ah ah ah, ah ah hello in welcome to cross top where all things are considered line. peter lavelle, the west has gone to great lengths to generate a false narrative about the conflict in ukraine. the cab regime is losing and badly so, and no amount of propaganda can alter this reality. this conflict will come to an end and it will be on moscow's terms. ah,

to discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess, glen decent in oslo. he's a professor at the university of se or norway, as well as author of the book, rissa phobia propaganda in international politics. and here in moscow we have exactly a miro. he is the founder of the center of political strategic analysis strap. all right, gentlemen. crosstalk rules and effect, that means you can jump anytime you want, and i always appreciate it. i would start out with glen in oslo again, the media continues to turn out a what i think a very warped impression was going on in ukraine, the conflict there. but i find which very curious and, and i think it's really important to talk about is that people that should know what they're talking about are essentially talking about how the west will influence the outcome is if they have any influence at all to in force and outcome in minsk 3. now i'm to remind our honey and sir is that there were 2

agreements after the, immediately, immediately after the coup in 2014 on the dumbass to don bout republics. mom said look what we didn't vote for this guy. and this new government and so they left and then there was centrally a civil war mens one and 2. i put that conflict into deep freeze and it was a process in which the 2 dom bath republics would be re integrated into ukraine. know, having a lot more autonomy and it's being talked about again. i mean it's, it lasts, you know, 3 months or so of conflict has not even happened. um, and why is it being talked about? and is it a way out, as we keep hearing, a zalinski will define and will decide what victory looks like. your thoughts are well, i've been worrying about this for quite some time. and again,

this is something that's well recorded and through history, please don't pass 100 years. when countries are in conflict, they tend to talk off the victories and downplayed them also to keep more ela and the, and this is something within this conflict as well. i mean, you have to present a narrative in which the russians being defeated because this is what's necessary to keep morale going within the grant. but it's also necessary the west's to make sure that the public keeps supporting, you know, putting the economy on the line and also continue to pump in this building some dollars the weaponry which we will replace their resources here, but also in risks nuclear war. so there's a necessity to keep up this idea that there's winning, but of course also the literature very clear when it, when finally, reality catches up and, and it's evident, most is coming. it's very difficult to change the narrative. so this is where the stage we're at now, and we have to find the way out and negotiating how to start sitting down and

finding a piece with russia. how can this be done? and again, some people now suggesting, well, let's go back to russia terms. what russia for, you know, back in february before it is moving in this conflict. and this is because now we're talking about the told me for us. but of course, this is her. after all this rounds escalation, this is part gone. and i don't think, well, obviously russia, you know, it was happy under them in agreement to give academy to them. but this was kind of a compromise that sold the native question on the internal grant question. but again, that was 7 years not happening. so the problem now was from february on russia recognized independence of the us and then went against ukraine. and now of course it has been later pilots. now march, we had a possibility of a peace agreement, but this was some past ukrainians. also recognize primarily by a u. k. in us,

in order to essentially we can believe that the russians this isn't working either so so, so, so, so this is the problem. none of us might not be enough anymore because what russia recognized in the fight was a key problem if it needed civilian administration and the territory was. but you can't have anyone volunteering locally to take our civil civilian administration if there is retaliation. when would that ever leave them? so russia have to communicate, clearly support that they would stay there and never leave. you know, so you've seen this by setting up the national symbols that it's maria, reorder thing, inter, everything down to the currency used to the russian license plate on the car stuff if you saw me, for example. so, so the problem is, is escalate this point. now, i don't think just a passive dawn, i think so. own is also gone. and again,

this is something they have to take into account because it continues to escalate. if there's no peace agreements, now, we'll have to see what happens once the bus is sold before the russians. the rest will be kind of low hanging fruit for russia, so they can march very easily than most, all this force and i've been liberated from the bus. that means russian troops liberated from fighting and they're free to fight other places. then it will be very easy, are easier to take a life. that's why even, and at that point they're rush left. even the goal should be circle or so my, my point is for many, especially ukrainian studies might seem unjust, but it simply do accept. now, this territory last or the wait for 2 months and then have you been war? and i think this is the dilemma. and it's quite unfortunate, obviously, and i can understand why many would be hesitant to negotiate on his own favorable terms. but if it turns will only become more favorable that surely this is a good reason to sit down and talk to you. we all saw each other. recently in saint

petersburg we were sitting at the same table. there was a gentleman from india that had joined us at exactly you and i got into a conversation with him and he said, well, what was needed was a win win solution. and i was really puzzled high that i'm because why? ok, i mean what, what does that mean? the means agreements were the win win as glen his pointed out. and the korean regime and it's western backers rejected it. so why go back to something that they reject and then when the facts on the ground have completely changed? exactly. yes, actually it's too late. russia is winning the war. and remember, the written claims in the beginning of the operation was a 22 things recognized. try me as a part of russia and recognize the independence of the republics and the refuse it . so though the war and as i've change already on the twenty's twos

