1:24:55 - 2021, Commander-in-chief Zaluzhnyi hired Dmytro Yarosh, the former leader of Right-Sector, as his personal advisor. Previously, Dmytro Yarosh had said that Zelensky would be hung from a tree if he implemented the UN authorised Minsk agreements.
I never expected a historian to repeat that "3-day" meme, which rightfully belongs to US general Mark Milley, who said Russia would need 72 hours to reach Kiev, an attribute it to the Russian officials.
14:50 To insinuate a Mearsheimer-esque proposition that because the Serbians would create chaos, they should be pandered to and the Croats should not be allowed self-determination, is insulting and amoralistic.
The expansion of NATO didn't create the war in Ukraine; it was Russia's nationalistic response to it. The West was acting in its own interests just as Russia claimed it was acting in its own interests. The (crucial and defining) difference is Russia's response was presented at the point of a bayonet.
@jonlittle5032 The premise that "because the Serbians would create chaos, they should be pandered to and the Croats should not be allowed self-determination" is a strawman. It is not what mr Haslam said. What was the problem, and the ultimate cause of that war is premature declaration of Croatia independence, before arranging for peaceful dissolution with rest of Yugoslavia. The dissolution negotiations process would certainly drag on, but ultimately it would lead to Czechoslovakia style of dissolution - peacefully. But no, Vatican and Germany nudged Croats to go for full independence immediately, guaranteeing swift recognitions from rest of EU coutries, just as mr Haslam describes.
Speaking of hubris, he presents a very Western-centric point of view again, denying any agency to Russia (and Ukraine, of course), and assuming that all Russia does is simply a reaction to Western initiatives-or lack thereof. While, in fact, it is the Western ‘realpoliticians’ who lack a strategy and only react to Russia’s behaviour.
What his top-down analysis completely ignores is the agency of the peoples. Recent collapse of the Syrian regime just reminds you how flawed such an approach to history is.
@AmericanDiscord it's people on the ground that in the end cause change, not people on top of the pyramid. US and other powers tried to change the course of events in various countries and failed because they had not much of activist rank and file support. In Syria, multiple regimes tried to maintain the status quo and failed for the same reason.
@@RomanGolubev_A over 10 years of sanctions and the americans taking over syrian oil fields was not influential in the exhaustion of the syrian state? riggghhhhttt
@Zeitgeist_Dron no, it wasn't. Iran has been under sanctions much longer. As to "taking over oil fileds", which oil fields Americans took over? None whatsoever.
Russia was always a threat to Eastern Europe. Yes, Russia was weak and having domestic trouble in the 1990s, but Russia was still much stronger than Eastern European countries and everyone should have known that Russia would recover from its post-Soviet chaos and be an immediate threat again. Those countries had a clear incentive to join NATO, that that incentive was from the inherent historical and future threat from Russia.
The first yugoslav country to break free was Slovenia, not Croatia, if I remember correctly. Also not all east german industry was that bad and they had their customer in west and east. A longer transition time was needed then, but the DDR collapsed too fast. It was rather the D Mark suddenly made them too expensive. Of course it wasn’t nearly as competitive as the western counterparts, but nonetheless they had their customers. A much bigger part could have been saved, but West Germany was too overwhelmed with handling also companies besides a second country.
yep, the 1:1 conversion rate on the ostmark imposed by Kohl for political reasons was an economic disaster for the easts businesses and workers, i think the only people who benefitted were pensioners
@@rexiioper6920 the conversion rate was a West German gift to the East German citizens, not to nullify all their savings. Also only a certain amount per person was converted 1:1, for any amount exceding this the rate was 1:4 - which was the real general conversion rate.
Yes it has proven an incredable amount of hubris in EU and US but the propaganda from our side have been impressive, although have only lead to increased and prolonged suffering for Ukraine.
@BStrapper They are a fighting a life or death geopolitical game set up by us. It is now or never and we play a millitary pair of jacks like a pair of aces. We lack industrial capacity, have less and less tectical adventage(if any) and a population that is not willing to fight. Our only adwantage now is a unmatched capacity of political capturing(academica,politicians and civil servents)other countries and a superior propaganda machine.
We all have the Internet so just go back over the years and listen to the Russians talking about reclines and the arrogant west trampling all over them until nato and Ukraine
Yes, we have the internet where you can find all this: 1997 Nato-Russia Founding Act: "respect for sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all states and their inherent right to choose the means to ensure their own security" 2005 German newspaper handelsblatt asked Sergei Lavrov what he thinks about a possible NATO membership of Ukraine. He replied: "It is their choice. We respect the right of every state - including our neighbors - to choose its own partners". 2010 OSCE - Astana declaration with Russia: "We reaffirm the inherent right of each and every participating State to be free to choose or change its security arrangements, including treaties of alliance, as they evolve."
This was a very interesting presentation and I look forward to reading Professor Haslam's book. However, I wish he would have addressed in this forum how crucial the internal divisions within Ukraine were in leading to the invasion of February 2022, including what appeared to be an escalation in the civil war against Donetsk.
There was no civil war against Donetsk. It was a war fomented by the Kremlin and was not escalating. The full history will not be known until Kremlin records are released, if they keep any records.
It wasn't a civil war in Donbass, that is what Russia wants you to think. I know people from Donbass and my uncle served there. It was a classic attempt of provocation from Russia.
cool yarn. Glad you confirmed Boris scuttled the peace deal. Im sure Ukranians will thank him for generations (those ones that will not have a dad growing up to end up with a smaller ukraine and the same result)
@@Zeitgeist_Dron Boris managed to do a lot, but I seriously doubt he had authority to scupper a peace deal between the two sides. I expect his opinions were valuable, and maybe both sides read his work on Churchill and were influenced by that, but not to the extent either side would let him have the final say.
@Nathan-in-Cwmbran it's well documented. The Ukrainians initialed an agreement in Istanbul. Then Boris went to Kiev and told them of you dont fight you are not getting western backing. David Arakhamia (zelenskys party leader has said this in an interview. You can watch it online 😉)
@@Zeitgeist_Dron There's a lot we can watch online! If you'd said the U.K. parliament had blocked U.K. support, which would be free and open for all to scrutinize, maybe that would be believable. But there is no way "Western" backing was on Boris' say-so.
@@Nathan-in-Cwmbran just told you David Arakhamia said that's what was said. I don't think Boris was talking on behalf of the UK, he was talking on behalf of America. Regardless doesn't really matter. It's all recorded and on video so when conclusions are reached in 5 to 10 years on what went wrong this will come up over and over ...and over
@@Zeitgeist_Dron I don't think the Americans would have a Brit speak for them, even if it was the Prime Minister, much less than the British parliament would have Boris speak for them. Do you know if the text of the Istanbul agreement is publicly available anywhere?
That was an outstanding and eyeopening discussion. The thing is I remember all the events Haslam discussed as they happened and were covered in the media at that the time, and everything he says is consistent with what I remember and with what I find when I go back and look it up again. It also helps that he is merciless in sharing the blame around, no one nation looks good coming out of this, just a bunch of self deceiving individuals operating in chaos resulting in repeated misunderstandings and lost opportunities.... sounds like real history.
In a nutshell: bad, bad United States and bad, bad NATO - Putin was forced to defend mother Russia, he was left with no other choice. Other countries and peoples do not matter. I suppose it is hard for someone who was focused on Russia's relations with the States for so long to know much about other players.
Yes it matters where you live. If it's right next to a superpower you don't get to live your best life. I didn't make the rules but don't for a second think we allow any more freedom. The Monroe doctrine is alive and well
May be Putin had not to take Crimea in 2014, may be he should have brought troops inside Ukraine right in 2013 to stop N4z1s before it was too late. Other so-called "western" powers decided to let N4z1s enslave all Ukrainians into Totalitarian N4z1 Ukraine under their new N+I swastika (which is an anagram for "N4z1 Idea"). I guess this was the mistake, not Crimea.
I don’t understand the support for Burns to remain head of the CIA. I agree he recognized that Russia would use force to keep nato out of Ukraine but he failed to stop the US to take action that would surely lead to conflict.
Ukraine suffers because NATO was NOT expanded - to include Ukraine. There is peace in all those countries that werw NATO did expand. Sorry but the evidence suggest NATO expansion brings peace and the NOT-expansion brings war . How could somebody possibly argue against this?
"NATO expansion brings peace" hahahaha what a bs nonsese "NATO is the most violent and aggressive organization on the planet." ---Noam Chomsky, labeled the most important intellectual of our time by New York Times hahaha
Do you understand that there is no chance to argue against Russia? Ukraine is either neutral or it does not exist. If you wish to play games, you have to be ready to fight against the most powerful nuclear weapons machine. Think twice!
@@whitelilycalla You abolished all pretense of being right. This is good. The nuclear stick doesn't work against us - too close to not hit yourselves, and militarily of limited use. If anyone on this planet still supports Russia, do you think they still will, after you started a nuclear war because you want Ukraine to submit to your rule?
In reference to the title, and the term in a geopolitical context; I'm reminded of Peter Beinart's book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris.
