went through the ashes and counted all the dead bears. “They’re all here!” said the eldest son, after laying the bears bodies out. “No wait a minute, there’s one missing!”
They all scouted around the area, but the mate of the late great bear, was nowhere to be found....
The end?
A key question for the people from the West. Is Russia right to fear NATO at some point in the future? If so what would you do if you were them?
The Western media and policy establishment would call a nuclear strike on Moscow "defensive", in their opinion Russia has no right to do anything except sit there while NATO prepares to encircle and destroy them.
Why would NATO want to invade Russia?
NATO is
an existential threat to Russia . Would you trust a socio psychopath just because he asked you to ?
The Russians accuse the West of having "Russiophobia," when I think it is actually the Russians that have NATOphobia.
No, for Russia there is nothing to fear from NATO as long it does not attack one of its members because its a defensive alliance. The Europeans have much better things to do with their money then playing war in remote places. That time of Empires is gone. The European major powers finished that game with WW1&2. Thats why you have diplomacy and economy. BTW, the same game that China is playing!
Remember Iraq and how Bush needed the "Coalition of the Willing?" that alone shows you the unwillingness of European NATO member states to play war. Yes, the UK played along and what did it get out of it? NOTHING! Say what you want about US military adventures, at least they dont threaten nuclear exchange when things go south for them.
Regarding your question what Russia should do, get its house in order. Russia is on paper super wealthy but has the same GDP as Italy! Seriously? Neither are the Russians dumb or lazy but with the current system in place which promots corruption and oppression this will not end well for the Russian people. Major mistakes were made after the disolvement of the Eastern Block and the US is a good deal to blame for that but also Europe was distracted by the Yugoslavian Civil War and Iraq. Instead of sending business consultants to Russia they rather should have send lawyers and NGOs to promote the development of civic society.
There is much, much more to say on that topic but this is to long for a YT comment section.
PS The one thing one can do as a Russian is to support the brave Russian citizens who demonstrate against this stupid war. When I go to the streets to demonstrate, nothing happens to me, they are risking life and limb by showing up!
3:08 "to contain USSR that is Russia" - this distinguished gentlemen doesn't understand that it is not even close to same. An expert for western Europe wouldn't say "United Kingdom that is England" or "US that is Texas" or "EU that is Germany". Can not even listen that simple man hegemonic thoughts further.
it only proves that this so called gentleman knows very little. Waste of time.
NATO propagandists are intellectual pygmies with historical amnesia.
I agree. USSR is NOT Russia today ! Russia a free and sovereign state that returned the priesthood of the church that the USSR killed entirely in its time.
Great response, Guzjebesku. The Ukrainian ambassador to Norway pointed this out clearly. He said that the Red Army that liberated northern Norway in 1945, was something completely different from the Russian aggressors that are invading Ukraine now.
When you are running a "Q & A" session it always pays to pass a microphone around the audience.
(Assuming, of course, that you're even interested in hearing the question in the first place.)
they want to repeat the lies.
lies that they know what Putin is thinking. they do not.
Where on Earth people assume Russia´s plan was to take Kiev in a few days? When a single Russian official even suggested taking Kiev was in their plans? I have not heard or read a single source citing a Russian authority admitted that was their original plan. Hours before the invasion, Putin in its speech set up four goals, and they have been working in them. And none of them was taking territory in central or western Ukraine.
I made it only to the 24th minutes. That was plenty enough. There is no proof whatsoever Russia used chemical weapons in Syria. Actually, the Syrian forces were accused, but it was quickly disproof as a propaganda maneuvering by the revels. The first speaker repeated too many Western points lacking any substance.
Why do I never come across the assertion, or assessment that Putin could simply not stand the fear that Ukraine would do better then Russia on all fronts, under democracy, and that this would contaminate Russia to also want democracy. (and to some extend that Putin also wanted to punish Ukrain for wanting to abolish autocracy.) Sure, Ukraine is also tremendous food supplier and geographicly important, but if Russia had decided to compete with usa on grounds of less hypocrisy in matters of humanitarian and democratic goals - it would have won all the sympathy of the world it feels humiliating and is furious about not to have.
I did. I think it was an analysis by some Polish expert. He said almost exactly what you are saying: that it is insult for the Russian leaders, that people who are mentally so close to Russians can chose western values and political system, and do much better thanks to that. Perhaps we, Poles know Russians better. We fought with them, we were occupied by them, but also loved them. For instance my grandfather was Polish and grandmother was Russian :-)
@@marek-kulczycki-8286 why you are saying that Ukrainians are close mentally to Russians? That what Russian propaganda would say. And how recent events are backing your point?
@@vanone8454 Firstly: I was quoting somenone which was clearly indicated. Secondly: For the matter discussed it's more important how Russian powers are seeing this topic, then what is the real picture. And lastly: I knew closely people of many origins. From my experience Russians are very similar to us - Poles, while I can tell the same about Ukrainians. If you take an average German, Englishman, Aussie - there will be a noticeable difference in behavior. I am talking about averages, because there are for instance extreme Russian nationalists with whom I can't find a way to communicate. If we take two persons of a totally different social background - this can play a more significant role then ethnic origins. This is the war of the systems, not mentalities. Civil wars tend to be the bloodiest ones.
@@marek-kulczycki-8286 Ukraine today is doing to Russia what your grandfather patriotically did to Russia too.
Nothing to do with that.
NATO, Nazis, Donbas.
I do appreciate these discussions, as it shows what the line of thought is from a western perspective regarding the lead-up to the war and where we are now. However, their proposed solution of an eventual partition of Ukraine, as well as its rejection to NATO as a compromise for ending the war is a fatal mistake. In the annals of Russian power, displays of strength and brutality are what make and break empires. Concession would only reinforce Putin's (and the Russian elite) conviction that now is the time to push hard at dismantling the liberal international order. Appeasement, just as in WWII, would bring Russia closer to direct confrontation with NATO.
