[000:00:00;00] ah ah ah hello and welcome to cross hawk where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle . just what exactly is the west policy approach on ukraine should give negotiate of peace, or should it fight on indefinitely? and what is nato's end game? what does winning mean? meanwhile,

despite sanctions brush is creating political facts on the ground with cross fucking a crane, i'm joined by my guess, the voice of knowledge in washington. he's a blogger, and column this in like jackson, we have daniel mcadams. he is the executive director of the ron paul institute for peace and prosperity and in brussels. we have piri manual tom and he is a lecture at leo. the university gentleman cossack rose in effect. that means you can jump any time you want. and i would appreciate it, i'm calling this program, walk back and you'll know why after he does quote, i'm going to go to daniel 1st. this is anthony blank in the u. s. secretary of state. the people and government of ukraine led by president zalinski must decide on their own the issue of pos, that the possibility of territorial concessions my my day know what a change change in tone and tenor and direction your thoughts? well, the thing, the quiet part out loud, i mean it's hard to imagine either they're stupid or evil, maybe a little bit of both. but it's hard to imagine they didn't understand this back then at the beginning, you know,

in february 24th. if the us intelligence community weren't able to inform our diplomats that this was going to happen this way, then we're spending $20.00 to $30000000000.00 a year on intelligence in vain. and we're wasting our money. but you know, peter, this is what always happens in washington. these people live in a bubble. they listen to each other. they get high on their own supply constantly. and they believe the lives that they told each other, any voices like yours or mine or your other guests that are on the show are absolutely drowned out. even people like colonel mcgregor, who was right from the beginning, always completely drowned out. they don't want to hear a counter narrative because this isn't about foreign policy diplomacy. it's about building a narrative and maintaining it at all costs until it disintegrates, which it started to do peter a couple of weeks ago with mainstream media. and then they say, oh gosh, no one saw this coming. nobody should the same thing because, you know, we, i think it was in the core, over a course of 10 days, maybe,

or something like 10 days, where we had the head of nato saying, ukraine to demand crimea back within 10 days to say, well, you know, about negotiate. well that's up to a kid. no one's going to pressure kiev. you're after it's been a client. they, for 8 years of nato. i mean, you can't talk out of both sides, your mouth at the same time. go ahead and watch. well, obviously nato things, they can, they do every day. i would agree with daniel that this was entirely predictable from day one, but i would, i would strike is likely contrary and tone here and say that there don't. we're reading too much into their segments because what they're saying is not necessarily that, you know, they want ukraine to make concessions. what they're saying is the ukraine has the blank track to do whatever once and the us and nato will back it on conditionally as they have been for the past 3 months. obviously the solution to this has always been from day one to negotiate in good faith by the government and he is incapable

of this. this is a fact is an established fact. and so saying, so now you know, after it's way too late, isn't going to change anything. but i keep hearing the same, you know, blinking statement, you know, it's up to ukrainians. he's always been saying it's up to you radians, that's the thing. and everybody believes that ukraine has agency, but this is a government that's literally being funded, like underwritten by the us taxpayers just like the regime in afghanistan, the collapse that minus 2 weeks. so we're, you know, did his whole notion that ukraine is the one in the driver's seat making decisions . and the usaa nate are there to back them up is 1st of all, completely upside down. and secondly, it doesn't really correspond to reality on the ground. so if is it washington, who wants to make concessions? if, if they are, they need to say, so i don't think they're saying so. yeah, well, appear manual i big. the thing is they politically an idea logically they can say,

can make concessions after all of the investment. you know, i don't live in the us, but what is it like $7.00 a gallon right now? no, baby food and, you know, and they, they, they actually found them so painted themselves into a corner. and by saying, you know, it's up to the ukraine. it's up to is lensky. well, that's one way to say, well, it's their faults to, they're looking, they're playing the blame game already. go ahead and brussels sweater ah, senior, because he's a proxy wall between the natal member states and russia with ukraine as a front states are of a push ukraine. to were to weaken rashaw during this conflict, but doing so earn more and more early they your v year are losing the economic butter on the west side, on the military butter because your ukrainian army, or will they received the look of weapons or from the initial member states,