Jeffery Sachs Glenn Diesen Anatol Lieven Nicolai Petro Richard Sakwa US Ambassador Jack F Matlock John Mearsheimer Sumantra Maitra Alfred-Maurice de Zayas Stephen Cohen and Vladimir Pozner Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft Neutrality Studies
mr haslam gives no agency to the ukrainian people...(madam, thank you for your question) 64:43 he calls ukraine a 'small' country, which it most definitely is not and 'nucular'...really? would be good to hear someone like him posit on how things would have gone if eu rather than nato membership had been given the greater impetus over the last 15 or 20 years total tory
@rosemaryanaisanesse Ukraine's people was not following US orders when they decided that it was enough of russia's interference in their matters and destiny. What's more, US under trump tried to throw under the bus, so ...?
An interesting conference but I was not completely satisfied: quid of the “Not one inch” story, quid of the Minsk agreements, quid of the Maidan revolution? I was surprised that Gorbachov’s name never came up.
People seems to always refer to Putin, Putin what Putin think...But Putin is just the speaking voice of a complete organization backing him (or sometime force him) into hard decision. He's just the guy who sign the papers and make audiences to confirm the decision made back there. It could be really interesting if there wasn't a f blackout of RT and Russian people medias or, at least, some public exchanges about this issue.
New York Times, April 3rd 2004. The reality of NATO forces being deployed in the Baltics - on short notice - has deeply angered and unsettled Russia's politicians and commanders, prompting some of the sharpest criticism of the alliance since its war against Serbia. Russia's lower house of Parliament overwhelmingly adopted a resolution denouncing NATO's expansion generally, and the deployment of F-16's specifically. Echoing warnings in Russia's new military doctrine, the resolution called on President Vladimir V. Putin to reconsider Russia's international agreements with NATO and its defence strategies, including its nuclear posture.
@@stuartwray6175 Yeah for sure Russia will never treat Ukraine as an equal. It's not. lol. thanks for the share. Ukraine really need to learn to be more realistic. They are close to a huge country with militaristic ambitions. You embrace your existence or you deny it to death... Things will stay as they are. In fact Ukraine, if were acting wisely, could really have the best of both world but both side are just trying to play ONLY ME all the time in a power bloc thinking. It's really the problem here Both side around try to push it on it'S side while Ukraine leaders should really play like India and be REALLY careful of everything and just try to go with the flow of the moment what ever it is carefully without insulting/provoke the other side but admit it can't do much more than gaining/profiting from both in a neutral way.
@@stuartwray6175 Leaders around the world, especially now, are really just big egos. It's really insulting for the populations. Theirs duty is to protect, secure, organize and make the population profit and grow. Not to play some stupid nationalist races, provocation and ''I am better than you'' things. This is for kids.
@@mathquir190 I've always wanted to know: who are those really old looking military men who sit next to him at the military parades and what influence do they have?
Oh, Haslam is ever ready with cutting repartee at the lips, but listen Ca min 36:00 where he attributes Medvedev’s single term as president to America’s regime change in Libya, and it becomes clear that for all his accolades and achievements, Jonathan Haslem lacks meaningful understanding of Russia. Which is fine; not everyone has Russian expertise. One would hope that epistemological humility in an erudite mind would hedge against holding forth from a position of ignorance on such consequential matters. Alas, Haslam‘s hubris was too great and and such was not to be in this case.
@@Nathan-in-Cwmbran Sad that TH-cam seems to have likely already censored the two people you are replying to, As my screen only shows your two replies.
@AdamBechtol I think the channels themselves have a hand in moderating the comments. And sometimes I think when I give a dumb response to an intelligent post, the poster can block me from seeing stuff, so who knows how many comments are missing. There have been some good back-and-fores on this video without it descending into chaos, be a shame if we can't all get to see the same discussion.
@@ralphmccawley1554 you’re serious? Before we start: Putin and Lawrow are that old, that they grew up in Soviet Russia. All diplomats are schooled directly in KGB schools or by such personel. Of course Putin was schooled in the KGB. What do they learn? A lot, but one thing for sure: lying and deception. Denying that is just dumb. Hope you know what KGB was… Simple example: literally attacking Ukraine with official goal of demilitarization and getting rid of ukrainian president and parliament (they repeated it hundreds times in TV), but then always saying they were attacked and had to defend itself. Same shit Hitler said when he attacked Poland…-> Hitler: saying a jewish ukrainian president is a faschist/nazi, while russian mercenaries called „Wagner“ and led by a guy with big svastica tattoos is killing people in Africa or occupying Crimea, while Putin and Lawrow pretended they didn’t know who these GRU goons belong. Later, of course, they admitted they were russians….etc Just watch his last interviews, like in Doha? Always same lies about poor Russia being attacked by NATO (which it’s literally not), while russian spies kill in daylight people in Germany, GB or Spain, destroy under sea data cables and gas connections in the Baltic Sea.
In 2005, German newspaper handelsblatt asked Sergei Lavrov what he thinks about a possible NATO membership of Ukraine. He replied: "It is their choice. We respect the right of every state - including our neighbors - to choose its own partners".
@@ralphmccawley1554 I listed some but someone deleted it. It’s simple: Putin and Lavrov occupied Crimea with little green men and pretended they are not russians. One year later they laugh and thank some Wagner leaders for their brave occupation of Crimea. Same with Donbas and at the end before the „military operation“. They are told: we see you preparing for invasion…Putin and Lavrov: no, we do such thing with 250000 troops every year…blabla. Etc. Putin and Lavrov were educated in the old soviet KGB way to know how to lie and deception. I don’t know why I try to argue with someone who doesn’t see the news, even the russian ones (if he doesn’t believe the western ones).
In 2019 Eric Prince, founder and owner of Blackwater (one of the biggest "private military companies" - read, guns for hire) came flying into Kyiv and wanted to buy Ukraine for five billion dollars. He was laughed out of the room. And that's all you need to know.
I read the authors "Spectre of War" and liked it a lot. I was at first a little put off by the title of this book as it seems to validate Putins' excuse for attacking Ukraine. But after witnessing the Democrats before the last election try to make Ukraine their issue, I wonder. I myself would like to see bipartisan support for Ukraine. And if there is a way to work with Putin (would you believe anything he says now?) I would be all for it.
For a scholar who prides himself on going to the source, his assessment of both sides is surprisingly simple, viewing one side as inept and the other as passive.
One surprising thing about power politics is that behind the screen of complicated actions, theories, and discussions conflicts might boil down to a matter very similar to a schoolyard or playground fight.
The NATO justification put forward by the Cambridge professor based on events that happened after 1990 ignores 500 years of Russian imperialism including the annexation of Ukraine by Catherine, the Great. Weak!
@@aldofromsf And what did we do during those 500 years around the globe? You can't be serious and we attacked them faar more times then the other way around. By the way they also did help to defeted the Ottomans in some parts of easter europe and afterwards new countries popped up that they didn't collonice or occupied. We wouldn't have them then becourse our own imperialistic dreams and our new Imperialistic tool called EU is teying its best to take any part of their zone of influece now ro widen our empire.
Appalling. I have read numerous books on the issue of the Ukraine war and Haslam is incredibly one sided and narrow in his opinions. His joking off the cuff style of presenting gives him away. Cambridge of course is noted for the "Fellow Travellers' that have frequented its halls. I guess things just haven't changed.
Enlighten us then. What were the actual reasons? But please back up your argument with facts and relevant historic quotes. In fact I'm not interested in anything that isn't substantiated
Yes, all the people who follow the realism course all come to the same conclusion as well. No diversity with that view at all. There are a million things he misses beyond the fact of talking about Ukraine like it’s a chess piece and they have no say if they want to join nato or not.
@@ewartmouton I grow so tired of the realist, fantasist, reductionist school; Mearsheimer, Walt, Roberts, Lieven. It's as if they live in outer space!!!
@@jarettmeyer4929 To be fair, I expect that to the leaders of the world's great powers - and as a consequence, to the rest of us - it is very much like a chess piece. Not saying that's right, just that that's the way it is on one practical level.
46:10 "The new American president was senile and ran away from Afghanistan." The timetable for US withdrawal was agreed by Trump, and a smooth exit would have been possible under better conditions, but the collapse of the Afghan army took everyone by surprise. These things happen sometimes - look at Syria.
A reasonable point. However, it looks like Russia will be able to retain its military bases within Syria, whereas the Americans foolishly deserted Bagram airbase, which the Chinese now control.
The presentation by Dr. Haslam was entertaining and educational. Thank you. As per the subject matter, I feel with the Ukrainian people who are striving to build a nation. But also feel with the Russian people, because I know they do not enjoy having to fight their brotherly Slavic neighbor. I blame all 3 parties to this conflict. Russians, the collective West and the Ukrainians too. This tragic war could have been avoided but each party went for maximalist position. Ukraine could have had security, productive relations with the west and with Russia. In 2013 Russia was by far Ukraine's largest trading partner. Ukraine could have been EU member without NATO membership. The west could have had good relations with both had they not listen to the revangist Poles and the Balts. The EU leadership needs to be reminded that in every former Soviet satellite there is a large segment of population which sympathizes with Russia.