of april, the war and officially are all the ukraine coast and supposedly a region as well. and it will happen, so it's over. but what's changing in that on the mainstream media, for instance, i was reading a statement saying that the russia made progress because the, the mistakes in consideration. so of course it's not the same as it used to be. and i saw it on the french media as well. that's and those are new narrative is ok. russia lost the war because they wanted to invade all ukraine. i don't know where to find that, but i thought i would say in that, just ok only pretend to take the number maybe, but it's, it's too late. it's read. russia wants to negotiate again on the basis it's, it's,

it's quite possible the only think that if you for that to be reasonable can do is i agree with the creation of never russia to be, to be frank frank speaking. and if they don't do that within a month, in my opinion, the war and will change again. let's talk about a check se, let's talk about both of our, let's talk about journey. gov and the, let's talk about jeff. maybe again, because or, you know, a treaty would have to be signed and maybe should have been signed already for 4 months is ago. it's interesting to me and i mean looking at the means to me and that's what i do for a living. in this conflict and then there's still this kind of impression that the west has influence here, how to determine an outcome. and that is, that is completely unreasonable to believe that ok and last,

and i want to part on the, on the boards all the time. but that wasn't agreement. so why would, why would the russian side believe the rental operators this? all right, because the last time they didn't fill their side of the deal, so i mean the ukrainians at the behest of the west united states and you pay a really put themselves into a spot because there's, there's no lack of trust completely. oh, i agree. and i think that's what made this obstacle to any compromise because it would have to be guaranteed somehow or because it doesn't exist anymore. and again, they are correct also less than from ms to him because even cinco spoke openly about also if leading american officials also send an agreement, allows them to prepare for 7 years and, you know, and then yes, so, so this simply be, it doesn't become a peace agreement that becomes

a temporary cease fire. so essentially we arm and then go back to the way things work to i mean to fighting. so i think this is why i think you rush would be very hesitant to accept any, any deal. i mean, this is just so this is just reality 11 in which i would have to fight later. now i agree it trust this problem in most them both sides. and of course, i think i key problem would be for ukraine. of course, you could have some legitimate fear on favorable terms. ukraine could be serial the weekend, could be strengthened while the west to lose interest in ukraine and, you know, then the congress disintegrating somebody or so what they want are some solid security guarantees from natal that they would intervene in the future. but again, this is not going to happen so, but no one can see that a lack of trust and why they want to. but you also have the side of the russians, which is in the peace agreement could be, you know, usually may come used to rearm ukraine. you know, place more america can system closer to russian borders and even along to black sea

coast. now that the spoken so we're just about destroying rushes bikes, the navy and the american studies. and you know, so i think that want us to keep in mind that this is the main, the main obstacle, like all sides, want some kind of security agreement. but, but this is why it goes back to why the conflict happened to begin with. this can work again because european security architecture collapse. this is why we're having problems. we have to address the real problems in the, in the that the real issue here. and again, mainstream media either doesn't have the intelligence and certainly doesn't have the integrity to discuss it. but just as glenn said, i mean, this is all about russia, this russia, security in europe. ok. and because it really in the west refuse to, to interact with them and consider their demands here. russia took the actions that they did and because of that and because of the lack of interaction, honest interaction with the way they will determine when this thing is burke and how far it goes. and they're not, there's not going to be any interaction or dialogue here. because dialogue was

a waste of time. we learned that from december 17th, all the way to february 24th zavion. yeah, actually no follow for the russian side. the west didn't respect is a whole no signature it up on the 1st time on the 21st of february, when there was a, an agreement with the new coach to organize in 6 months in a presidential election. the sir agreement, i remember hold a 20 less than 24 hours without any reaction from the west. after the weather. oh, maybe i have to jump in here. we have to go to a hard break name or break. we'll continue our discussion on some real new stable 30. ah ah ah

ah ah ah ah, welcome as a cross that we're all things are considered i'm hearing now this is the home

addition to remind you we're discussing some real news. ah. the idea here in moscow we were talking about the lack of trust and broken agreements and how we ended up having this conflict continue on please. and so they didn't respect the, the signature, you know, for not i'm from in c, 14 means to foster stand. my are agreement we were supposed to were allowed to implement a dis this agreement. do i see as well that didn't respect the basic rules because all the ukrainians employees were organizing, spying on the dinner and eleanor territories. so it's impossible to, to trust the west. i mean, from the russian side. and i can, the, i can understand that. and the 2nd point is there is another actor we we have to