"Liberal international order"? The west continues to pretend. No such thing outside of their imagination
thanks John, I think you are right, much as Biden and NATO don't want to hear that. Eventually to save Ukraine from a rout, it will mean boots on the ground, planes in the air, and A-10 Warthogs going after all that Russian artillery and rocketry. From wherever it is firing. Had the US, Briton, France and Poland even sent a regiment each before the invasion - since their intelligence proved so accurate - sent them to the vicinity of the major cities but not right to the Russian border, Putin might not have done it. Putin has read us and especially Biden and Germans the way the Nazi leadership read the West, 1935-1939, especially the failure to intervene in the Spanish Civil War, 1936-1938. Now it's hell to pay, with the bill mainly due in Ukrainian blood and structures, all of civil society in ruin in many parts of their country. I'm on the left, but I break with them on this issue.
(Disclaimer: I’m not the lady in the helmet, but she hangs w/ me a lot.) The complaint about “institutes” being off-base is utterly clueless, and typical of ignorant Yanks who demand definitive facts about deeply nuanced situations, and recklessly disclaim responsibility for contributing to sort out the fog of (not so much war as typical INTERnational) affairs.
…One is tempted to invoke the model of “praying in one’s own closet.”
Actually, the situation is quite opposite. Russia has done a lot to reset relations with the collective West after the Cold War: they dismantled the Warsaw Pact, abandoned communism, dismantled USSR, allowing former Soviet Republics to become independent, stopped flying strategic bombers next to NATO borders, allowed western experts to inspect nuclear installations, signed a treaty to decrease the number of nuclear weapons, opened up its market to western capital and goods. etc. The West, on the other side, continued flying strategic bombers next to Russian borders, thus showing they still considered Russia an enemy, published online the locations all ex-Soviet nuclear facilities, financed anti-Russian propaganda in ex-Soviet republics, trying to lush them away from Russia, armed and financed radical muslim terrorists from Caucasus, organised a coup in Ukraine, and installed a puppet anti-Russian government in Kiev, encouraged them to start and continue an 8-year-long war in Donbas against their own Russian speaking citizens, and armed and trained their army. The West also broke the agreement not to expand NATO over ex Warsaw Pact countries several times, installed launchers that can fire nuclear missiles in Poland and Romania, and talked about accepting Ukraine in NATO, too, which would allow NATO to put launchers that could reach Russian nuclear missiles in just 5 to 20 minutes.
So, it was not concession and appeasement that brought West and Russia to the brink of WW3, but continuous hard line policy of hostility and ignoring any Russian interests or security concerns. That showed Russia that concessions to the collective West were mistake, and that they need to start talking the language of the West - the language of force.
Hardly anybody takes the Kremlin propaganda seriously anymore so spare yourself the trouble. Russia is a mafia state run by a brutal dictator who poisons his political opponents. He is trying to rebuild the Russian/Soviet empire. Fortunately, it looks like his kleptocratic regime (corrupt to the core, based on lies and oppression) will not be able to achieve this.
Hats off to the professor who spoke at 39:22. Excellent points and perspectives.
I don't really like the "if things had been different in the past, would they be different now?" question, because that's just impossible to know and will probably be answered with "obviously yes" and "obviously no" depending on what position you want to argue for. (Personally I would just say that I don't have a reason to believe that things being different in the past would make it different now.)
If Ukraine had been left to its own devices it would remain in Russia's sphere of influence, trade etc. It's was the NATO empire's attempt at pulling it into theirs which split it in Two. The coup of 2004 was reversed because the majority are pro russian. In the 2014 madian coup the west and their ultra nationalist fractions/militias made sure that would not happen. Remember Zelensky elected on a strong peace platform and mandate to implement the Minsk accords but of course our empire couldn't let democracy run it's course. They WANTED this confrontation by proxy and they want to bleed Russia down to the last Ukrainian. Putin took the bait
so, what do you think of all the wars started by the USA since the fall of soviet union? if we want to get to the root of the matter, all the wars since the end of ww2?
Yes, he kinda carefully pointed out that what the first speaker brought up is nonsense to put it politely. Tbh I watched only the first 5 minutes of that and skipped to 39:22 in the hope of finding something more encouraging, I did.
Other scholars, particularly those familiar with the inner workings of Russian during the last 20 years, have pointed out in multiple ways that the reason and trigger for Russia‘s Ukraine-war is solely found in the 21st century. That whole Nato-extension variant has been debunked extensively - in particular there were never treaties or promises forbidding independent countries to join Nato. The idea that bigger countries get a say about who their neighbor’s friends may or may not be is history. Also Putin himself is on the record stating that Ukraine in its borders is untouchable - that however must have been before 2006.
At some point he found out that to western leaders he is a goon and Putin just didn’t deal well with it. What are a couple of ten-thousand dead compared to an imperator‘s hurt ego after all?
@@michaela.178 you are why there is war in ukraine right now.
Part of the problem is that state department people play games
Its simple really: diplomacy only works when it is backed by military (and economic) power. Russia has to feel considerable pain before they will enter into negotiations.
And then they'll go nuclear
I think it is high time West feels a little pain for Livia, Palestine, Afghanistan and Iraq
@@tommyodonovan3883
Most of the country will be vapourized within half a day if they do and they know it. Their boomers under the ice are probably already being tracked. The planet community could survive it. Russia could not.
If China is smart they'll stay the hell out of it.
@@juuscafret9733
No.
Ukrainian's pains are still not enough at this point?
I have a lot of Ukrainian friends who are fighting for their lives right now and the Western values that most of us believe in. If Russia takes Ukraine it destablizes Eastern Europe, NATO, and the existing World Order. I think Western interests overlap entirely with Ukrainian interests!
I did not enjoy Thmas Graham emphasizing the Russian point of view at the start of this presentation. It could be looked at from a number of other angles. None of them are positive. The participant's later question on what would have happened without NATO expansion was very revealing as far as Russian aggression is concerned.
Finally, the only comment Graham made about Ukraine was Zelensky's unpopularity. There was no real sensitivity or analysis on who they are and what they are fighting for. Just that the US and the Russians should settle the deal. It's really too bad that no educated Eastern European was there to challenge Graham's self-satisfying views. I would not go so far as to describe him as a ''fellow traveller'' but this presentation stuck in my throat.
sorry for my english , but any way i am understandable , i swear if not exoantion nato no one russia would aproove even crimea . We do not nead ukrain . they have nothing in comparrison damages and expeneses we face npw amd in a future . But now for us it is war for existence , like probable lounching war by US in carribean crisise . Pure and simpe . If you have a flate you do not have rights to keep explosives . be like switzerland and srtive .