or they cannot a different property, their territory. and, or we can expect to russia to low, to take over the wound of dumbass on may be bull, the mo, mo, a weight, the more russia we rise, probably the stakes on the negotiation. we'd be much more difficult. yes. right? yeah, i agree. i mean, the longer this goes on, let me go back to daniel late jackson here. i mean, we'll maybe learn in the future, but there was a point of inflection. it is stem bull. and apparently with the media is a reporting as ed morris johnson told the zelinski, ha, no, you're not, you're not getting negotiate here. and ever since then again, this is a lead to, we don't have a we, we need to have a call cooperated. but, but daniel, at that point, the, i think the russian side said, well, what's the point in negotiating with you people? first of all, you didn't implement minsk one or 2. why should we believe you? now? i think this is one of the best big misconceptions in western media. i mean,

what do you think rushes in particularly interested in living, listening to what zalinski to say about anything at this point daniel? well, the funny thing is we had for years of the democrats in the u. s. and a lot of european leaders believing that somehow trump was putin's agent. but literally, if putin was the greatest by master in history, he could not have had agents as fantastic as he has right now. and let's just look at the economic front because oil has skyrocketed, obviously, mostly because of sanctions, but also because of supply price problems and domestic us energy policy. oil has skyrocketed in russia is selling on the world market at a 30 percent discount. and people are lapping it up. i think china has purchased a 67 percent increase in russian oil. literally russia last month made $20000000000.00 in revenue from oil sales that month alone. they are literally financing and funding their war on the back of us sanctions. how is that for running agents in the west?

it's just unbelievable in their voice. and i mean, that's one of the most incredible things that i've seen in my lifetime. how the europeans, particularly about your cut themselves. i mean, it was chancellor shields which i referred to as sergeant shields on this program. he said, well, sanctions are not supposed to impact us negatively as if he was surprised. ok. that's why we call me sharp. sergeant schultz go ahead and washington, well, i mean the europeans, the european union, i'm making a distinction between them. the continent have committed economic suicide and they're in the process of committing political suicide as well as the american empire, on the other hand, has managed to consolidate rule over over europe in a couple of satellites in the pacific, but has literally antagonized the rest of the world, they keep talking about international community and you don't hear that much anymore because it's obvious to everybody that quote, the international community is basically the u. s. canada nato,

and like australia and south korea and japan. i mean that's, that's it, that's, that's all folks. so in every respect, strategic, tactical, operational, political, diplomatic, economic, this, this conflict has been a total disaster for the west. and obviously the ukrainians are the ones you know, doing most of the dying here. and then you have the dutch prime minister of a country as a, you know, one, a war and in centuries, going, oh yes, we are in water with russia and russia must lewis. and so we must give you creating all the weapons. like mark, do you have any idea what you're talking about? of course not because there's no accountability, there's no consequences. their completely insulated, of the politicians are. there people are suffering, but the politicians don't care because what i get a good both, both them out that never worked. yeah. but and also in the boyish, again, stay with you here. sanctions hasn't changed. russia's quote unquote behavior. ok. i mean is so you can throw in all these weapons so you want, but it doesn't change the outcome here. and then you have the problem of where these weapons go. and there's

a lot of pockets being filled in care of. we the big story before this re, per democrats. i'm sorry for republicans just how corrupt ukraine was upset, not story, doesn't count here. a manual manual and brussels. i mean the be outside of the craniums. i mean, europe is the biggest loser in all of this. not russia. exactly. oh, because her european union member sits in part to could a france and germany missed a huge opportunity to decide on their own future and or winner. the americans didn't mind to negotiate in europe and security arrangements, or re russia, or because of nato enlargement. they wanted to keep the gate open to new need to a nation's a future of france and germany. we chop supposed to be opposed to this enlargement anyway. didn't do a good niss, it go station region promised,