@@thomasbenian4701 If Russia's maximalist position culminated in the military action it took in February 2022, what were the corresponding maximalist positions of the Ukrainians and collective West?
@@Nathan-in-Cwmbran The maximalist position of the USA was to try to push NATO up to Russia's border with Ukraine and to back the 2014 coup that deposed the democratically elected Yanukovytch.
ask yourself the following questions. The United States was there for Russia on this. Where the USA experienced that Russia placed military installations, personnel islands and missiles in Cuba and Mexico. Would you still argue the way you do. Or would you say, of course the USA must react to secure its own border. Hatred of Russia dates from 1945. Then the war against the Nazis ended, and those who were allies became two opponents. The US had plans ready, and General Patten wanted to move east to occupy the Soviet Union. luckily he was voted down. The Russian hatred has been there since then. why??? Why should we in Europe listen to what the US says. Why should the US have military bases all over the globe. Why do we say that Russia is imperialist when it is the USA that occupies countries where they exploit the country's wealth. I'm just wondering...
The US has the Monroe Doctrine that states any nation that encroaches into the western hemisphere is a threat to its national security and will be met with military force. When Russia told the US that nato on its border in Ukraine was an existential threat to its security but the US ignored them and pressed on. It should be obvious that if the US has security concerns it should have been more understanding that Russia would have similar concerns. I don’t know if you have noticed but nato basically surrounds Russia today and the US is in the process of circling China now. This will repeat in the South China Sea in the next few years but obviously the narrative will be Chinese aggression.
Western thinking seems to go something like this: 'We're allowed to dominate our region but you aren't because we have all the answers and you're just wrong. So there's no point in even considering your opinion or concerns. And btw there is nothing you can do about it. And btw we come in peace so why are you even worried'. What's arrogant about that 😂
Yes. The notion completely disregards the sovereign, free choices of the Baltic states. What would have happened to Estonia, had its people not decided to join NATO?
@gustavomartin2 so would we allow our neighbors to join enemy alliances on our borders? Ask Cuba. You see this is arrogance. Were allowed to, because we know better and therefore your concerns don't matter. And you can't do anything about it anyway. And besides we only want peace and wouldn't dream of doing anything immoral. "We should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety." Dec 1823, James Monroe, 5th President, USA “there should be no interference, no sponsorship of any kind of military activity in this hemisphere by countries in other hemispheres.” 1984, Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Defence “It has been the formal policy of our country since President Monroe that we reject the interference of foreign nations in this hemisphere,” Sep 2018, Donald Trump, President USA "the Monroe Doctrine is alive and well,” May 2019, John Bolton, National Security Adviser
@ The government probably would have been overthrown and replaced with one who would. That’s what happened in Ukraine, and they are attempting in Georgia
@@tomasznojmiler7667 I think we should be listening more to the Polish people and less to professors when it comes to Russia and its aggression in Ukraine. Greetings from the U.K.
People are drunk with bloodlust in the comments so they dont see clearly but this was a normal understanding before the war since the beginning of the 90s. This war was so predictable its just tragic. Also professor is a legend for that Fiona Hill comment lol.
These days historians no longer have the historical ipse dixit...we are all capable of accessing...sometimes source documents, ie Wikileaks...which even diligent historians might not have done. This chap puts some interesting flesh on the bones, but says nothing not already known to anyone with a passing interest in the subject. So much...so much other stuff...like Clinton's staff discovering tens of thousands of Polish swing voters in the mid West who were eager for NATO expansion. One thing is for sure, there is enough truth out there that history will always know that US expansion was behind this adventure...not Russian aggression. The hook, line and sinker acceptance of Bucha at face value diminishes the whole presentation. Far more likely a Ukrainian psyops...with a little help from their friends.
First person he visited was rhe Russian ambassador? Well that set the stage and i was waiting for him to trot out the twaddle about the Revolution of Dignity being formented by the CIA. He didnt disappoint.
Exactly. This figure jokes about Biden being senile and Yeltsin being a drunk, yet he composes himself no better than someone suffering both. When an ageing professor enters the geriatric equivalent of the terrible twos, I think it's about time he retires. Because that's actually what this is. It's recycling russian propaganda, it's failing at basic methodology, and its done with a sort of arrogance that is rare, and mostly found among the drunk and the senile.
@@erikamonahan Munich Putsch also was "Revolution of Dignity" but NSDAP edition, not UNSO edition. Strange they both have National-Socialist in their names, what a coincidence.
He looks like just another (very sophisticated; paid?) Vatnik, that's all. And never loses the opportunity to desdain those politicians that are really standing up against his (I guess) beloved pootin.
So, you have a historian, writing a book about the war in Ukraine, and *not* making sure he has any relevant Ukrainian sources for his work? If I ever saw someone fail miserably at basic methodology, it is this. A lot of interesting finds, by all means, but utterly useless if the point is to understand anything about the dynamics that lead to the war. Because the most important perspective - the Ukrainian perspective - is completely missing. How did a supposedly serious historian end up.with something so embarrassing? It's simply puzzling. Failing at basic methodology, bah. Pathetic 🙄😤
Why, in your opinion, the Ukrainian perspective is the most important? What are your merits for this assessment, except for the obvious “Ukraine is valiantly fighting this war for its future, democracy and western values”? Feel free to enlighten this comment section about some of the dynamics and perspectives that are missing. I’d like to hear.
@alkatrazgodspeed9366 partly because Ukraine is the country being attacked, partly because there are so many assumptions made about Ukraine, that are both dead wrong, and at the same time essential for the logical consistency of the analysis. Who am I? Just someone who happens to have some experience with Russian-speaking Ukrainians. A group that is grossly misrepresented here. To the extent where the entire story - or fairytale if you like - falls apart and make no sense.
@@alkatrazgodspeed9366for instance, the fact that Janukovitsj promised, as a central part of his campaign, to join the EU, and then reneged on his promise, isn't taken into account at all. But this fundamental deceit was the main factor behind the uprising. Joining the EU had broad support also in the south and in the east. Many of the activist groups where from the south and the east, and they where russian speaking. There where also demonstrations in support of the Euromaidan in cities like Odessa, Mariupol, Kramatorsk, Donetsk and Luhansk. Even in Crimea, there where demonstrations. This is absent from the analysis, rendering it false and meaningless. Instead the analysis points to NED - National Endowment for Democracy - and George Soros. Repeating typical Russian propaganda points that have little to no basis in reality. The analysis makes the point that it was hard to convert russian speakers to "proper ukrainians". That this was a type of experiment that usually fails. Alas, this is completely backwards, and, again, just parroting russian propaganda. Russification is a well documented russian strategy, and it has failed to russify Ukrainians for hundreds of years. Even if many speaks Russian. Zelensky is a native Russian speaker, and became famous as a Russian speaking comedian. Zelenskys chief of staff, Andrij Yermak, is a russian speaker, who also has close family in Russia. Olekandr Syrskyi is also a russian speaker with close familybin russia, and uses russian as his working language. The Azov Battalion, a popular subject to various propaganda operations, is a russian speaking unit. This idea of russian speakers turning around and resisting the Euromaidan is entirely false. The notion that russian speakers somehow stages meaningful anti-maidan rallies with popular support, is also false. The fact is, the demonstrations never had much support, and when the organisers ran out of money to pay the "protesters" to show up, they contacted their masters in Kreml for more funds in order to keep going. In the end, Strelkov, with a bunch of FSB operatives, neo-nazi groupings and nazbols intervened with violence and started the escalation spiral that lead to russias covert intervention later in 2014. An intervention with minimal local support. This is all well documented, for instance in the before-mentioned book by Jakob Hauter: Russias overlooked invasion. A book that is passionate about methodology and review of data quality. Can be recommended for those wishing to actually know something more than propaganda and your general MSM-derived nonsense.
@@oliviaschnepf2994 • 'Provoked' - book, written by Scott Horton. Also recommended: Glenn Diesen Jeffery Sachs Anatol Lieven Nicolai Petro Chas Freeman Col Lawrence Wilkerson US Ambassador Jack F Matlock John Mearsheimer Alfred-Maurice de Zayas Richard Sakwa Sumantra Maitra Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft Neutrality Studies
Exactly. But in my mind there is an avalanche of truth to support this argument and very little on the other side: Putin decided to remake the Soviet Union over his cornflakes one morning? C'mon
Hi from Russia. Yes, USA ignored our interests for the long time - because USA ignored everyone interests. This was an "unipolar moment", after all. So no objections on US policy, including NATO expansion etc. But it cannot go on forever, so no objections to Russia policy either. I really proud that my country stand up against the American totalitarian rule. And I think we need no exuces to do that - look around and you will see why. Putin, jihadists, Trump - I support everyone who stand against the liberal cabal.
Sometimes, things are as simple as the aggressor country's leader being a brutal dictator on a revanchist land-grab. There is no need to invent excuses to try to excuse the inexcusable.