Russia must not lose, the world order must change. The USA chose Ukraines destruction for their own ends. I lost my in Mar
Mariupol and may lose the one in Kiev. I didn't want any of this. When you accept the US doesn't give a damn about Ukraine lives, or the country. That you've been shafted by the USA, then you will understand the picture
Why are your friends fighting for their lives NOW.... They have lived peacefully along side Russia since 1991, and been trading partners? Their families are intertwined? Only since the Vampire States Brainwashed them with their evil propaganda did they become destabilized... Russia will NOT TAKE Ukraine? Al they are there for is to DENAZIFY Ukraine, get them to declare NEUTRALITY and be INDEPENDENT of the VAMPIRES/NATO and the George Soros MAFIA? Russia bent over backward to prevent any bloodshed by sticking to the Minsk agreement, right until Donetsk and Luhansk declared Independence..When they agreed to send in a Peacekeeping Force to protect Donetsk and Luhansk that had been smashed, demoralised, terrorised. mutilated, raped and murdered for EIGHT YEARS from when the USA paid to foment trouble and create a regime change?.... Is your friend a Nazi?
Explain if you can, how do Western interests overlap with Ukrainian?
Do you mean they have given over all their untapped resources to the USA investors who have already paid their deposits, and agreed to give up all their young people to die in the Vampire's Proxy War for God only knows what? A medal? A cold grave? Or a mutilated body and mind?
@@Alexey1967And what about Sweden and Finland entering NATO. Are they existential as well for your survival??? No, the war is only existential for the survival of Putin and the nationalist extremists that support him.
What you really fear in Ukraine is a successful democratic state which would humilate a totalitarian Russia. Please look yourself in the face and realize just how narrow and biased your arguments are!!!
@@barrylane1055 1. Wordl oder in you way is the freedom west to invaid in any countries , like iraq, lybia, syria ( us are still there ) , posibility to Push any country to accept you conditions .
Ucrain had had not any rights to bobm donbass . Ucrain was de facto has began part of nato , and they had no any poroblem not provoke russians in ukrain , like in Belgium the manage language problems . They reale impose Nazi ideology . This fact you could not deny .
They were instigated by US to try expell aour fleet from crimea. We just used time after coup in 2014 and ssisted crimea to select it's future. Finland and sweeden . That is not the same . They are realy peacefull . And we hope their membership is still on the table. Negociations wll be in a future . As we see we are not weak and for us it is decolonisation of russia. Saudies and Turkey request to be new members of BRICS . ISOLATION OF Rissia is going on)))) we glad how Venezuela and Arabs ignore USA . JUST BECAUSE OF ROSSIAN EXISTENCE .
We are garant of realization of the Minsk treaties . Ukrain ignore them and terrorise donbass . So we are using compultion . Pere and simple . As usa do , when they allowed to do that . Drunk obedient poodle Eltsin wos friend of the west . Who argue ? We will crush ukranian NAZI regime , and we will back about where NATO should be in 1997 . We have differetn opinions . What is the reason and what the concecuence . It is sad if your friend will be dead or crippled . If Putin have leaved russians on donbass and crimea with NAZI without protection we would have not to vout for him . He knows that . Now we support his policy . In 1918 i escaped from hospital to vote for him. He is our leader , although i am not agreed with him in some steps, and priorities . But newer the less hi knows what hi does.
This all sounds like assuming Russia is a rationally acting Nation state and not an organized crime run country.
exactly, it doesn’t make sense to pretend Russia would respect diplomacy or reality any more than the mexican cartels would or Kim Jong Un for that matter.
you need to look into Ukraine..
@@skodalaskoda8754 Agreed. I think he mixed the two up. He needs to go over to Ukraine and meet the Azov Nasties. Organised crime and mafia pale in comparison to that sub-human group of people.
@@ashecbtb9509 it is not even that, Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in the world.
Please do yourself and everyone else a favor and invest in a headset microphone !!! It's very annoying when the volume varies drastically up and down every time you turn your head or lean forward / backward ect.ect. !!! People might be less inclined to tune out and move on and listen to what your subject matter is about !!!
Is Watson Institute an Israeli based NGO Think tank or a US based one? Either way this guy's assessment seems to be a resume for a job at the Used State Dept .. Would love to read their assessment of Afghanistan a year before it fell to the Taliban.. Or how Assad would be taken out within weeks of US involvement in Syria..
How the hell did you menage to throw Israel into this?
@@michalperach984 What? "Blame Canada" passe. Now it's blame Israel. th-cam.com/video/ip5OWcoE6GE/w-d-xo.html
@@michalperach984 Israel controls much of US foreign policy.
@@ot23234 You should have a special military operation to de-nazify yourself
He works for the CFR. Go figure.
This guy thinks Putin was in this to negotiate? This was never just about NATO. This is about Russian nationalism, Ukrainian nationalism, and the belief in the Kremlin and certain other Russian military and intellectual circles that believe Ukraine as a nation should never have existed. He's completely glossing over the ideological portion of this war.
ukraine existed before russia did but Putin wouldnt let that stop him
Imagine this guy in 1941 talking about Hitler.
German would be the lingua franca and maybe "official" language of the world, most Jews would have been exterminated, there wouldn't even be a "Ukraine" or a "Russia" because of lebensraum...well you get the gist...
I'd love to start squatting on his land with guns and see if he negotiates or calls the cops to forcibly remove me. Then would he say the resulting shootout was could've been negotiated? Negotiation only works when both sides have a respected baseline. Academics...smh.
This guy would be in Berlin, talking about Hitler and how it was unfair what is being done to Germany both now and during the aftermath of WW1.
In 1941 this guy would be on Hitlers side.
This isn't 1941, and Putin isn't Hitler.
While it sounds like a dumb ad hitlerum, there is actually a plausible scenario that's fairly similar.
Except it would involve the Allies not protecting Poland, so there's no war in the west. Germany and its fascist allies form a de facto EU (without France or the Low Countries). They hate "Russia" with a passion, which in turn is already a sworn enemy of the Allies. So the Allies had good reason to join the "EU" in an effort to take down the USSR.