or russia and not to in her, not to were an archer nato, to ukraine. we could have sign a b latter ronald re lot to rocks. would you, franco? german russian didn't do it because are they are a consider over europe and project as a sub product to the euro. atlantis or project undo vcs, led by new to united states to contain, or russia. but to or saw or european union is more and more divided because you can ever, you have 2 sides now or france, germany, italy, seed are taught is governments are but early they like you or a, or a negotiated outcome of his conflict. but o'bar to countries and poor, and they would like to ukraine to we know about conflict, which is totally impossible. and for example, we are gonna we are going to kiss ern mccall. sure sir. i,

he but we are not gonna negotiate anything to be efficient of issue do pressure on ukraine to accept it in any negotiation on, on, on territory to accept a im or no ne tool for ukraine. mit, which means sir, or so probably no e, you aver, because or would it be a poisoned, a gift to of, for you to, to take ukraine because it will divide member state you, it doesn't have a capacity to take or ukraine and so they will be more divided by 2 may need communication and the other lose us because it couldn't be carry this switch or a white sheet. obviously, obviously there's been no adults in the room when it came to this decision making here. gentlemen, we have to go to a heartbreaking out about hard break. we'll continue our discussion on ukraine. stay with archie. ah,

ah, ah, i should be with you barbara. charlotte with a question given him

with awe . ah ah, welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered on peter level to him and you were discussing ukraine. ah.

okay. when asked all 3 my questions. i guess the the same question here. go to daniel 1st. daniel, i mean we, there's this takeo, should ukraine getting negotiation who should back it, who should be pushing it, washington, london: the you all of it. but for me, this is all kind of small potatoes because, again, and in the reason why we got here is that nobody so saying to what the russians are saying. and the issue is, the issue is not change. particularly since december 17th, when russia and its diplomatic notes or ultimate, whatever. however, you want to define it about rush his own security relations with europe. and that has this thing is not going to be over over until that is addressed. and again, the west refuses to get involved in that conversation. that's what this is all about. not about, you know, zalinski at the oscars and por ukrainians, our star being russian. it's not what this is about. it's about security arrangements in europe, and russia won't stop until it gets what it wants,

because it doesn't have good faith interlocutors. daniel. in that you're absolutely right, peter, and in that case, why would russia stop at all? i mean, we're seeing facts that was on the ground far beyond, on that we're seeing the integration into russian economics or economy and political structures of parts of ukraine far beyond don das. so the idea that somehow putin would negotiate a way these facts on the grounds at this point and someone pointed out, maybe as you peter, is turnbull. i think that was the turning point because the on that there is no point, we already see the effects of russia turning its back on dawn best so to speak in 2014. and it made him very unpopular for a while in the region. so at this point, if he gives away the territorial gains that have been won by the russian army, to the benefit of the people in the region, we've seen people on the ground celebrating and being happy, mary pull, etcetera,

etcetera. then that is a huge political liability profusion at this point. why would he take such a huge downside with literally 0 upside? what a pat on the head from blinking that's going to make him happy. you know, a story. i don't think so. there's no incentive for them to not keep going as far as they want. no voice the same question, daniel is absolutely right here. i mean, why should they give up what they already have in exchange for? what? ok, i mean i did. none of these people have any understanding of history or geo politics . go ahead. well contrary to what the current leadership in the united states may believe, this is not 990 years. sloppy things are completely different, even though the us exactly the same way is not nick. you know, the russian army is not taken territory to give it back for russia. this is not a war of choice. as the bi denise administration. try to frame it in

a remarkable display of projection. it's an existential struggle. and if, if it wasn't on february 24th, became so in the subsequent days throughout this whole obsession with army ukraine, making it a proxy war between russia and west. russia calls it a special needs, reparation for it is for right for moscow, this is a police action. but for the west it's the, it's world war 3, but they don't dare actually fight it themselves. and so he has literally become an existential struggle. and so i don't think russia is going to give it, give up on it because they're aware stakes. i think what's, what we need and what we're not getting is some kind of understanding in the west of this is so and they don't have an off ramp. they haven't thought this through to begin with. they have no big tree conditions. they have no end game plan. their end game plan was basically all will be mean to russia and it will, it will come grovelling on its knees and surrender. well, that hasn't worked and never will work. what's next?