According to Haslam's logic, Russia's first annexation of Crimea in 1783 was, of course, a response to the foundation of the United States in 1776. Moscow just reacts to what the West does. Had Nato been dissolved in 1991, there would be today a peaceful Russian-German border on the rivers Oder and Neisse (or the Elbe).
По доброй воле СССР состоялось 3 октября 1990 года вхождение Германской Демократической Республики (ГДР) в состав ФРГ. Советские войска были выведены из Германии. Войска США не были выведены из Германии ни тогда, ни сейчас.
Nato destroy Minsk agreements why?..EU path for Ukrain was there secure and certen.Membership in Nato could wait...but no..arms bussines and destroying of German cheap gas economy was more important than Slavs lives you hypocrites..
Why don’t you invite Ukraine experts to speak instead of Russian experts? I challenge you, I dare you, channel organizers, to invite Ukrainian history and culture experts to speak. If you dare, if you have the guts. Let us examine Ukrainian bravery and compare that to your own cowardice. Being anti-American imperialism and an expert on Russia does not make you cool or well informed or sought-after, except in Moscow . He would be welcomed and given a platform on Kremlin State TV. Where is his expertise on the Eastern European people, and Ukrainian peoples perspective ? He can’t help himself for being a Russian propagandist with a western accent . The question should be asked, why is this media platform Promoting Russian propaganda as insider intelligence. Do you notice that all of the comments in this comment column are calling you stupid and duped by Russian propaganda posing as enlightenment thinking . Why don’t you enlighten yourself and us and provide us some information of value by inviting guest speakers who are experts on Ukraine? I understand they’re not as common as experts on Russia. Shows whose narrative we have been listening to all these years.
@@brettharris6428putin sealed Yanukovichs fate when he forced him to reneg on his main campaign promise: The association agreement with the EU. Then Putin attacked Donbas, that is very well documented. For instance in the book Russias overlooked invasion, by Jakob Hauter. Unlike this rambling old fool, Dr Hauter actually takes rigorous methodology and the critical scrutiny of sources seriously. His book can be much recommended!
Thank god Haslam enlightened me. We need saddam and ghadafi back, democracy is for the weak and our savior is putler. "Ideas so crazy only an intellectual would believe them".
I am really surprised how much I've enjoyed this talk. I'm strongly pro-NATO and wouldn't ordinarily give my time to what on the surface appeared to be Russo-sympathetic content. I suspect that Jonathan Haslam and I wouldn't agree on much discussing this over beers, but the perspectives he explores are undeniably interesting and are certainly thought provoking. I appreciate having a reputable alternative to my admittedly entrenched (and happily entrenched at that) biases. I'll never change my mind but I feel more informed all the same. Thanks very much, @CentreforGeopolitics
Obviously you don't have to be open to changing your mind. At least you are able to listen to an alternative view which seems to be an endangered skill these days. Some would argue that it doesn't matter what we think anyway given how much agency most of us have and it's certainly more comfortable and easier to hold the mainstream opinion (even if it's not based on much fact). I personally think and hope that it may matter if enough of us question, debate and are willing to abandon our previous understanding in the light of new evidence but that's just my opinion.
@@FundedinaWeek As a citizen of a NATO member country, I'd say it's a heavily armed, well trained alliance that keeps me safe, and that produces awesome TH-cam videos. I'm open to the fact that it may have flaws, and might be problematic for non-member states' citizens.
you sound like a man who made us his mind without knowing all the facts surely thats the description of ignorance you say you wont change your mind even tho youve been presented with an alternative picture how can we ever move on when you freely admit youll never change your mind that leaves no space to advance and your mind is closed to any new solution you even admit your biased what hope is there for the world if people are unwilling to be open to see others point of view and think theirs is the only correct view does this not qualify as conceit and arrogance surely not good characteristics of a nobel soul searching for truth and leaving little space for human advancement to creat a more fair and peaceful world
It’s surprising how common the idea is among Western academics that Russian foreign policy is simply a function of reacting to America. But I’ll give Haslam credit for being intelligent about this idea as compared to Mearsheimer who is essentially a Blame America First fanboy. But for Czechs, Poles, Balts or Nordics among others there’s no question who the bad guys are…the Russians.
Let me remind you that Poland is not in Eastern Europe. As a Brit you should know this as it’s manifesting in the leading country, both economically, but also in third processes . The NATO expansion was a wonderful and positive process for Europe. As far as money goes, Germany needs to account for payment of reparations for second world war that they will primarily to Poland as well as Greece.
You have so much ignorance not even to have read the history of WW2, when the USSR WON the war against Nazism (not that it has gone- look at dear Ukraine now)!!
DATELINE KYIV OBLAST - DAY 1022 Excellent lecture. Timely, insightful, and informative. Wonderful Q&A session. Thank you, Professor Haslam. V/r - IB An American in Ukraine (2019 - Present)
That's the spirit. We good. They bad. We strong. They weak. Put down TH-cam and go back to Sky or BBC or whatever. The grown-ups were discussing things.
GLORY for RUSSIA, a world of great people and yet greater ideas!!!❤❤❤❤❤❤ Against that background, the Anglo-Saxon speaker looks bloodless and unexciting ...
1:24:55 - 2021, Commander-in-chief Zaluzhnyi hired Dmytro Yarosh, the former leader of Right-Sector, as his personal advisor. Previously, Dmytro Yarosh had said that Zelensky would be hung from a tree if he implemented the UN authorised Minsk agreements.
I never expected a historian to repeat that "3-day" meme, which rightfully belongs to US general Mark Milley, who said Russia would need 72 hours to reach Kiev, an attribute it to the Russian officials.
14:50 To insinuate a Mearsheimer-esque proposition that because the Serbians would create chaos, they should be pandered to and the Croats should not be allowed self-determination, is insulting and amoralistic.
The expansion of NATO didn't create the war in Ukraine; it was Russia's nationalistic response to it. The West was acting in its own interests just as Russia claimed it was acting in its own interests. The (crucial and defining) difference is Russia's response was presented at the point of a bayonet.
@@jonlittle5032 please advise what the western interest is in expanding NATO to include Ukraine
@@rexiioper6920 Certainly. The expansion of human liberty and democracy, if one is into that sort of thing. Putin and Xi certainly aren't.
@jonlittle5032 The premise that "because the Serbians would create chaos, they should be pandered to and the Croats should not be allowed self-determination" is a strawman. It is not what mr Haslam said. What was the problem, and the ultimate cause of that war is premature declaration of Croatia independence, before arranging for peaceful dissolution with rest of Yugoslavia. The dissolution negotiations process would certainly drag on, but ultimately it would lead to Czechoslovakia style of dissolution - peacefully. But no, Vatican and Germany nudged Croats to go for full independence immediately, guaranteeing swift recognitions from rest of EU coutries, just as mr Haslam describes.
@@misakostic72 Watch the video, that is precisely what he said.
Speaking of hubris, he presents a very Western-centric point of view again, denying any agency to Russia (and Ukraine, of course), and assuming that all Russia does is simply a reaction to Western initiatives-or lack thereof. While, in fact, it is the Western ‘realpoliticians’ who lack a strategy and only react to Russia’s behaviour.
Exactly. What a silly excuse for a historian. Failing at very basic methodology. Its completely pathetic.
Hi from Russia. I don't think so. Up to 2005 Russians mindlessly follows US lead.
@@paulzx2000 всё идет по плану ;)
@@shchenka5973 а план идёт по кайфу.
какие будут указания, тащмайор?
@@paulzx2000 Вперед!!! ведь мы за все хорошее :)
What his top-down analysis completely ignores is the agency of the peoples. Recent collapse of the Syrian regime just reminds you how flawed such an approach to history is.
When the analysis is done you will probably find that the events in Syria are a very much top down affair. 😊
@AmericanDiscord it's people on the ground that in the end cause change, not people on top of the pyramid. US and other powers tried to change the course of events in various countries and failed because they had not much of activist rank and file support. In Syria, multiple regimes tried to maintain the status quo and failed for the same reason.
Which people? Those paid by the West ? People do nothing without financing them, especially in Ukraine
@@RomanGolubev_A over 10 years of sanctions and the americans taking over syrian oil fields was not influential in the exhaustion of the syrian state? riggghhhhttt
@Zeitgeist_Dron no, it wasn't. Iran has been under sanctions much longer. As to "taking over oil fileds", which oil fields Americans took over? None whatsoever.
Russia was always a threat to Eastern Europe. Yes, Russia was weak and having domestic trouble in the 1990s, but Russia was still much stronger than Eastern European countries and everyone should have known that Russia would recover from its post-Soviet chaos and be an immediate threat again. Those countries had a clear incentive to join NATO, that that incentive was from the inherent historical and future threat from Russia.
Seems to happen more often than you would wish: You wake up in the morning to realise that the world is not the same as the day before.
The first yugoslav country to break free was Slovenia, not Croatia, if I remember correctly.