There's even some similarities in timeline: Russia had collapsed ~25 years before, was partially restored in a brutal civil war. Its current leader, Stalin, was a beast who had massacred millions, plotted to restore all of Russia, and ultimately (openly) wanted to take the world, and the USSR had done a lot more to try that, than Russia has. So there's a higher justification then than there is now.
Ukraine's situation is slightly different: it was under Stalin's tyranny. Other than that, there was major Ukrainian nationalism, and a significant group that did join the nazis more fully, which is analogous.
Finally, the situation has some comparison in the Winter War (likewise a Russian disaster, where the "EU" helped out Finland), so it's a thinkable scenario.
For better analogy, we'll assume Hitler agreed to deport the Jews to Palestine (solves that morality) and is willing to let the Slavs die to natural population decline instead of a policy of sterilization. His ambitions were to incorporate a regime-changed European Russia into the Reich, which is a thinkable objective for our EU.
Finally to launch the scenario, we assume Ukraine revolts while Russia is weakened by the Winter War, and grabs its current territory. Come 1941, Stalin attacks. The Reich ships arms, and is considering to intervene militarily.
To what extent should the Allies, in this scenario, join Hitler in his efforts to at least help Ukraine, and probably take down Stalin's tyranny, and collapse the USSR?
It’s not about any of that it’s about ukraines gas . Most of it is in crimea and …. You guessed it the donbass
Are these "experts" going to give us regular updates? Now THAT would be interesting.
How's your boss since the aeroplane crash, Ivan?
No assessment, unless I missed it, of the effect of sanctions and gass/petrol politics on the outcome of this war and Ru's future.
Well, sanctions against the Russian Federation have caused the Russian GDP to drop by an estimated 10%. If the Russians lose in Ukraine, their GDP will drop by approximately 50%. This being the case, it's safe to say that sanctions are small potatoes.
By the same token, western investment in Ukraine is a major factor in the run- up to this conflict- primarily because of the large reserves of natural gas discovered there in 2012. This is one of the two major reasons for the conflict.
it is hard to assume that the State Dept did not want war
The US isnt in a war genius. The only guy who wanted war is Putin.
@@fuerstmetternich1997 wrong. wake up pls
@@turquoiseowl No you wake up from your conspiracy far right/left (either way it is bad) trip. People who think everything is a conspiracy are just lazy with a very weak educational background. Please start educating yourself outside of far right/left garbage on the internet.
@@fuerstmetternich1997 is the leaked recording of Victoria Nuland planning the next government leadership of Ukraine in Feb 2014 three weeks before the violent putsch that resulted in those very people becoming leaders a lazy conspiracy theory? how does an educated person such as yourself interpret that call out of interest?
@@turquoiseowl Dude I am pro democracy and anti-authoritarianism. I dont care by what means but I want every single oppressive corrupt governent including the Russian and Chinese government toppled. The corrupt pro Russia regime in Ukraine was rightly overthrown. Nobody needs fascist wannabe dictators!
Also it was violent because the state shot at protesters, thats why it was violent.
Actually Putin only chose war after spending 8 years holding off on war in the hope that Ukraine would keep to it's commitments in regards the Minsk agreements. Now look at how quicky Bush Jnr chose to go to war against Iraq, which was far more brutal, murderous & destructive.
The double standards & hypocrisy of the west in these regards are over the top.
Anyone who says they have the Russian playbook isn't worth listening to.
-Colonel Douglas McGregor
Anyone who thinks the Russians were trying to sack Kiev with 50000 troops doesn't know what they're talking about. -Everybody that knows anything about war.
Can't have the public knowing what is going on in their own government.
That is typically how diplomacy is done. Imagine electing leaders to conduct diplomacy, crazy!
Early on, he said Russia could never have hoped to join the EU. Why? A Russian leadership with a more democratic perspective could certainly have joined the EU and been an incredibly valuable member.
Germany, France and the Baltic states never are going to accept that.
There would have been no money to be made for the Western arms industry like that, the American and other Western countries political system is almost completely lost to big Military, Pharma, Money, Food, Media who do control the levers of power.
Deliberate lie by him. Reveals his true intentions. War profits to help the economy in the tank.
On March 5, 2000, in an interview on the BBC, he stressed that "Russia is part of European culture" and that he had difficulty presenting NATO as an enemy, noted that Russia had a negative attitude towards NATO expansion, but did not ruled out Russia's entry into NATO, subject to the mutual interests of the parties. In 2010, in an article in the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, timed to take part in the annual economic forum, Putin suggested that the European Union create an economic alliance on the territory from Vladivostok to Lisbon, starting with the unification of customs tariffs and technical regulation, the abolition of the visa regime with the EU. In the European Union, by this time, they were busy with their own project aimed at involving the countries of the post-Soviet space in their orbit - the Eastern Partnership initiative, which involves the development of ties with Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. So draw your own conclusions.
JSC Early on Russia didn't want to join the EU, But then President Putin's Government decided it was a good idea, but they were then blocked.... Just as they were blocked from NATO, and now we know why. Because NATO was devised with the express purpose of "PUSHING BACK THE RUSSIAN HOARDS AND DISMANTLING IT" Those same hoards who lost 22 MILLION souls helping to eradicate the Nazis and keep Europe safe! And will do again. But this time the US have shown their true face as has the UK. We are now SUPPORTING THE NAZIS.
Why not let Russia be a member of NATO?
After Russia's reaction to Finland and Sweden joining NATO, can we just accept that "Ukraine in NATO" threat is just a Russian red herring?
Why??
Saying that a Russian strike into Poland as a possibility at this time is an really odd thing to say...
You are 💯 right
can't rule it out considering the increasingly deranged ways Putin is showing
the man is a lunatic
It makes no sense...unless he is setting a false flag. America has done that before.
Agree with most of your points. The Perun TH-cam channel has published a series of videos on the Russian- Ukrainian conflict that goes in-depth on numerous related topics.
Even if Putin was to succeed in regime change, at this point Russia has lost on the strategic front by unifying Ukraine as a nation state, unifying the EU, EU NATO membership military expenditure increases, Finland and Sweden applying to join NATO, long term infrastructure builds will change EU usage of Russian energy forever, western corporations leaving Russia for years to come, Russian educated population leaving Ukraine, etc.