take in consideration is already galks, because i'm sure that jeff was planning to invade dumbass in march of 2022. i wanted to say why, but maybe we can better. i'm sure of that. so woo, organize this operation will push to get this with this operational be done. it's already got because the last, the last many thinks during as a 1st tape of the my dietary grading oligarchs. yes. yes. and for instance, i met of e last, already many, many active in the 1st part of the, of this conflict in 2014 and 15 last variable and is about to last crogue and column ascii is losing arbitrage. and so, all this oligarchs, we decided to push a zalinski to organize this military operation to get bags are the properties of course want to find a, an agreement, especially somebody like myself because it perfectly understands that no revoke is

a 50 kilometers. and enough of the front line, so it's next up for russia. and so it will, everything after losing my, your ball after losing done it's, it's of a for him. so of course is there is all this force is the west, the only gosh, well in panic because they know that sooner or later all this i said we were told during the night ninety's by the audi galks that we will get back to the people. and so that's a very and, and consequently, the part will stay in ukraine will be the poorest one. router is about to take to port the industry. and the gas, for instance, and 45 percent of the gas produced in the ukraine is in the region. in 10 kilometers from the frontline is origin decide to go to but um it would be 45 percent additional so we will pay

a bill. we will pay for weapons. it's not it what, what to you with with having the crane? it's something like your own, you were the country was a small population. no industry, almost no recruiter. so for the west, it's and for the oregon is or is a hispanic because they used to steal the money in this territory and they wouldn't do. it won't do be able to, they won't be able to do it again. anyway, my name is go back to glen here, glen, and when all this is said and done, you know, one of the things i always find interesting is going from western capitals about how this counseling should be resolved, zelinski will decided ok, and then you hear my murmurings, you know, the, the u. k. rustles and washington are working behind lensky back to create a, some kind of station of conflict of hostilities under terms that they will decide. now again, we keep get these counter mailing trends here. but one thing i've, i'm a very curious, we never hear about it. well, when this company comes to an end,

well, what about the sanctions? ok of or sanctions are forever. and that would go into anyone's calculus. all right, and we look at the energy wells of europe right now. they're only going to get a lot worse as the year goes on. and we all saw the game of thrones winter is coming, and they have not resolved that. the issue of the depends on, on russian energy, even though what i find it's directly weird is that they know cut off, cut off all the energy from rush, and then there's panicking about building up their storage units for the winter. so that's kind of it as kids are running there, but i mean, what happens when the sanction regime? i mean, if there would be any influence the west would have would be about sanctions. and we know about when america passes sanctions, they never with them. glen. yeah. and that's why when you said before that the west, maybe you don't have an influence on that. i disagree to some extent because one of

the things that once it's obvious that the removal of sanctions, but you are correct to what extent is it possible. but also would it be seen as reliable or credible and a bargaining chip because if they're move this anxious today, even if it's possible, you know, why not put it on next week because you know, maybe the risk as i entered about something else. you know, it can be also from syria to gay rights. it doesn't matter like the sanctions can come back, right. run again. so i think that this is the main problem. so that's why this divorce and from the west economic divorce assumed to be somewhat permanent because they wanted to let them sell from further sanctions. so i think that the sanction question is quite interesting and, and also it's the sanctions on ross energy. that was amazing because russia never actually had to do counter sanctions. and this is great for russia because, you know, he wants to be a credible energy supplier. but he never had to dress in the energy because the weather kind of didn't themselves. so it kind of put things on the cells. there's

an interesting move, but i think that if the westport influence here in a peace agreement, the main thing i can do is to go to the heart of the matter. and this is and to look at the issue of european securities, because i'm often told here and also by some ukraine, friends, but there's a ukraine that's a reasonable reason to be fair, careful the russian. they want to go close natal. sure enough. i can understand that. i think you, chris has reasons to favor to ask and reason to say russia, however, russia also reasons to the west and it's natal. and the problem is the security architecture of 30 years left off the 2nd half, which is yes, we have reason to fear russia about russia can have no legitimate fear of nato nato . and this is kind of been the argument and become an idea ology that it's like the biggest military lines in the world struck that against russia or speaking about containing russia. but somehow this is not a threat to russia. you know, when we even have to speak the language that is a defensive alliance,

even though anything they tell the country is quite extraordinary thing. so this is going to harper international relations, which is a security dilemma. one shot sites are not expensive during the expense of other this was also the key focus all the time, your p and secure agreements with a bill of 30 to go after the cold war, which was i think if the west will go and offer something like this to russia, that would be a bargaining chip, which you might get some concessions that are russia, but you're probably correct and would rush. i trust this, i think maybe they will be very skeptical. because over the past 2 years, the us demonstrated that it's prepared to withdraw from a lot of agreements, not just with russia about iran and around the world as well. so. so the willingness, the russian to trust disagreements, i don't think it would be very high, but it's not important as forward to making sure that we can finally have some stability in, in europe because again, this is complex. i think everyone has an interest in it, not the continuum in going back to our conversation,