Also not all east german industry was that bad and they had their customer in west and east. A longer transition time was needed then, but the DDR collapsed too fast. It was rather the D Mark suddenly made them too expensive. Of course it wasn’t nearly as competitive as the western counterparts, but nonetheless they had their customers. A much bigger part could have been saved, but West Germany was too overwhelmed with handling also companies besides a second country.
yep, the 1:1 conversion rate on the ostmark imposed by Kohl for political reasons was an economic disaster for the easts businesses and workers, i think the only people who benefitted were pensioners
@@rexiioper6920 the conversion rate was a West German gift to the East German citizens, not to nullify all their savings. Also only a certain amount per person was converted 1:1, for any amount exceding this the rate was 1:4 - which was the real general conversion rate.
Yes it has proven an incredable amount of hubris in EU and US but the propaganda from our side have been impressive, although have only lead to increased and prolonged suffering for Ukraine.
How about Russian Hubris...?????
@BStrapper They are a fighting a life or death geopolitical game set up by us. It is now or never and we play a millitary pair of jacks like a pair of aces. We lack industrial capacity, have less and less tectical adventage(if any) and a population that is not willing to fight. Our only adwantage now is a unmatched capacity of political capturing(academica,politicians and civil servents)other countries and a superior propaganda machine.
@@BStrapper yes, the turn to crony capitalism is on them. blame nobody but yourselves
We all have the Internet so just go back over the years and listen to the Russians talking about reclines and the arrogant west trampling all over them until nato and Ukraine
We all might have the Internet but not ability to be OBJECTIVE and non-siding UNDERSTAND the matters as they are.
Yes, we have the internet where you can find all this:
1997 Nato-Russia Founding Act: "respect for sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all states and their inherent right to choose the means to ensure their own security"
2005 German newspaper handelsblatt asked Sergei Lavrov what he thinks about a possible NATO membership of Ukraine. He replied: "It is their choice. We respect the right of every state - including our neighbors - to choose its own partners".
2010 OSCE - Astana declaration with Russia: "We reaffirm the inherent right of each and every participating State to be free to choose or change its security arrangements, including treaties of alliance, as they evolve."
@@JMLtube1 post the links pal
@@rexiioper6920 www.osce.org/files/f/documents/b/6/74985.pdf
@@rexiioper6920 www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_25468.htm, www.osce.org/files/f/documents/b/6/74985.pdf
This was a very interesting presentation and I look forward to reading Professor Haslam's book. However, I wish he would have addressed in this forum how crucial the internal divisions within Ukraine were in leading to the invasion of February 2022, including what appeared to be an escalation in the civil war against Donetsk.
@@nicoleortiz983 I wish I knew of a reliable English language source I could use to examine what WAS going on within Ukraine before February 2022
Roses have thorns Ukraine
There was no civil war against Donetsk. It was a war fomented by the Kremlin and was not escalating. The full history will not be known until Kremlin records are released, if they keep any records.
It's not really a civil war at all. It was a continuation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine
It wasn't a civil war in Donbass, that is what Russia wants you to think. I know people from Donbass and my uncle served there. It was a classic attempt of provocation from Russia.
cool yarn. Glad you confirmed Boris scuttled the peace deal. Im sure Ukranians will thank him for generations (those ones that will not have a dad growing up to end up with a smaller ukraine and the same result)
@@Zeitgeist_Dron Boris managed to do a lot, but I seriously doubt he had authority to scupper a peace deal between the two sides. I expect his opinions were valuable, and maybe both sides read his work on Churchill and were influenced by that, but not to the extent either side would let him have the final say.
@Nathan-in-Cwmbran it's well documented. The Ukrainians initialed an agreement in Istanbul. Then Boris went to Kiev and told them of you dont fight you are not getting western backing. David Arakhamia (zelenskys party leader has said this in an interview. You can watch it online 😉)
@@Zeitgeist_Dron There's a lot we can watch online! If you'd said the U.K. parliament had blocked U.K. support, which would be free and open for all to scrutinize, maybe that would be believable. But there is no way "Western" backing was on Boris' say-so.
@@Nathan-in-Cwmbran just told you David Arakhamia said that's what was said. I don't think Boris was talking on behalf of the UK, he was talking on behalf of America. Regardless doesn't really matter. It's all recorded and on video so when conclusions are reached in 5 to 10 years on what went wrong this will come up over and over ...and over
@@Zeitgeist_Dron I don't think the Americans would have a Brit speak for them, even if it was the Prime Minister, much less than the British parliament would have Boris speak for them. Do you know if the text of the Istanbul agreement is publicly available anywhere?
That was an outstanding and eyeopening discussion. The thing is I remember all the events Haslam discussed as they happened and were covered in the media at that the time, and everything he says is consistent with what I remember and with what I find when I go back and look it up again. It also helps that he is merciless in sharing the blame around, no one nation looks good coming out of this, just a bunch of self deceiving individuals operating in chaos resulting in repeated misunderstandings and lost opportunities.... sounds like real history.
In a nutshell: bad, bad United States and bad, bad NATO - Putin was forced to defend mother Russia, he was left with no other choice. Other countries and peoples do not matter. I suppose it is hard for someone who was focused on Russia's relations with the States for so long to know much about other players.
your competence is amazing 😂😂😂
Yes it matters where you live. If it's right next to a superpower you don't get to live your best life. I didn't make the rules but don't for a second think we allow any more freedom. The Monroe doctrine is alive and well
May be Putin had not to take Crimea in 2014, may be he should have brought troops inside Ukraine right in 2013 to stop N4z1s before it was too late. Other so-called "western" powers decided to let N4z1s enslave all Ukrainians into Totalitarian N4z1 Ukraine under their new N+I swastika (which is an anagram for "N4z1 Idea"). I guess this was the mistake, not Crimea.
@@ewartmouton And the Wolfowitz doctrine, which just extends Monroe around the whole world.
I don’t understand the support for Burns to remain head of the CIA. I agree he recognized that Russia would use force to keep nato out of Ukraine but he failed to stop the US to take action that would surely lead to conflict.
The CIA director does what the president tells him. He might have wanted to stop the conflict but Biden being the Russia hawk he is certainly did not.
what action by the US?
@ The coup, arm, train, reject agreements
@@davemccrillis1470 ah, and the Ukrainians themselves played no part in this?
@@davemccrillis1470 Which coup?
Ukraine suffers because NATO was NOT expanded - to include Ukraine. There is peace in all those countries that werw NATO did expand. Sorry but the evidence suggest NATO expansion brings peace and the NOT-expansion brings war . How could somebody possibly argue against this?
How? With typical Russian reasoning: no logic, emotional thinking and internal contradictions.
"NATO expansion brings peace" hahahaha what a bs nonsese
"NATO is the most violent and aggressive organization on the planet." ---Noam Chomsky, labeled the most important intellectual of our time by New York Times
hahaha
Do you understand that there is no chance to argue against Russia? Ukraine is either neutral or it does not exist. If you wish to play games, you have to be ready to fight against the most powerful nuclear weapons machine. Think twice!
@@whitelilycalla
You abolished all pretense of being right. This is good. The nuclear stick doesn't work against us - too close to not hit yourselves, and militarily of limited use. If anyone on this planet still supports Russia, do you think they still will, after you started a nuclear war because you want Ukraine to submit to your rule?
@@whitelilycalla Do you think Russia would have gone for a full war with NATO if Ukraine had become a member at some earlier point in time?
In reference to the title, and the term in a geopolitical context; I'm reminded of Peter Beinart's book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris.
Grazie mille for this amazing video ' I look forward to reading the book.
Provoked - book by Scott Horton
Jeffery Sachs
Glenn Diesen
Anatol Lieven
Nicolai Petro
Richard Sakwa
US Ambassador Jack F Matlock
John Mearsheimer
Sumantra Maitra
Alfred-Maurice de Zayas
Stephen Cohen and Vladimir Pozner
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Neutrality Studies
mr haslam gives no agency to the ukrainian people...(madam, thank you for your question)
64:43 he calls ukraine a 'small' country, which it most definitely is not
and 'nucular'...really?
would be good to hear someone like him posit on how things would have gone if eu rather than nato membership had been given the greater impetus over the last 15 or 20 years
total tory
What agency has Ukraine? Just a Tshirt following US orders.
lol the ukrainian people (or atleast the women children and rich men) got agency, they all fled to the EU/UK/Can/US using their white privilege
Russia has no issue w/ EU membership for Ukraine. You'll find the resistance to this comes from within the EU itself.
@rosemaryanaisanesse Ukraine's people was not following US orders when they decided that it was enough of russia's interference in their matters and destiny. What's more, US under trump tried to throw under the bus, so ...?
@ Why would they have spent $5 billion dollars on a spontaneous protest ? I’m sure you would recognize this as being unnecessary.
An interesting conference but I was not completely satisfied: quid of the “Not one inch” story, quid of the Minsk agreements, quid of the Maidan revolution? I was surprised that Gorbachov’s name never came up.
Quid?
People seems to always refer to Putin, Putin what Putin think...But Putin is just the speaking voice of a complete organization backing him (or sometime force him) into hard decision. He's just the guy who sign the papers and make audiences to confirm the decision made back there. It could be really interesting if there wasn't a f blackout of RT and Russian people medias or, at least, some public exchanges about this issue.
