ah, ah ah ah hello and welcome to cross stock where all things are considered i'm peter labelle . the conflict in ukraine has demonstrated tactics can when propaganda and narrative points while strategy will ultimately determine the political outcome of this conflict. here in its western backers, excel and tactics. it keeps the conflict going. is this enough to trump moscow's

long term strategic goals? ah, discuss these issues and more. i'm joined by my guess, george samuel l. e. in budapest, he's a podcast or at the goggle which can be found on youtube and locals. and here in moscow we have maxine switched off. he is the director of the center for advanced american studies and moscow state institute of international relations. for a gentleman cross that rules and effect, that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciated. or let's start with georgia in budapest and church over the last few days. we've had this real flurry of, you know, is a negotiations going to break out, you know, we had sold in our kia and then we have general mill lane. they joined chief of staff are saying this is a good point. and before the winter sets in for negotiations, i think he said, any time there's an opportunity, you should seize it. ok, i mean, are they talking among themselves? are they making overtures? how do you read this?

well, it is very difficult to discern what any of this about. it's hard to see how at this stage, any serious negotiations are possible. and because what is that to negotiate about giving sense that it's also hard to figure out exactly what is going on without question. the russian with roll from city is politically a problem for russia, because now you can think of russia initial objectives when it launch the special military operations, which is some demilitarization, dean optic ation, and the liberation of don't ask and look guns not none of these as it has yet been achieved. now this, what we've seen when the withdraw may well be just a,

a strategic role in preparation for the an offensive. sometime during this winter may be delayed, maybe into next spring. but at the same time, it's not immediately clear what this offensive will be about, what, what's the, what the strategic objectives will the russian forces seek to attain in this offensive. so at this stage, i think there's a lot up in the air. and really, when i'm real questions about what russia is trying to achieve, what russia has deploy sufficient resources in order to achieve so no, i think i started to regard any of the diplomatic overtures as anything very serious . but they, what the, the, the strategic situation is also somewhat problematic. basically the same thing to

you because essentially it gets down to this flurry of talk is, it is, this is talk within the political leads in the united states, also including nato. and then also the some in the regime here, there for getting a brittany important home in it called russia. ok, mean that's what i find very peculiar because it says that there are a telegraphing their position publicly among among 2 sets include excluding the 3rd set, which would be moscow here. so how do you, what do you make of this? it doesn't mean anything whatsoever, or is it just a fundraising event to keep people interested in the conflict in the west as europe descends into recession, we cannot make the choice in the u. k is becoming dire. i mean, no one can give 3 tiers. the economy in the us, so i, my birth reaction is it's a diversion and it's a distraction. max,

your thoughts will come in there if you waste, look at what's going on. i guess one as, as been right here is that need just maybe in a way, claiming kind of a starting bargaining position. and part of the united states is that the russia, there is a clear bottom line. and part of the us least that they're the, the, the want to avoid escalating the conflict to the point where it may become, you know, not everyone gets, it's not just about your pain. but in a case of you, this escalation be taken to a nuclear level, it won't behave how you can at all. so to say, so i think it's clear. ready that the unit us leadership monster would that scenario. on the other hand, i think there is a sense both with the ukrainian and american elite that they, they need to seize on the momentum while the ukraine is still on the offensive. well, russia is, you know, recreating beyond the river on the other side of the river and they, they, they ceased care some city. and they want to kind of cement the moment as you

clearly appoint and rightly might you want it out in your introduction. you know, before the winter, where the calculus may change, and i think there is a sense in us and ukraine elite going to me term and long term time is rather on the russia side. whereas on the short term, i'm is on the u. s. side. and the russia is now on the retreat. you know, they want to seize the moment and say, hey, here's your chance. moscow to they are deal none of the things and none of the goals and objectives that you stated before the special manager operation have been achieved. but you are losing, you know, within your losing, here's your chance to say face. and here it is. the question is, of course, now what's, what's going to happen on, on the, you know, the all kinds of decisions that may be taken, the russia side. because you know,

the pollutants press secretary escal stated that harrison is still in a constitutionally part of russia. we didn't excluded from, from the russian territory, which means russia still maintains both political will and the military objective to recapture it in some time whether it's going to happen or not happen where there is some agreement behind that or would know there's all kinds of speculation a way now. so but yeah, i think clearly on the us side, you know, it's an attempt to cement the status quo as it is today now, which will give you brain some time, perhaps to a group to re arm. and, you know, consider even further movements you know, to, to, to capture don bass and perhaps even crimea. yeah. even in a few years. yeah. ok. let me thank you max for saying that. ok. in a few years, george, what people are talking about is this simply nonsense because it doesn't resolve