PS - Russia did sign on to respecting Ukrainian borders which Russia, USA, UK and France acted as guarantors
PS2 - Trump administration spent 4 years interfering with Ukraine and undermining things in general. It is a miracle that Russia didn’t win outright.
PS3 - will any European country / politician ever trust Russia?
Your delusional.
The agreement also included that foreign governments wouldn't interfere in their politics and military which US violated from 2013 to now. So the agreement was voided due to the actions of corrupt politicians in Ukraine and the US violating the agreement.
@@ExCommie Completely forgetting what the Russians did and are doing.
If Russia wins the eastern side Dinieper river of Ukraine the Russian speaking people will support Russia overwhelmingly therefore Russia will have full control there.
That in 2014, Russia did not help the aspirations of Russian speaking people of Ukraine less Donbas n Crimea, this time when special operations was launched by Russia they didn’t show outwardly support as they were not sure if Russia real wanted real estate in Ukraine.
Whatever other might propagate on all people of Ukraine uniting is not true.
@@ExCommie yes US violated moment Victoria Nuland declared on her alleged speech tape given out by Russia that they have spent more than five billion dollars for installing their choice of regime in Kyiv.
What happened to the questions that were in the “speed round”? The video jumps over all of these and goes to the end where Graham is responding to a question not in the video.
Probably saying something not good about Ukraine, so it got edited out
You don’t call it denazification when you want just a regime change. They do really want also to extinguish Ukrainian identity as well.
Wow sounds just like the same conversation the US had about Europe at the start of ww2 .
Please read history, it would be helpful for a responsive and responsible guy like you. After all , it is guys like you and me who fix a policy. No offense, bro but a suggestion. Thanks and Peace.
Peter - EXACTLY!!! And the same old rhetoric that preceded Iraq/ Afghanistan/Libya and Syria. Not to mention Lebanon/Egypt/Etitrea/Somalia/Ethoipia/Yemen. The Vampire Parasites and their attack dogs NATO and the MAFIA will never be content until they own ALL the world's resources and are left with only a few slaves to work their precious metal/diamond/opal mines and oil drilling rigs.
What is so special about Ukraine all of a sudden? Open Wiki and see what they are sitting on. Billions in untapped resources that the investors have already paid a deposit on. That's why they won't negotiate with Russia. For after Ukraine it will be on to Russia that has more minerals and precious resources than ALL THE REST OF THE WORLD PUT TOGETHER.
Never forget the role of Rothschild and Rockefellers who actually control the whole shebang.....
“coordination of public opinion can only be managed by a specialized class which operates through “intelligence bureaus.”
The Ukrainians were shelling civilians.
WTF did they expect would happen
interesting and I agree that we didnt reach out a hand to Russia when we could have .. we were triumphalist BUT the idea that we just had over millions of humans to this heinous capitalist yet autocratic regime just because they might kill us all is utter nonsense... we have chosen a reasonable if cowardly strategy to support a nation which has proven its determination and now alas pushing Russia beyond what they may consider acceptable is inevitable. if irrationality kills us all ..it wont be our irrationality, the reality is, as with all human resistance is that its better to be dead than a Russian citizen under this regime I regret to say .
It's never been about Russia being concerned about NATO. It's always been about Russia wanting Ukrainian oil, gas, coal, and manufacturing. Russia didn't invade Georgia because they were worried about Georgia joining NATO. This is just the current excuse. Russia wants two things: Russia wants money and Russia wants all the old Soviet satellites back. Russia wants her empire back along with the prestige and power that goes along with it. Everything else is just Russia denying, deflecting and misleading. I believe it's referred to as the Russian firehose of falsehoods. We couldn't have reached out to Russia to placate them. The Russians ignored the diplomatic agreements they already had in place. The sooner the world figures out that the Russians are lying, murdering, thieves and that any and all diplomatic agreements are absolutely pointless, the better for all. Except for the Russians failing militarily this all went exactly according to plan. And that's where Putin really failed. It will be decades before corporations and countries trust the Russians and invest there again. The money is gone and it's not coming back.
I disagree. Europe more than any other has bent over backwards to appease Russia for decades, the USA in the 90s did many things to try to make Russia's transition easier. I'm not saying they were well thought out or that there weren't things the US to to also make it worse, but to act as if it never happened is to misrepresent what was done.
See link for a timeline
2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/85962.htm
1. he's right about the failure of the US in the earlier negotiations with Russia well before the war began, all the way back to the early 2000's: we did not take Russian Russia seriously, the imbalance of power was too great in our favor.
2.He never refers to Professor Mearsheimer, who is the outspoken and serious defender of balance of power and spheres of influence and other nation's claims to "Monroe Doctrine's" of their own...if he doesn't take Mearsheimer seriously there is no hope for a citizen like me.
3. And there is no sense of historical movement - that Putin's internal conduct towards critics, or towards Syrians or Chechnya is a factor in how the former satellites look at this dynamic since 1989-1991...this pushes them towards NATO obviously...at what point NATO says no we have to live with Russia...
4. there has been a Civil War between the US and Russian inside Ukraine since...at least 2004, in many ways resembling the Spanish Civil War between 1936-1938 just as brutal on a smaller scale but which escalates in 2014...
5. He doesn't seem to evaluate the military aid given to Ukraine accurately: always too little too late and done with the primary eye not to escalate or anger Putin...
6. I've framed this as a war between the US and Russia by Ukrainian surrogate: very much like the losing of the Spanish Civil war to Franco and the Fascists when the Republican government was overthrown...
7. A smug indifference to the nature of the Russian conduct inside Ukraine since feb 24th and the scope of Ukrainian losses...kind of like upper middle class Americans and the top10% to the impacts on working people under Globalization, lack of medical care and dental care...tough luck, life is cruel...
8. No mention of the Food Crisis nor how Ukraine could survive a settlement which gives Russia Crimea, the coastal corridor and the Donbas - survive economically except as a Ukrainian Appalachia.
9. And of course, given the actual date of the speech, no sense of where the war is on June 9 with the Russian's winning the war of attrition.