New York Times, April 3rd 2004.
The reality of NATO forces being deployed in the Baltics - on short notice - has deeply angered and unsettled Russia's politicians and commanders, prompting some of the sharpest criticism of the alliance since its war against Serbia.
Russia's lower house of Parliament overwhelmingly adopted a resolution denouncing NATO's expansion generally, and the deployment of F-16's specifically.
Echoing warnings in Russia's new military doctrine, the resolution called on President Vladimir V. Putin to reconsider Russia's international agreements with NATO and its defence strategies, including its nuclear posture.
19th Dec 2013/Reuters Special Report - Why Ukraine spurned the EU and embraced Russia.
@@stuartwray6175 Yeah for sure Russia will never treat Ukraine as an equal. It's not. lol. thanks for the share. Ukraine really need to learn to be more realistic. They are close to a huge country with militaristic ambitions. You embrace your existence or you deny it to death... Things will stay as they are. In fact Ukraine, if were acting wisely, could really have the best of both world but both side are just trying to play ONLY ME all the time in a power bloc thinking. It's really the problem here Both side around try to push it on it'S side while Ukraine leaders should really play like India and be REALLY careful of everything and just try to go with the flow of the moment what ever it is carefully without insulting/provoke the other side but admit it can't do much more than gaining/profiting from both in a neutral way.
@@stuartwray6175 Leaders around the world, especially now, are really just big egos. It's really insulting for the populations. Theirs duty is to protect, secure, organize and make the population profit and grow. Not to play some stupid nationalist races, provocation and ''I am better than you'' things. This is for kids.
@@mathquir190 I've always wanted to know: who are those really old looking military men who sit next to him at the military parades and what influence do they have?
Oh, Haslam is ever ready with cutting repartee at the lips, but listen Ca min 36:00 where he attributes Medvedev’s single term as president to America’s regime change in Libya, and it becomes clear that for all his accolades and achievements, Jonathan Haslem lacks meaningful understanding of Russia. Which is fine; not everyone has Russian expertise. One would hope that epistemological humility in an erudite mind would hedge against holding forth from a position of ignorance on such consequential matters. Alas, Haslam‘s hubris was too great and and such was not to be in this case.
@@erikamonahan I'd like to see Haslam's reply to that... Ouch!
@Bailiol That's a much more mature response than mine.
@@Nathan-in-Cwmbran Sad that TH-cam seems to have likely already censored the two people you are replying to, As my screen only shows your two replies.
@AdamBechtol I think the channels themselves have a hand in moderating the comments. And sometimes I think when I give a dumb response to an intelligent post, the poster can block me from seeing stuff, so who knows how many comments are missing.
There have been some good back-and-fores on this video without it descending into chaos, be a shame if we can't all get to see the same discussion.
i see your desperate to use the new big words you've learned
Lavrov is a master diplomat.
Following the tradition of Talleyrand, Metternich.
In contrast to Blinken&Sullivan.
Not really. He is same as many soviet diplomats before him. Clever and maybe intelligent, but in the end they repeat same lies as ever.
@micumatrix . Please list what you consider these lies are?
@@ralphmccawley1554 you’re serious? Before we start: Putin and Lawrow are that old, that they grew up in Soviet Russia. All diplomats are schooled directly in KGB schools or by such personel. Of course Putin was schooled in the KGB. What do they learn? A lot, but one thing for sure: lying and deception. Denying that is just dumb. Hope you know what KGB was…
Simple example: literally attacking Ukraine with official goal of demilitarization and getting rid of ukrainian president and parliament (they repeated it hundreds times in TV), but then always saying they were attacked and had to defend itself. Same shit Hitler said when he attacked Poland…-> Hitler: saying a jewish ukrainian president is a faschist/nazi, while russian mercenaries called „Wagner“ and led by a guy with big svastica tattoos is killing people in Africa or occupying Crimea, while Putin and Lawrow pretended they didn’t know who these GRU goons belong. Later, of course, they admitted they were russians….etc
Just watch his last interviews, like in Doha? Always same lies about poor Russia being attacked by NATO (which it’s literally not), while russian spies kill in daylight people in Germany, GB or Spain, destroy under sea data cables and gas connections in the Baltic Sea.
In 2005, German newspaper handelsblatt asked Sergei Lavrov what he thinks about a possible NATO membership of Ukraine. He replied: "It is their choice. We respect the right of every state - including our neighbors - to choose its own partners".
@@ralphmccawley1554 I listed some but someone deleted it. It’s simple: Putin and Lavrov occupied Crimea with little green men and pretended they are not russians. One year later they laugh and thank some Wagner leaders for their brave occupation of Crimea. Same with Donbas and at the end before the „military operation“. They are told: we see you preparing for invasion…Putin and Lavrov: no, we do such thing with 250000 troops every year…blabla. Etc. Putin and Lavrov were educated in the old soviet KGB way to know how to lie and deception.
I don’t know why I try to argue with someone who doesn’t see the news, even the russian ones (if he doesn’t believe the western ones).
In 2019 Eric Prince, founder and owner of Blackwater (one of the biggest "private military companies" - read, guns for hire) came flying into Kyiv and wanted to buy Ukraine for five billion dollars. He was laughed out of the room.
And that's all you need to know.
@@therealmccoy7221 My original reply was silly.
Why is that 'all you need to know'?
I read the authors "Spectre of War" and liked it a lot. I was at first a little put off by the title of this book as it seems to validate Putins' excuse for attacking Ukraine. But after witnessing the Democrats before the last election try to make Ukraine their issue, I wonder. I myself would like to see bipartisan support for Ukraine. And if there is a way to work with Putin (would you believe anything he says now?) I would be all for it.
Not too bad a summary.
For a scholar who prides himself on going to the source, his assessment of both sides is surprisingly simple, viewing one side as inept and the other as passive.
One surprising thing about power politics is that behind the screen of complicated actions, theories, and discussions conflicts might boil down to a matter very similar to a schoolyard or playground fight.
give us yours then Professor Gray of titok university 🤣
The NATO justification put forward by the Cambridge professor based on events that happened after 1990 ignores 500 years of Russian imperialism including the annexation of Ukraine by Catherine, the Great. Weak!
@@aldofromsf And what did we do during those 500 years around the globe? You can't be serious and we attacked them faar more times then the other way around. By the way they also did help to defeted the Ottomans in some parts of easter europe and afterwards new countries popped up that they didn't collonice or occupied. We wouldn't have them then becourse our own imperialistic dreams and our new Imperialistic tool called EU is teying its best to take any part of their zone of influece now ro widen our empire.
@niklasnorberg5071
"And what did we do...?"
However the fok you want to define WE, it doesn't include me. Your straw man fails.
@@niklasnorberg5071 Who is WE? And how does that help Russia?
"annexation of Ukraine" ??? o_0 ?!!
@@niklasnorberg5071
Who is WE?
Appalling. I have read numerous books on the issue of the Ukraine war and Haslam is incredibly one sided and narrow in his opinions. His joking off the cuff style of presenting gives him away. Cambridge of course is noted for the "Fellow Travellers' that have frequented its halls. I guess things just haven't changed.
@@barrylane1055 PLEASE
Enlighten us then. What were the actual reasons? But please back up your argument with facts and relevant historic quotes. In fact I'm not interested in anything that isn't substantiated
Yes, all the people who follow the realism course all come to the same conclusion as well. No diversity with that view at all.
There are a million things he misses beyond the fact of talking about Ukraine like it’s a chess piece and they have no say if they want to join nato or not.
@@ewartmouton I grow so tired of the realist, fantasist, reductionist school; Mearsheimer, Walt, Roberts, Lieven. It's as if they live in outer space!!!
@@jarettmeyer4929 To be fair, I expect that to the leaders of the world's great powers - and as a consequence, to the rest of us - it is very much like a chess piece. Not saying that's right, just that that's the way it is on one practical level.
46:10 "The new American president was senile and ran away from Afghanistan."
The timetable for US withdrawal was agreed by Trump, and a smooth exit would have been possible under better conditions, but the collapse of the Afghan army took everyone by surprise. These things happen sometimes - look at Syria.
Mmmm
A reasonable point. However, it looks like Russia will be able to retain its military bases within Syria, whereas the Americans foolishly deserted Bagram airbase, which the Chinese now control.
I am sorry , this is pathetic... Cambridge 5?
Ditch TH-cam and go back to the BBC you'll be more comfortable there 😂
Please... what a stupid and tasteless joke
@@oliviaschnepf2994 It's not. It's an interesting reference.
@@Bailiol AMEN
@Bailiol Very true.
interesting but he lost me near the end . . . we shall see
Pity he's pro-trump, which says a lot about his biases.
Thank you for your information (that I do not always agree with) which many do not wanna hear over here...