anything. this is what i find very frustrating is a, you know, they way they seize on, you know, that leave the them at the moment where, you know, we have ukranian troops advancing russian around the russian zone with making a strategic withdrawal. i mean, this is a battle that has nothing to do with the outcome of all war. ok, i find this very, very confusing. go here, george. no, it, it really is because from russia perspective, i mean if, if a ceasefire were to be put in place now, then russia will achieve nothing. and so they, so, and ukraine would immediately begin preparations for the next offensive. and because for the united states, this is a war, this relatively on the cheap and he's working quite nicely for all of the, you know, it keeps the arms industry humming along nicely. and it's bloody in russia it's,

it's, it's weakening in feebly russia. and that's, that's all that the united states is seeking to achieve when you create the doesn't really care about, you know, getting territory back so much as weakening and hurting rusher. so that, that objective of the united states has been achieved. so if a sci fi will put in place now, and then this will be in preparation for a renewed ukrainian offensive, maybe next year, maybe in 2 years time. so russia will not have achieved anything through sci fi. so the idea that withdraw from house on city was in preparation for some kind of a deal that, that makes absolutely no sense at all. and i don't think the government in the current and good possibly. so why? i think that the question is, what is russia planning on? i would certainly think that they are planning for an offensive in

maybe in the winter, or maybe in the early spring. and then we really raise the question, how will that offensive and secure some of their goals? because 300000 was also forces that they are planning to deploy for such a defense. if that doesn't sound like it's enough, i mean, i think you need much more than that. and then you have to raise the question. we would need to mobilize more seriously to achieve military objectives. and all, while the in the, in ukraine would be turn into the front line for nato. all right, so here, you know, i'm actually, again, what i find quite the, funneling is that quote unquote ceasefire. well, who, who, when that i mean of the run the russians will have gained nothing at great expense the ukrainians will last even more of their country. i don't see how any side,

if we look at the training side in the, in the russian side wouldn't get anything out of such an agreement. i mean, you're just a spot on, right. i mean, the u. s. is getting this on the cheap. ok. and what it is, is, again, in my introduction, i talked about tactics versus strategy. this is showing telegraphing to the world that rushes in a bind, which is sending a message to the global se, sending a message to china. and did, you know, did see we told you not get in line? this is a, this is only working to the united states. that's why you quoted, this got to the spokesperson. you know, nothing is really changed here. your thoughts. busy i agree, i mean, look in my view, the u. s. kind of strategy in, even in the, in the context of recently rolled out national security strategy clearly lays out china is a key and an only strategic challenger, an adversary in the 21st century, which suggests that other, you know,

a challenger's an adversary such as russia has to be constrained. well, i'll, i'll call it on the cheap, it's not, you know, on the cheaper say, but it means that there's gotta be a system constructed around them that enables us to constrain them and to contain them while, you know, focusing on china, in case of russia, in my view, it suggests that there are a few kind of geopolitical literatures and kind of spokes food in place that women rushes maneuver and rushes influence over europe. and you know, in that sense, i think us doesn't care for ukraine's territory or say it cares a how much of that land russia has. it only in regard to how much you believe leverage russia will have over ukraine in europe. but what it cares about in a crane is that sprain may stays within the west's, you know, military and political orbit. well, probably outside of nato. but it doesn't mean that, you know, even if it has non nato status,

it will be able to receive all kinds of arms. not security guarantees per se, but you know, even more enhanced military training even more, you know, enhanced intelligence and political presence in the country. that ultimately, i think upsets the very objective of the russian operation. you know, to drag ukraine out of the of the orbit, which i think makes all the resolution of the country even more complicated regardless of the tactical movements on the ground. george, your thoughts real quick before we go to the right? i think so. i think it, there's no question that as far as the united states is concerned, they just going to keep ukraine as a force directed at russia. i mean, it's not so much membership in native, but that as a problem, you know, essentially a battleship directed of russia for years to come because it will, it will in feeble russia and will be

a major and they call them for years. but we're going to go to a short break, and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on some real estate. ah, ah, look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such order that conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about personal intelligence at the point, obviously is to great trust rather than a job with artificial intelligence. real, somebody with a robot must protect its own existence with