and they don't have the answer to that. peer menu al, speaking as a european these are the talk about bringing in ukraine into, into the e u. i find it really quite fanciful, particularly right now, what, what ukraine mean or, i mean, it's a failed state right now. what did they want to induct? and why, and you as a european, are you interested in paying for that? go ahead. well, in the european union, his story, or each country wanted to be advice center or for a european union for its own security. or like the france at the beginning, the project was in but meter because there was a west germany in one side to spain. each hardy and her or shore own benjamin netherlands of been off. and then germany, or be canvas said center of the you with enlargement of o e. you were to the east and then now poland, under budget countries,

they were like old. sure not to be or you know, at the territory, but to enough to ukraine, also to, with a buffer zones against a russia. but problem ease or if when you working as a cheese now if his internal structure, ukraine were mixed road you because are made of money is spent on agriculture. water come on. so to see, but don't show on your funds and is unsustainable. and also there was a rivalry between media and member say, do done one ukraine because it would suck over on it to the east and the eastern europeans would act to put all the money. will you on ukraine? sure. is not going to work. a tour. you know, daniel, if i go back back to you here, i've long believe now ever since, since is them bull is that the russians will take, take the time table in the terms of the end of the conflict. and we just have to wait for that. the aqua,

i find it really foolish on the part of western analysts. you know, russia separately defeated him well that, that presupposes that you knew what rushes plans were, but nobody does. okay. and if you listen to the defense ministry briefings, which are really dry and they never let anything out, they never tell you what they're up to. they just give you the number of items destroyed. it's very numerically driven, but they never tell you what their strategy. but everybody on cnn knows what that strategy is. that's why they look like fools every single night. go ahead, daniel. it's the vietnam thing all over again. you know, and you have people like william ark, and suppose it defense expert writing a piece of news week. i think yesterday saying that, oh yeah, russia is taken over several minutes and, but it doesn't mean anything. they're losing any way you have, you have the fingers. but what's interesting is the thing to shift in european opinion. and there was an interesting recent survey done by the european council on foreign relations and they asked 3 questions. are you in favor of peace justice?

are you on the fence piece or the people who want this to end immediately, regardless of what it costs justice or people who want to keep going and on the fence or people that sort of want both? well, the plurality, by a long shot 33 percent, want to have peace, and that's the way things are going. i think that might be something behind the visit on thursday of the leaders of france, italy and germany, to keep their surprise visit showing solidarity with ukraine. i wonder what really was said there. i wonder if this is more of a saw a swan song than a new opening because we know that germany says, hey, we're going to send you some great tanks and then there's, okay, this is great, but where is the ammo? well, that's going to come next year. do happen over and over again. hey, have some planes, they don't work, but here you can have them in your calling appraisal. we need some new ones. we gave our crappy ones to ukraine, you know, it's a money laundering scheme and it's not working. and i think they're starting to

census. yeah, it's your so right. it's a money laundering operator. this is all, this is an a plus and plus all the goodwill from the nato country. they gave them junk that they didn't want anymore. okay, that's absolutely true. that's absolutely true here. no boy should. where does it go from here? because if you look at the headlines, it's dropped, at least in the united states, where people, it's not the story that it was a few weeks ago a couple months ago here. and there seems to be a real quandary here. and plus, you know, a lot of people forget zalinski if he's kind of given that, you know, the, the let down, sorry, you know, but we know we did our best and all that. then the entire government will collapse because he can't speak around being a defeated leader. they don't understand they, they pushed him up so much as a pop star. and now he has a long way to fall. the boy ship, he's got the world's biggest sense of entitlement. i have not seen anything like this, not even in the 1900 ninety's with us proxies. but, you know, you had biden himself the other day go going, well, you know, he didn't listen to me what i told them,