The presentation by Dr. Haslam was entertaining and educational. Thank you. As per the subject matter, I feel with the Ukrainian people who are striving to build a nation. But also feel with the Russian people, because I know they do not enjoy having to fight their brotherly Slavic neighbor. I blame all 3 parties to this conflict. Russians, the collective West and the Ukrainians too. This tragic war could have been avoided but each party went for maximalist position. Ukraine could have had security, productive relations with the west and with Russia. In 2013 Russia was by far Ukraine's largest trading partner. Ukraine could have been EU member without NATO membership. The west could have had good relations with both had they not listen to the revangist Poles and the Balts. The EU leadership needs to be reminded that in every former Soviet satellite there is a large segment of population which sympathizes with Russia.
@@thomasbenian4701 If Russia's maximalist position culminated in the military action it took in February 2022, what were the corresponding maximalist positions of the Ukrainians and collective West?
@@Nathan-in-Cwmbran The maximalist position of the USA was to try to push NATO up to Russia's border with Ukraine and to back the 2014 coup that deposed the democratically elected Yanukovytch.
ask yourself the following questions. The United States was there for Russia on this. Where the USA experienced that Russia placed military installations, personnel islands and missiles in Cuba and Mexico. Would you still argue the way you do. Or would you say, of course the USA must react to secure its own border. Hatred of Russia dates from 1945. Then the war against the Nazis ended, and those who were allies became two opponents. The US had plans ready, and General Patten wanted to move east to occupy the Soviet Union. luckily he was voted down. The Russian hatred has been there since then. why??? Why should we in Europe listen to what the US says. Why should the US have military bases all over the globe. Why do we say that Russia is imperialist when it is the USA that occupies countries where they exploit the country's wealth. I'm just wondering...
Answer your own dumb questions, bot.
Lol "USA occupies countries" when Russia quite literally bombed then annexed the Donbas.
You in Europe shouldn't listen to my arrogant, warmongering country at all, but unfortunately, your leaders do.
I totally agree with you.
what is arrogant about nato expansion? I'm genuinely confused by this notion
The US has the Monroe Doctrine that states any nation that encroaches into the western hemisphere is a threat to its national security and will be met with military force. When Russia told the US that nato on its border in Ukraine was an existential threat to its security but the US ignored them and pressed on. It should be obvious that if the US has security concerns it should have been more understanding that Russia would have similar concerns. I don’t know if you have noticed but nato basically surrounds Russia today and the US is in the process of circling China now. This will repeat in the South China Sea in the next few years but obviously the narrative will be Chinese aggression.
Western thinking seems to go something like this: 'We're allowed to dominate our region but you aren't because we have all the answers and you're just wrong. So there's no point in even considering your opinion or concerns. And btw there is nothing you can do about it. And btw we come in peace so why are you even worried'. What's arrogant about that 😂
Yes. The notion completely disregards the sovereign, free choices of the Baltic states. What would have happened to Estonia, had its people not decided to join NATO?
@gustavomartin2 so would we allow our neighbors to join enemy alliances on our borders? Ask Cuba.
You see this is arrogance. Were allowed to, because we know better and therefore your concerns don't matter. And you can't do anything about it anyway. And besides we only want peace and wouldn't dream of doing anything immoral.
"We should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety."
Dec 1823, James Monroe, 5th President, USA
“there should be no interference, no sponsorship of any kind of military activity in this hemisphere by countries in other hemispheres.”
1984, Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Defence
“It has been the formal policy of our country since President Monroe that we reject the interference of foreign nations in this hemisphere,”
Sep 2018, Donald Trump, President USA
"the Monroe Doctrine is alive and well,”
May 2019, John Bolton, National Security Adviser
@ The government probably would have been overthrown and replaced with one who would. That’s what happened in Ukraine, and they are attempting in Georgia
when ideology thinks it s epistemology? Is that the level in Britain.?
nafo bots projecting so hard right now
Mersheimer 2.0. Russian propaganda covered in nice words understandable for elites. No greetings from Poland
@@tomasznojmiler7667 I think we should be listening more to the Polish people and less to professors when it comes to Russia and its aggression in Ukraine. Greetings from the U.K.
Amen
Drawing equality sign between "Russian propaganda" and Strobe Talbott, this is the new level of Banderist Schizophrenia.
Who care about Poland?! :D
Clean your own house before you criticise the neighbours.
@FundedinaWeek The other NATO member states care about Poland. And so do I.
And this gentleman is professor at Cambridge?! What a disgrace!
No. It’s a typical brit and how old school brits viewed the world.
lol we cant have professors who disagree with our biases
People are drunk with bloodlust in the comments so they dont see clearly but this was a normal understanding before the war since the beginning of the 90s. This war was so predictable its just tragic. Also professor is a legend for that Fiona Hill comment lol.
Medved never made any decisions he was a pawn
These days historians no longer have the historical ipse dixit...we are all capable of accessing...sometimes source documents, ie Wikileaks...which even diligent historians might not have done. This chap puts some interesting flesh on the bones, but says nothing not already known to anyone with a passing interest in the subject. So much...so much other stuff...like Clinton's staff discovering tens of thousands of Polish swing voters in the mid West who were eager for NATO expansion. One thing is for sure, there is enough truth out there that history will always know that US expansion was behind this adventure...not Russian aggression.
The hook, line and sinker acceptance of Bucha at face value diminishes the whole presentation. Far more likely a Ukrainian psyops...with a little help from their friends.
First person he visited was rhe Russian ambassador? Well that set the stage and i was waiting for him to trot out the twaddle about the Revolution of Dignity being formented by the CIA. He didnt disappoint.
Yes, and the “nice meal”!
Exactly. This figure jokes about Biden being senile and Yeltsin being a drunk, yet he composes himself no better than someone suffering both.
When an ageing professor enters the geriatric equivalent of the terrible twos, I think it's about time he retires.
Because that's actually what this is. It's recycling russian propaganda, it's failing at basic methodology, and its done with a sort of arrogance that is rare, and mostly found among the drunk and the senile.
@@erikamonahan Munich Putsch also was "Revolution of Dignity" but NSDAP edition, not UNSO edition. Strange they both have National-Socialist in their names, what a coincidence.
He looks like just another (very sophisticated; paid?) Vatnik, that's all. And never loses the opportunity to desdain those politicians that are really standing up against his (I guess) beloved pootin.
That was very informative! Great questions 👍
Very Russian story ...
Conveniently substantiated by numerous Western sources. Those crafty Russians 😂
A very objective story
go cry in polish
The utter lack of charisma and any semblance of appropriate concision on display here warrant extensive study.
So, you have a historian, writing a book about the war in Ukraine, and *not* making sure he has any relevant Ukrainian sources for his work?
If I ever saw someone fail miserably at basic methodology, it is this.
A lot of interesting finds, by all means, but utterly useless if the point is to understand anything about the dynamics that lead to the war.
Because the most important perspective - the Ukrainian perspective - is completely missing.
How did a supposedly serious historian end up.with something so embarrassing? It's simply puzzling.
Failing at basic methodology, bah. Pathetic 🙄😤
Why, in your opinion, the Ukrainian perspective is the most important? What are your merits for this assessment, except for the obvious “Ukraine is valiantly fighting this war for its future, democracy and western values”? Feel free to enlighten this comment section about some of the dynamics and perspectives that are missing. I’d like to hear.
Good God!!!! ONLY Ukrainian sources are used by the Western legacy media!
@alkatrazgodspeed9366 partly because Ukraine is the country being attacked, partly because there are so many assumptions made about Ukraine, that are both dead wrong, and at the same time essential for the logical consistency of the analysis.
Who am I? Just someone who happens to have some experience with Russian-speaking Ukrainians. A group that is grossly misrepresented here. To the extent where the entire story - or fairytale if you like - falls apart and make no sense.
@@alkatrazgodspeed9366for instance, the fact that Janukovitsj promised, as a central part of his campaign, to join the EU, and then reneged on his promise, isn't taken into account at all.
But this fundamental deceit was the main factor behind the uprising. Joining the EU had broad support also in the south and in the east. Many of the activist groups where from the south and the east, and they where russian speaking. There where also demonstrations in support of the Euromaidan in cities like Odessa, Mariupol, Kramatorsk, Donetsk and Luhansk. Even in Crimea, there where demonstrations. This is absent from the analysis, rendering it false and meaningless.
Instead the analysis points to NED - National Endowment for Democracy - and George Soros. Repeating typical Russian propaganda points that have little to no basis in reality.
The analysis makes the point that it was hard to convert russian speakers to "proper ukrainians". That this was a type of experiment that usually fails. Alas, this is completely backwards, and, again, just parroting russian propaganda.
Russification is a well documented russian strategy, and it has failed to russify Ukrainians for hundreds of years. Even if many speaks Russian. Zelensky is a native Russian speaker, and became famous as a Russian speaking comedian. Zelenskys chief of staff, Andrij Yermak, is a russian speaker, who also has close family in Russia. Olekandr Syrskyi is also a russian speaker with close familybin russia, and uses russian as his working language. The Azov Battalion, a popular subject to various propaganda operations, is a russian speaking unit.