a victory for russia solution with my to a new modem, but look at a mean crane more is a proxy war. this is a war between russia and the united states. mm hm. it comes to the us, you get them in carbon dioxide for sure, and your not in your gauge in conflict as russian forces. the american forces are harris defend nato, allied with nato escalades even more than the special military operation. become a war, though when you but bells have so many rules that denial. another 1000 is my story . i see it. i see you are to us thinking casias got what i mean with so you story, you should weakened yourself to with almost them once you live

at home and you're still foolish that are in your sewage. never seek of the girl. ah ah, welcome back to cross that we're all things are considered. i'm peter. well, this is a home addition to remind you. we're discussing some real news. ah i just go back to my fear moscow. you know, i, on this program i try to remind your viewers of the bigger picture here. and i go

back to history, december 17th of last year, when russia communicated very clearly publicly to nato and to the united states about its security demands in the pen, europe, space that hasn't changed again, going back to the beginning of our program, this seems nonsensical for me to think that or to believe that moscow would settle for so little actually in the net negative. if we think about that the, their demands before the conflict started and where they were sitting right now that it was off or not max. well, i would, i would even make it go even this far to suggest that the situation is even worse, given the, you know, the, the, the, the, the length of the border would need or was, it is now even bigger given, you know, the membership. but the thing here is,

i guess that i find problematic. i think russia is literally formulated what it doesn't want. but i don't hear last formulating what it clearly once and what if suggested once a warm be embraced by the united states. and it's hard to impose these things on the united states. so i guess there's gotta be some creative movements on board of russia to make the worst feel they really need this deal and that they can't win this conflict on the chief. they can't make europeans pay all the price and that they want a bird. you know, i just really the key here because again, a, i hope on me i will be eventually proven. i'm 100 percent. correct. is it. this has been tactics. it's about controlling the narrative. um, if i go back to george here on the, on the, the, the, when sullivan was in camp talking to zalinski, you know, you know,

get doing an attaboy and padding on the back and all that. but you can also interpret that is, you know, zelinski and i got a little bit be a little bit more finessed here about negotiations. it doesn't have to be real ok, but you have to be more flexible of what flexible, publicly, because it always, europeans are really worried about inflation high energy. and if we, there's no hope, no hope at all from you and your regime, that there will be negotiations. that's a net loss, not for the united states per se, but for the coalition of the willing that if you're desperately trying to keep together, i'd like to point out to everyone, the japanese have broken ranks and they're staying with the soc alene project, which is very very important to japan, very important to russia. so the sanction of global sanctioned regime against russia is cracking. so i mean, again, this is kind of like smoke and mirrors. and as i said in my interject introduction, george, just to keep it going. george. yes, on the other hand, is in other way looking at it is that the cracks in the global sanctions regime

doesn't really work for russia because from russia, one of you, what has really worked so far has been the pain that it's inflicted on the west. and therefore it's to rushes advantage to keep that pain going. if they stop doing backroom deals with all of the european countries, we'll skip over sanctions with this country. so in all the sanctions with that country, then europe is off the hook. you know, the winds won't be quite as bad as they're expecting. you know, they'll still be a little bit of gas. this will be some energy, you know, the industry will say, and therefore russia will not have achieved the pain that it should achieve in the labor and the leg. yeah, that's right. so it's a problem. the russian has been rather risk of us in it's a military operation. it's risk of us in terms of the casualties. it's willing to

sustain risk averse as to how much pain and no casual does that they're willing to inflict on the ukrainians risk of us about getting into a serious military confrontation with nato. and then risk averse about bringing the european economy to its knees. so that means, you know, you're a couldn't get through this winter without as much problem. if i have a month or so ago and rushes problems remain because the, you know, the americans are just going to keep boring, more and more arms and do, are you great. so maybe the only way out of this is a serious military offensive in russia, which really puts no grain on the back of the make a deal. i personally think that's what's in the cards right now, and i personally think it's going to happen sooner than later. but you know, matt, see if you look at the history of modern warfare,

no shock and awe of the brand from the u. s. when i'm thinking about iraq, specifically, russia hasn't engaged in anything like that. ok. the internet cafe still work in keira. celebrity still visits zalinski and you know, if you can report on what's going on in ukraine from a cafe when you know what's going on and they dont, i mean i watch, you know, cable new me who from the very few people actually had the problem. there sitting in their hotel rooms and then we had about 2 weeks ago, a little over 2 weeks ago we had russia demonstrated it's pain dial by taking out a good part of the electricity grid. the parts of it still exists. obviously it has to 1000000000 used, but there's also has a military dual use. and again, you know, if you're in a conflict where it's kind of existential, it's puzzling that russia doesn't put more effort into it because, you know,