the 3 of us had in st. petersburg is that big terms and conditions of ending this conflict with russia has hall the high cards. but part of its calculation is going to be to make sure that there isn't to repeat this and by over 10 years. ok. and that's why, you know, it puts into question the statehood. the sovereignty of ukraine completely. okay, because we get a, not a peace agreement, not a p settlement with an armistice would say. and then, you know, for the next 5 years to nato dis, pours in, whatever is left of ukraine. and they want to started all over again. and nature has an interest in doing that because nato has failed. it is failing. ok. and it cannot accept that for ideological and hubris reasons. and everything else will be usually on this program. so part of the calculation from the russian side is, you know, we're not going to do this in the next 510 years. i mean, we're going to make a settlement where we feel comfortable and we don't really care when you thing. go

ahead. yeah, actually if you look at the 1st written, the claims at the beginning of the conflict, it was then as if you cation and then a meter is ation. so it means anywhere that at least there won't be any certainty in ukraine, as it used to be that me, that russia will strongly survey the militarization of ukraine notification of ukraine. so on the point of view on the ocean, best picture of the there is no more possible a ukrainian or any just used to be. and i just would like to add the what you said before that rush i need sanctions. because if you look at, for instance, the, or planes plane for risha blends industry plan for risha, they just started investing on the base on the 4 year plan. so it's been 3 and 4 years. russia don't have to get any boeing any airbus on these fleet. so we

observe exactly the same. we observed in 2014, 80015. that even if the west want to take back the sanctions, russia will continue to adopt a sanctioned because they can trust the west anymore. and it's a, it's concern. of course, the planning in just to print industry is concerned the cheap production where there are no investing a huge amount of money because they want to be independent using a chinese technology as well. but it's, it's a, we don't have to, we have to, to understand that russia need sanctions. and in my opinion, since the beginning, when a very me put into the decision to start the special apparition, it was thinking about that. let's, let's do the we're what we did in 2014, 20152016. it was quite difficult during the 3 years, but after 2017, everything was already ok. all the logistic of movement. no,

i really wanted to idea to what india and actually in 3 months is it will be completely a risk to it. so, sanction is good for russia. let me go ahead and finish out here. you know, blending the, there is again, this, the western on narrative is and you know, we have to push russia out of europe if it doesn't behave when this is when exactly a say, well why she's been preparing to leave europe ever since 2014 and survive those sanctions, it was survive these sanctions. it's not going to be a bed of roses. i always tell people this is the impact of the sanctions. will be incremental. people feel it over time, but there is a re orientation last 30 seconds to you. but i agree, and a roster will feel a little now will build up when you are correct. and this payment's seem to be instrumental in the process of the coupling a bit from the west not completely by moving more economy towards the east. and

that's what that's benefit if you will, from having to sanctions. it puts more motivation behind it, behind, behind this pressures to shift away from the rest of the industries technology, transportation course, banks, currencies and reorganize, probably closer to asia. this is gonna be very painful in small stuff like insurance, it's under ships. a lot of this has to be built up over time so, so, so that will become, become a lot of economic paintbrush in your quest. devices are always messy. i want to thank my guest enough and here in moscow, and i think our boards for watching us here at our dc and exam, remember, ah, ah, i worry when he's done, i had a few missions there. one time that a guy that fought against soviets, and he told me it was such

a pleasure to fight with you because you fooled honestly, we saw your soldiers, we fall to get those, you fall to toss directly. at the same time you will building hospitals, schools and all this stuff bought those americans. we even see them the boom bus from somewhere from all the space on the feet. so ah, the only one main thing is important for naziism, internationally speaking to that is that nations allowed to do anything, all the mazda races, and then you have the mind, the nations who are the slaves. americans, brock, obama and others have had a concept of american exceptionalism and international law exist as

long as it serves american interest. if it doesn't, it doesn't exist by turning those russians into this danger is boy, man that wants to take over the world. that was caught, your strategy was and walked out of it on your own. i not leashed off tim zip on and tablet block. nato took it out. we moved east. the reason us. hey jim, it is so dangerous. is it deny the sovereignty of all the countries? the exceptionalism that america uses and its international war planning is one of the greatest threats to the populations of different nations. if nato, what disbanded shareholders in united states and elsewhere in lodge obs companies would lose millions and millions or is business and businesses good. and that is the reality of what we're facing, which is fashion. and oh,

was reason is meaningless credits and like if you speak russian, keep your voice down while out in about about a quarter. don't put your human symbols on display a little speech nice. all right, so you guys don't talk to strangers. i avoid noisy gatherings and rallies, a more actually eaten your colleagues.