This idea of russian speakers turning around and resisting the Euromaidan is entirely false. The notion that russian speakers somehow stages meaningful anti-maidan rallies with popular support, is also false. The fact is, the demonstrations never had much support, and when the organisers ran out of money to pay the "protesters" to show up, they contacted their masters in Kreml for more funds in order to keep going. In the end, Strelkov, with a bunch of FSB operatives, neo-nazi groupings and nazbols intervened with violence and started the escalation spiral that lead to russias covert intervention later in 2014. An intervention with minimal local support.
This is all well documented, for instance in the before-mentioned book by Jakob Hauter: Russias overlooked invasion. A book that is passionate about methodology and review of data quality. Can be recommended for those wishing to actually know something more than propaganda and your general MSM-derived nonsense.
@rosemaryanaisanesse I have no idea who's in "western legacy media". I gave up that bunch a long time ago.
I guess Biden can start another one or two fronts of the other three fronts of Russia.
Was he paid by by gru?
@@piotrszczepanski6694 o, Hi, MI6, or Mr Zelensky!
Very interesting lecture and insights to learn a bit more. Thank you.
The best propaganda always contains elements of truth.
Please... Its a great Book. If you know better, answer him with a Book.
@@oliviaschnepf2994
• 'Provoked' - book, written by Scott Horton.
Also recommended:
Glenn Diesen
Jeffery Sachs
Anatol Lieven
Nicolai Petro
Chas Freeman
Col Lawrence Wilkerson
US Ambassador Jack F Matlock
John Mearsheimer
Alfred-Maurice de Zayas
Richard Sakwa
Sumantra Maitra
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Neutrality Studies
The words advertising and propaganda are synonymous.
Exactly. But in my mind there is an avalanche of truth to support this argument and very little on the other side: Putin decided to remake the Soviet Union over his cornflakes one morning? C'mon
@@ewartmoutonwow. Who has ever suggested that?
Thank you for an excellent and insightful discussion !!
Jesus!! I must buy this book!!
what jesus;s book its very widely known
Hi from Russia. Yes, USA ignored our interests for the long time - because USA ignored everyone interests. This was an "unipolar moment", after all. So no objections on US policy, including NATO expansion etc.
But it cannot go on forever, so no objections to Russia policy either. I really proud that my country stand up against the American totalitarian rule. And I think we need no exuces to do that - look around and you will see why.
Putin, jihadists, Trump - I support everyone who stand against the liberal cabal.
I didn't know the USA was supposed to care about your interests.
@AdamBechtol Western arrogance is bigger than the Western capabilities, lol.
Sometimes, things are as simple as the aggressor country's leader being a brutal dictator on a revanchist land-grab. There is no need to invent excuses to try to excuse the inexcusable.
Mmmm
в комментах русские общаются с русскими на английском
Привет из Краснодара :)
According to Haslam's logic, Russia's first annexation of Crimea in 1783 was, of course, a response to the foundation of the United States in 1776. Moscow just reacts to what the West does. Had Nato been dissolved in 1991, there would be today a peaceful Russian-German border on the rivers Oder and Neisse (or the Elbe).
always amazing to see people flashing their ignorance online
По доброй воле СССР состоялось 3 октября 1990 года вхождение Германской Демократической Республики (ГДР) в состав ФРГ. Советские войска были выведены из Германии. Войска США не были выведены из Германии ни тогда, ни сейчас.
Nato destroy Minsk agreements why?..EU path for Ukrain was there secure and certen.Membership in Nato could wait...but no..arms bussines and destroying of German cheap gas economy was more important than Slavs lives you hypocrites..
Superb presentation.
Why don’t you invite Ukraine experts to speak instead of Russian experts?
I challenge you, I dare you, channel organizers, to invite Ukrainian history and culture experts to speak. If you dare, if you have the guts.
Let us examine Ukrainian bravery and compare that to your own cowardice.
Being anti-American imperialism and an expert on Russia does not make you cool or well informed or sought-after, except in Moscow . He would be welcomed and given a platform on Kremlin State TV.
Where is his expertise on the Eastern European people, and Ukrainian peoples perspective ?
He can’t help himself for being a Russian propagandist with a western accent .
The question should be asked, why is this media platform Promoting Russian propaganda as insider intelligence.
Do you notice that all of the comments in this comment column are calling you stupid and duped by Russian propaganda posing as enlightenment thinking .
Why don’t you enlighten yourself and us and provide us some information of value by inviting guest speakers who are experts on Ukraine? I understand they’re not as common as experts on Russia. Shows whose narrative we have been listening to all these years.
So you really haven't read or seen any public media for thirty years?????
What a bunch of putins lies
Did Putin overthrow Yanukovych and attack the people of the Donbass?
@@brettharris6428putin sealed Yanukovichs fate when he forced him to reneg on his main campaign promise: The association agreement with the EU.
Then Putin attacked Donbas, that is very well documented. For instance in the book Russias overlooked invasion, by Jakob Hauter.
Unlike this rambling old fool, Dr Hauter actually takes rigorous methodology and the critical scrutiny of sources seriously. His book can be much recommended!
Thank god Haslam enlightened me. We need saddam and ghadafi back, democracy is for the weak and our savior is putler.
"Ideas so crazy only an intellectual would believe them".
Democracy isn't for every country.
I am really surprised how much I've enjoyed this talk.
I'm strongly pro-NATO and wouldn't ordinarily give my time to what on the surface appeared to be Russo-sympathetic content.
I suspect that Jonathan Haslam and I wouldn't agree on much discussing this over beers, but the perspectives he explores are undeniably interesting and are certainly thought provoking. I appreciate having a reputable alternative to my admittedly entrenched (and happily entrenched at that) biases. I'll never change my mind but I feel more informed all the same.
Thanks very much, @CentreforGeopolitics
Obviously you don't have to be open to changing your mind. At least you are able to listen to an alternative view which seems to be an endangered skill these days. Some would argue that it doesn't matter what we think anyway given how much agency most of us have and it's certainly more comfortable and easier to hold the mainstream opinion (even if it's not based on much fact). I personally think and hope that it may matter if enough of us question, debate and are willing to abandon our previous understanding in the light of new evidence but that's just my opinion.
@@ewartmouton Then I guess I'll look forward to sharing opinions with you in future comments sections. Appreciate your reply.
Would you say that NATO is a force for peace in the world? I would like to become informed, too.
@@FundedinaWeek As a citizen of a NATO member country, I'd say it's a heavily armed, well trained alliance that keeps me safe, and that produces awesome TH-cam videos. I'm open to the fact that it may have flaws, and might be problematic for non-member states' citizens.
you sound like a man who made us his mind without knowing all the facts surely thats the description of ignorance you say you wont change your mind even tho youve been presented with an alternative picture how can we ever move on when you freely admit youll never change your mind that leaves no space to advance and your mind is closed to any new solution you even admit your biased what hope is there for the world if people are unwilling to be open to see others point of view and think theirs is the only correct view does this not qualify as conceit and arrogance surely not good characteristics of a nobel soul searching for truth and leaving little space for human advancement to creat a more fair and peaceful world
I dont want to listen to this crap. This ignores the reality of all things that should be considered.
It has been said that - There is one born evry minute of every day - but ofcourse - he is totally unaware of this fact -
Total BS
A liar...
stop your name dropping
What a rambling and boring fool
Listen to Blinken to have a better one.
It’s surprising how common the idea is among Western academics that Russian foreign policy is simply a function of reacting to America. But I’ll give Haslam credit for being intelligent about this idea as compared to Mearsheimer who is essentially a Blame America First fanboy. But for Czechs, Poles, Balts or Nordics among others there’s no question who the bad guys are…the Russians.
'bad guys' go back to your crayons
😂😂😂
He forgot to mention the West are run by worst real Mafia. 😂😂😂
Yea baby, you're good, Russians bad... we got it. Just do not call yourself historian. Stories teller is your level.
Let me remind you that Poland is not in Eastern Europe.
As a Brit you should know this as it’s manifesting in the leading country, both economically, but also in third processes . The NATO expansion was a wonderful and positive process for Europe.
As far as money goes, Germany needs to account for payment of reparations for second world war that they will primarily to Poland as well as Greece.
sorry lil bro, Poland is definitely in Eastern Europe 🤣
Still lying about Bucha, eh?
What lies? I lost that part.
Russian talking points
Greetings to putlers trollbotboys
You have so much ignorance not even to have read the history of WW2, when the USSR WON the war against Nazism (not that it has gone- look at dear Ukraine now)!!
DATELINE KYIV OBLAST - DAY 1022
Excellent lecture. Timely, insightful, and informative. Wonderful Q&A session.
Thank you, Professor Haslam.
V/r - IB
An American in Ukraine
(2019 - Present)
Unbelievable TRUE...The best ever explanation to depth...
bad book
That's the spirit. We good. They bad. We strong. They weak. Put down TH-cam and go back to Sky or BBC or whatever. The grown-ups were discussing things.
GLORY for RUSSIA, a world of great people and yet greater ideas!!!❤❤❤❤❤❤ Against that background, the Anglo-Saxon speaker looks bloodless and unexciting ...
...a POM lecturing the world about democracy... Try to square that C.R.A.P!!! LOL!!!
Complete BS
1 hour and 30 mins of flat-out lies. Impressive.