I will express my opinion. Russia has been warning Ukraine and the EU about its Red Borders for quite a long time, if my memory serves me right, it started with Putin's Munich speech. Now the USA and its vassal Europe have crossed these lines, so let's get ready for World War III, gentlemen, dig bunkers and buy oatmeal!
Absolutely, and like you say about the indifference to loss of life to Ukrainians..mind blowing..
- Agree current events and history has shown Meirsheimer's theories to be foolish and lacking many considerations.
- Disagree its US v Russia because a) if this were so then US would not have hesitated to give heavy weapons earlier in the war b) even Meirsheimer says that US doesnt want to be bogged down in Europe in order to focus on Asia / China and c) russia is not a peer power to the US. So this arguement has no basis in reality
- As an extension, the Ukrainians have been fending off russian aggression and insidious cultural subversion for 300 years, this is just an extension of that
- agree with your point (5) appeasement never works and it angers me to no end
- Ukraine wont give up even Crimea, this is still their territory under internationally recognised borders. Maaaaybe they will if there is full russian withdrawal and reparations but UA will ask for a high price for Crimea
- now its 15 July and its not apparent than russia is winning anything. Likely losing in Izium region, parity in east, and gaining territory in Donbas at a slowing rate in Donbas. This is with the 60k of ammunition being thrown at UA daily!
@@dro355 "Ukrainians for 300 years repelled Russian aggression and insidious cultural sabotage" - you live in a parallel world, however, like most Ukrainians. It is foolish to pretend to be a person from the West, you are a person from the western part of Ukraine, or a Banderite from the eastern part. You've been so brainwashed that it's hard to sort out the varieties of your shit. They interfere with you with mud, they burn you in the trenches, you have almost 70,000 soldiers killed and captured, and you write like that here?
agree 100%. # 1 is the biggest problem, but the reason for it -- well, you added insights about Establishment attitudes -- the attitude of ivy league faux tough guys could be summed up simply as 'life is cruel', etc. Its driving alot of US hegemonic policy. its very scary that the US is forcing not merely inviting conflict right on the Russian border.
Just a thought, more of the same old fear and appeasement analysis. The brave people of Ukraine deserve a more thoughtful analysis one With a complete return of all territories and Marshall plan to rebuild🤔
Thank you for this deep analysis. However, the speakers seem to underestimate the deep divisions within Ukraine and their possible influence upon the final outcome. Ukraine is divided into three very distinct parts, not two. The western one-third of the country used to be a part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for hundreds of years, and thus belonged to an entirely different cultural and religious environment than the other two-thirds of present Ukraine. That is where Ukrainian nationalism was born, and - one must not forget about this fact - a large part of Ukrainian population sided with the nazis during the second world war, even forming a Ukrainian SS Division "Galizien", and that's where genocide was committed against the Polish, Russian and Jewish populations. The central part of Ukraine is inhabited by people many of whom call themselves "real Ukrainians", who are not friendly towards the "zapadniks" ("westerners", inhabitants of the formerly Polish part of present Ukraine), and the language they speak sounds more like Russian. This is the part of Ukraine that suffered from the famine under Stalin's rule, then suffered under German occupation during the second world war, and fought against the nazis in the Red Army. The easternmost part of present Ukraine consists mainly of lands conquered by Catherine the Great from Mongols, including Crimea and is inhabited by considerable, indigenous Russian population. After 1945 Poland lost the present western third of Ukraine to the Soviet Union, and after the fall of the latter, the Ukrainian SSR was transformed into the independent state of Ukraine within artificial borders, consisting of very different three parts which could hardly be expected to ever form a uniform, stable country.
They were very stable and prosperous prior to the Russian invasion.
glad everyone know about a million years ago but have no clue what happened 5 minutes ago
@@MrJamespeyton No, the country was thoroughly corrupt, the level of living was dropping, people were earning meagre salaries, and several million had to leave seeking jobs abroad. Check your facts.
@@ShawnJonesHellion Historia magistra vitae. Or rather "Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future" (George Orwell, 1984). If you conceal the past, you can manipulate the future. It doesn't work long-term, though.
So prosperous that they are the poorest country in Europe with only 1/3 of GDP per capita of Russia. Ukraine is also Europe's most corrupted country. They were so stable to have a color revolution.
It ain't about what Putin want and can demand cause he got nuclear weapons those countries have a right to choose democracy over communism and oppression and Dictators !
The problem for Russia is not Ukraine itself, but NATO expending to their frontdoor.
In addition to that: since 1991 Communism in Russia failed. Since those days, they have private industry, church could rise up again. But yes, they dont love liberalism.
FYI Russia is not communist.
@@mariajurgens9889
Ukraine had already been denied entry to NATO before this war and the new invasion has caused Sweden and Finland--who borders Russian to join that alliance...
So does our states that was involved in election fraud but yet we still get push back from the left and don't forget the laptop from HELL on the Bidens ....
@@kjj26k No, Ukraine wants to enter NATO and in the US--Ukraine charter on strategic partnership form November 2021 says, that USA wants to help them, get in.
I believe, that is a mainfactor for the war.
Great monologue. Shame that the simplicity of getting a microphone to peoples asking questions wasn’t mastered!!!!
They just want to lecture us.
They are scared. Really scared of Putin.
If Putin was not winning, why be scared?
Perhaps a response wasn't prioritized.
Technology will come if needed
I bet they did not realize they were speaking to half a million viewers within 7 days...
@@AndreasDelleske Yep, people are really searching for real info. Not some fake party line!
Sounds to me like this guy would turn over the Baltic nations and perhaps Poland to satisfy Russia's historic paranoia...
I say turn over Luxembourg to Russia to keep their Medieval Russian brains happy. It was never the same after Radio Luxembourg stopped playing the Beatles. The bloke talking here should just give Luxembourg to Russia.
It would not be the first time this happened to Poland and the Baltics.
WE ALL STAND WITH UKRAINE PEOPLE !!!
Words are cheap, pick up a rifle and head to the front. Only then will your self-serving post have any meaning.