and i've heard it compared to kennedy's famous quasi denunciation of the vietnamese president the m, right before d, m got overthrown the cool. when we all know how that went for south vietnam afterwards, and kennedy himself later, the fact that the u. s. media and political establishment started talking up january 6 recently as opposed to speaking with ukraine. that's right. that was a dead giveaway to me that the ukraine narrative is busted. it's done. you know, that that particular ship has sailed the war last call, whatever you will. the fact that the, the establishment is desperately flailing for a new narrative, is showing that they're not actually winning and not, not the anybody who's actually observing events in the ground. seriously, believe that at any point. but you know, all this talk that you know, that whole arc and piece, you know, pay no attention is ever if there was an email ready, you know, pay no attention if a possible pay no attention to care. so pay no attention to, you know, you are here and you know,

it goes all the way down to pay no attention to. yeah, i mean it's, you know, what else has to happen for people to understand that the war on the ground is last for the west and it's proxies. it's, it's, it was last on february 24th. it was last on march 24th. and it will be lost on june 24th of july 24th, and so on and so forth. i don't think the french and germans are going to make a difference. so because they're the ones to try to negotiate the end of my don and we know how that ended, they're the ones who negotiate it means we know how that ended. they're simply in agreement and capable at this point and nobody's taking them serious appear menu. well, i mean it, the, the biggest mistake i mean it's difficult to say that the biggest mistake, but if they, if the west had said we must have peace in ukraine and not instead of saying they said we must win. that was their biggest mistake because they can't go ahead in brussels. oh yes much. that's right. or the what best western governments because

or a p or a we've, you know, western been by state. so she more differently. but you're atlantic governments. i would say they think misty can promote their a uni paula world to put to a westerner, value 0, a govern roofs or rosemay story that up at the top of the wall. that's the kind of because or ra, shot by intervening in ukraine is promoting a mercy. put our ward. and by doing so, are you creating we'd never be part of or nate to, which would be very difficult to, to be part of you as well. and means you say, retreat for you, atlantic space or nature on you and her emergence of mercy port richey. but it's very difficult for western governments to accept this fact because it will mean you

lose all of their illusions on the deed. so much papa gone? nope, i got down for an on the sewer company rapidly out of time to do you're absolutely right. no, a neo liberalism in the hubris of, of this ruling class. it will all die in ukraine the way they continue. and unfortunately, lot of ukrainians will continue dying. unfortunately, gentlemen, that's all the time we have. i want to thank my guests in washington, brussels, and lake jackson. and i want to thank my viewers for watching us here at ortiz. see you next time? remember? crossover? ah ah ah oh,

nice another well wow. do you easy while finance? oh yeah. do you want like yes, south. yeah. rush out with in your doc carson boys now watch done for me that will pull up right pete on that is emma? yeah, pulls video from she'll let me just kim's room should sort video a yes, my thought watching into it again, the audio fortune pretty up. no. be

a lot about it. more than just financial i see the current crisis in sri lanka as a continuation of the global financial crisis of 2008, which really has been resolved. we have only been trying to financial eyes and bubble up icon and, and, and what i see as perhaps a crisis of neoliberalism shooting sri lanka 1st. so i don't think the usual solutions going to we're going to have to drastically change direction the are to come up with this crisis. ah, a new ticket for this patient as to what this is becky lsu only i was feel

last or with her to pull you up with that you know, on february the 24th 2022 brush and launched a special military operation in ukraine. the campaigns 1st major battle was an operation to bring the city of murray. you pull back under the control of pro russian don bass

with