getting things to the front, they're big things. you put them on trains. and if there's no electricity for trains, you can get to the front, you get what i'm talking about, go ahead. was there, you know, all the talk in the western media about rushes and escalation to nuclear level. in my view is interesting and it's understandable, given the russian president spoke about it and our number of occasions, a low likely different context that explore trade in the western media. but i think the issue here is that russia hasn't actually employed a lot of non nuclear options that it could have employed. that could have changed the, the status for the conflict to its favor. and worse than all or a lot of people, including military experts and political politicians, are asking why this has been taken. and i think and part george answered that question rush has been incredibly risk averse, but also it doesn't seek to escalate to that level. but there are

a few things like, you know that the long range aviation hasn't loaner single place their, their kinds of missile strikes and the infrastructure that are used for carrying the weapons from nato countries to the united, to the brain and so on, so forth. so that is of course, one thing on the table. the other thing on the table with the given the recent election results in the us release, the seeing whether the in the republican control house were put even more pressure on the europe and allies, as republicans with most readily do and make them pay for paying him terribly and financially and whether this will entail in some kind of displeased between air, you know, the americans and europeans and was also whether the republicans will start any stretch or control of the funds i will be to, to train. i don't think it will dramatically change the supporting crane policy

because it seems for now to be a bipartisan issue. but i still think the accent will, will, will change and they may also have some impact on the outcome. i'm glad you brought up the midterm. that's where i wanted to go. george, what are your thoughts here? because i think it was more kevin mccarthy's comment. you know? no blank check and all that, i think that with the throw away cheap political red meat. because there are a lot of conservatives. the thing why we pay, why don't we control our border, why we're worried about another countries borders, but i, i don't think it was very genuine because it is very bipartisan and it gets, it gets the number of republicans off the j. d advancing coming sen. you know, that's my position, it's not going to change anything. do you think ahead? no, not in the night this. as you say, i mean, mccarthy just did this as a thought to wing within the republican party. that clearly is happy

about ukraine's, but that way is very small. i mean, when it's, you know, we can name the, the congress people and j. d vines, on the think of the one all in one, starbucks. right. and to be honest, as things are looking at the moment, it's not even clear, the republicans are going to control the house. as happens in the united states. the longer the both count continues, the more miraculously that the democrats, when so i think the americans need to, you know, study on brazilian politics because they seem to get the vote out and they get, the money isn't high and low politics is the longer the vote goes on, the more likely these are, the democrats prevails or every single seat with the votes account of the democrats miraculously, when so at the moment, kevin mccarthy may not. if i end up as the speaker of the house, but even if he were i, i don't think republicans would change policy very much. it might change if

for trump to return to the white house, but that's already at the very least 2 years down the road. so i don't think anything very much will change that, but no one has to see though, and you know, what happens if the, if this coming russian offensive, then in a serious problems where you brain does the united states, then decide that, you know, they've got a real problem on their hands, if in the event of a total ukrainian military collapse, that happens then, then the americans might just a, some peace negotiations as well. unless there is a complete political ask you the americans, i'm going to stop. well my, my theory really real quickly and it's a subject for an entire program actually. the way i look at it is this withdrawal is ukrainian to move in. they will take it and then we could possibly see

a major pincer, stalin grad like a band and obviously not in the same magnitude, but it's kind of a knockout blow that george and i are alluding to 30 seconds to you know, it's not fair to throw that she would 30 seconds even a shot anyway, i think look, i just conclude by saying that it's not over until it's over right back in the world war 2 just made it as far as the sound. right. as you mentioned, as for thrown back all the way to berlin so that it's, it's, you know, there, there may be a, you know, the moment may not be in russia, stever or it is, but there is some plan behind it. i can't really say a modern that on the circle, but like i said, there are multiple things and multiple literatures on both ends and it's not over yet all the time. we have gentlemen, fascinating discussion. i want to think, my guess in budapest and here in moscow, and i think our viewers for watching us here in our to see you next time. remember crossed up hills. ah,

well, it seemed wrong. went on just a sheep out because the african and engagement was betrayal. when so many find themselves worlds apart, we choose to look for common ground. what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy, even foundation, let it be an arms race group is on often very dramatic development. only personally, i'm going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very critical time time to sit down and talk

with as the g 20 summit kicks off and indonesia, what the russian foreign minister attending western powers are reportedly preparing the snob moscow. at the forum, i mean growing divisions over the ukraine crisis route. so go a distance in walk, it's the see where they lab. archie follows the russian army and their relentless are children. rules with your premium truth has moscow repels key as a tax on the don basque red line with the african farming industry.