He hasnt really said anything i havent heard or thought before
You are expecting too much. This is a mediocre college and mediocre professors. We already hear the best experts of our world in media. Humans aren't that smart. Temper your expectations
How many times USA decided to make a war in the last 30 years and how many wars Russia started, and how many died in those wars, can I have a answer for my knowledge please someone ?
When dealing with a complex and multi-faceted situation like the current Russia-Ukraine war, it is very important that discussions should be broad-based and should cover a full range of views and opinions. I found myself disagreeing with many of the points presented by Dr Graham and would have welcomed a panel discussion by specialists and experts with alternative views and opinions to those of Dr Graham. The presentation seemed to be very one-sided although I may have missed any challenge to his views at the end of the discussion. I also have to say that the war in Ukraine has now moved on from the situation on the 17th May and prognostications about the future given at that time do not now seem of much value (early August). Situation reports on an ongoing war have a very short useful lifespan and are of limited value in making long-term predictions about the future. Again, I feel a panel discussion which could have discussed a range of possible outcomes and scenarios would have been more useful.
Would have been even more useful had this discussion been fronted by people who were not CIA assets.
the us should go as far as necessary to support ukraine
If this professor's house was invaded by a gang and the police showed up to negotiate what parts of his house the gang could keep, maybe then he would understand how his comments look to Ukrainians.
You simply assume that there is only one Ukrainian, and the other civilians are furniture? I assume the only Ukrainian you knew is Zelensky.
@@xianseah4847
I simply assume that you don’t know any of Ukrainians
@@xianseah4847 Most Ukrainians are behind Zelensky.
Neoliberal Ukraine government has been killing Russian speaking Ukrainians since the 2014 coup. Which Ukrainians?
@@tedmoss
Yes, and those Ukrainians that don’t support Zelenskiy, accuse him of not enough of Russophobia
Playing the legalistic game between USA and Russia has very little credibility in the eyes of the world. We all know that the USA can no more claim to have a clean hand in this domain than Russia.
Playing dirty games is very much the practice of both powers.
The US hasn't attacked a European democracy for no other reason than nationalistic vanity.
I'm assuming you live in a democracy. If you do, have a think about all that means in terms of personal freedom and standards of living. If you don't, then enjoy your government directed propaganda and stay off western media comments sections.
"We all know” says it all.
You are full of feces. Russia's actions in Ukraine are every bit as reprehensible as those of the Nazis in the 1930s. Edited to add as.
@@gracchus7782 Straight forward, isn't it?
Misreading or not or open door for negotiations or not is totally irrelevant,Miniput have had these plans for making Russ.great again ( havent I heard these words before from another presi?) since he started out as a kgb agent in Germ.,he has never been interested in negos!!
You can't learn history reading biased history disseminating the propaganda of western terrorists!
Yet his last two offers werent even responded to
Crimea was Russian before she was given to Ukraine by Khrushchev ..1954
The USA should appreciate more what a friendly country neighbor Mexico is. Despite the immigration and drug issues. Those issues are purely socioeconomic, no ideology or national ambitions involved.
Canada says it's like living on top of a crack house, Mexico says the best friend you never wanted. 😂 That is what our neighbors think of us. We the USA is the old man sitting on the lawn with a shotgun and a case of beer. Avoid him at all costs.
@@lorainejones41 Interesting how Mexico didn't want to build a wall in exchange for getting rid of the drug gangs.
Mexico hasn't got a bloody comedian, like Zelensky for a president, who does not care how many thousand of his countrymen are killed, provided he gets a chance to fufill his own ambitions.
@@katalinrobin6222 Aren't the drug gangs killing people? I guess that would only get worse when invaded just like in Ukraine.
To be fair, we had a bit of it during our early days. Course, America won just by offering more independence to the north Mexican settlements, and trying to take them back didn't end well for Mexico.
"Significant European allies, the German and the French". What about all us Brits have done. Absolute slap in the face. We've lead the European and to some aspects, NATO response to Russias invasion. Notwithstanding the military assurances we've unilaterally given Sweden and Finland during their application.
Britain has also stepped up to the plate. I’m Canadian and we salute you, don’t worry about if one random dude didn’t give you props.
I think the UK is viewed with suspicion because of the huge influence that Russian money has in London and the various UK dependencies.
It the UK effort sincere, or just a superficial show?
I think a lot of people are unsure how close certain people in the UK government are to Russian intelligence officers.
The UK has done more than France or Germany. It is not lost on most of us.
@@rogerwilco2 given the frequency Russia threatens to nuke the UK, far more than the whole of the west combined, I'd say our efforts are legitimate. Granted we have a lot of dirty Russian cash in London but to my knowledge we've been at the forefront of rectifying this, including sanctioning and tracing said property.
UK EU UN
ALL US Lap Dogs !
Maybe it’s because of my service in US forces during the Cold War, but I’m having trouble caring much about the Kremlin’s security concerns.
putins russia has no valid claims or points. They are the true enemy of humanity because of their non stop threats to nuke the world if they cannot attack their neighbors at will.
And this is why all this situation can end up by nukes
@@АнтонЖелезнов-щ3х probably not. I don’t think anyone is that desperate.
@@michaeleastes1705 i thought the same way. But lately i had to change my mind.
@@АнтонЖелезнов-щ3х I hope not. Both of our countries deserve better.
He didn't 'choose' war...he found himself fighting one after his initial plan of 'liberating' Ukraine proved a fantasy.
Who are you referring to Rob...
Scott Ritter said the preliminary "attack" of Kiev was a feint to keep the bulk of the Ukrainian troops away from the Donbass which has always been the main objective of Russia!
jeez how stupid is this guy? Sending 5k troops to death and losing all the equipment doesnt look like a good feint
People ridiculed Sam Huntington, yet to me, he was spot on.
Absolutely.
Thank you Dr Graham, a rather scolarly presentation of the Russian arguments for this conflict. However, as an observer of this affair I feel that Putin's mindset, Russia's massive investment in millitary hardware over the past ten years and the economics of Russia facing a reducing dependence on fossil fuels as Europe transitions to renewables were the governing factors in his decision to go to war at this time. No doubt, the target was influenced by recent history as you describe. But IMHO the NATO/European expansion and regime change (a calculated replaying of US arguments) were just the pretext, very much as the bombing of Moscow apartments was a pretext for the second Chechen war.
As you rightly observe, there was little chance of Putin not millitating to recreate the Soviet era spheres of influence, even had NATO limited it's expansion as he wanted.
your view is not that of John Mearsheimer, but the field is packed with career tough guys
You just saved me one hour of my life; I've leas than zero tolerance for consuming fearful propaganda under the guise of academia and/or journalism. NATO is not without flaws but the preponderance of evidence going back DECADES indicate very clearly that this has always been a part of the Russian long-game
Even Thomas Graham is falling for the russian NATO Propaganda BS. Putin said cleary at the beginning of the war: Ukraine is not a nation. Ukraine is part of Russia, Ukrainan Culture does not exist. All the NATO BS was for us to believe. Ridiculous that those propaganda BS is part of this Analysis without CALLING IT OUT
This is about oil and gas earnings, and Russia infiltrating itself, as always, into the fabric of European society to influence strategic dependencies on the few things it sells - oil and gas. Ironically, Russia has now shown its hostility to European peace and democracy, its willingness to de-stabilise world food and energy markets, and as a result, accelerated that very transition of Europe to renewables by decades, reducing it to mere years.
Putin has shown himself to be a total loser, not as clever as he would like his own propaganda to portray himself as.
@@rd264 John Mearsheimer, is a russian hack!
Why wars end.
1. one side runs out of men and material and no longer has the resources to prosecute the war: ends in surrender.
2. one or both sides recognize that the cost is greater than anything that is to be gained: ends in truce or cease-fire or terms of surrender.
3. removal of authority prosecuting conflict by assassination, putsch, coup or other action.
I'm probably missing something here; If it comes to mind I might update this.
Strange that Graham would not mention that Russia was interesting to controlling Ukraine because of the Russian pipelines running through it which supply oil and gas to Europe.
Not with Nordstream 2 which had by-passed Eastern Europe with a direct supply to Germany...
And btw.
Despite the on-going war:
German gas storage level in February: around 24%
German gas storage level in late June: around 55%
If this is a shortage...and the largest one wasn't even put to use because it was still controlled until recently by a Russian company.
After this strategic infrastructure was sold to Gazprom.
"Germany will temporarily take control of a unit of Gazprom PJSC in the country as it seeks to safeguard security of gas supply.
Gazprom Germania GmbH -- owner of energy supplier Wingas GmbH and a gas storage firm -- will come under the trusteeship of the German energy regulator until Sept. 30, Economy Minister Robert Habeck told reporters in Berlin."
Just cut the pipe and remove it from Ukraine Europe are being told by USA to refuse Russia's energy so slash it.
I did like some parts of the speech but the whole "Putin needs a victory he can sell to the people or he could threaten to use nukes" discourse is dangerous because it makes the need for some "victory" for Putin necessary which sets a dangerous precedent: any nuclear power can do whatever and get a part of what they're asking for as part of an agreement.
Also it's not true, from the inside perspective as a person in Russia: people have no agency, and pretty much total control over the media makes it easy to present anything as a victory, even a defeat.
Also it leaves out the atrocities commited by Russia (including systemic repressions against Crimean Tatars since 2014) out of the question, and I believe we shouldn't do it
Russia will use toxic-gas munition on Ukraine! They allready did in Mariupol and in several instances against cities in Syria. The strategy is basically to force a surrender by threatening with total or at least massive annihilation of everyone alive in Ukraine...or just sterializing certain regions of Ukraine with chemical weapons.
At this point the question is how will Nato react!
Options:
1. Nato could close the Ukrainians skys and find themselves in a low intensity conflict with Russia and shield Ukraine from chemical weapons attacks.
2. Nato could switch to chemical weapon production, and deliver cruise missiles armed with chemical weapons to Ukraine, so Ukraine could target Russian centers of population, creating a balance of mass destruction capabilities...so Russia would hold back.
3. Nato could just watch how Ukraine gets genocided or how it get's forced into surrender after the gassing of some hundredthousends or millions of people.
Western polls show a majority of the Crimean Tartars now prefer being part of Russia to being part of Ukraine. Not to dismiss atrocities altogether but it's hard to imagine overall Tartar support for Russia would be possible if atrocities were on a large scale.
@@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311 Russia did just imprison every enemy of Russia. Many people living in Crimea fled that place as it helps not getting imprisoned or they would have to feign love for Putin to be save in Crimea.
Also Putin doesn't allow information that doesn't help his case into Russia or Crimea. Crimean people are completely unaware of what is actually going on. They think Russia is actually in conflict with the Nazi party in Ukraine freeing Russians from concentration kamps and gaschambers.
The West is most likely to attack with Nukes!
Biden said it himself, regime change.
If Putin is outside catching a tan in Moscow, what is the likelihood that Moscow is nuked to take him out?
Stealth cruise missiles????
A lot of one sided cope-wanking in that comment.
Europe's borders are not like the USA with a clear border for political power, economic power and military power. The gigantic shift right now is making the NATO almost Europe' s military power, covering the EU economic power and thus empowering Europe' s political power. Making Europe more Europe as an entity to reckon with regarding China and India. That is the main reason Sweden and Finland are joining now, because when else would a window of opportunity appear again. Russia was just 'a gas station' according to late McCain. The problem with Europe is, it is not a trinity of economy, military and politics yet. The moment Putin overstepped his calculations, all Europe's countries flocked to the common goal of unity in any of these paths. Next stop China and/or India for further integration?
China is on the WEF's menu. Russia, Iran, China. India is totally WEF. Problem is China knows this.
No other power my boy we is it and then the deluge
Nobody can safely set foot in India without stepping in human feces. They have fiercely and patriotically protected their land by a combination of throwing garbage everywhere they have not as of yet literally shit.
You could probably do half a billon dollars in infrastructure improvements to the place by nuking it.
McCain was hanging out with NAZI logo wearing dudes.
McCain died while in office for his own protection. And protect his family by being one of the elites.
McCain was an insane power hungry insane lunatic. He was a major participant in the coup in Ukraine. He also met and supported terrorists in Syria, literally. He's a genocidal lunatic, the only good thing he did in his entire life was die.
if nato is a defensive alliance, why is it expanding to threaten russian borders