and she the new premier and the appointment of all these topics to show up. we'll actually give a good, very good indication of where the countries of policies in de bellman tragic tray will go in the coming years. oh, plenty more news and analysis to be found on our website r t dot com, but we'll be back in 30 minutes with more so with i'm action is ancy and we're going underground. brought gusting around the world from dubai. in the united arab emirates today is 5 years to the day, am i 6 is so gay, scruple recruited from russian security services by an associates of christopher steele was allegedly poisoned by radioactive nava chalk near england's top secret

chemical weapons lab at porton down steel. auth, of the fake dossier against president trump. and despite denials, were moscow. ne donations accused russia. oh, the poisoning leading to all our nato economic war on russia. all that is the people of don best were attacked by kiev, leading up to the current war in europe. so when will this european war and, and who will win, or will we all lose with me as an arguable unofficial advisor to the policy makers and corporations involved? arguably now in a global conflict, george friedman, founder of stratford and geopolitical futures. he joins me for today's episode from washington, dc. thank you so much. sure, george, for coming on, you know, raytheon profits apparently doubled since the new phase, the ukrainian crisis a year ago. i know that they are reportedly a subscriber to geopolitical future. goldman sachs mentioned merrill lynch dow coca cola during your dad to tell us, but when will the war and then who's going to win? well, i don't think is gonna end very soon. i mean,

and i don't see how either side and when the russians are constantly bogged down, they are unable to mount effective incursions. they do some attacks, but they, they ultimately fail the ukrainians are not able to be to. on the other hand, russia can't possibly win because the u. s. weapons that are given to the ukrainians will devastate them at the same time as ukrainians or simply be pushed back and forth and nothing will happen. so the real point here is, is far work. it's got to be negotiated and a negotiation is very, very difficult. there's no geographical point where we can divide it up to forces. well, we're talking to an advisor for the progressive caucus in congress, in a week or so as time. and he's been saying that the negotiations are off the table

a a to remember, attract a letter asking for negotiations, calling it scanned to being called defeatist. you say that russia car, when i mean some say that all already arguably in the global south, russia has already, one, not least obviously the rubel currency, but the in terms of the deals now being done between bricks countries. the chang i cooperation organization. russia has already begun creating the new world order that so many have predicted, i think, strap for and your organization constantly talk about. the possibility of one possibility is not a reality. the fact is that russia made a massive intelligence failure before the worry. he did not and anticipate how well you created a fight. he did not really understand that the europeans would not side with your would not side with russia. norris neutral, and he completely misunderstood the united states and i was going to happen. so at

this point, after a year, he's time talker to small fraction of your credit. so in russia, there is a serious question, as you've asked when does this end? and is also the question asked, why haven't we done much better than we're supposed to? or the expectation was that this would be a fast war. it isn't. and therefore, how did you know that? how do you know that the expectation would be that it would be a fast war? and that actually russia wanted to go in more slowly, not using shocking or tactics that the united states did in iraq, afghanistan, libya, and syria. he did you shock it, or he just didn't fail that it's, well, yes, roy. yeah, of the way that the americans destroyed baghdad. the point is to point to he's not gone and defeated ukrainian army in

a war taking cities destroying them. they don't really count very much. you don't win wars that way. an army must defeat the enemy. army wooten has failed to defeat ukraine, army because of american sport. and in that failure, there are severe questions coding in russia that can be seen in the social media of why it couldn't start this war when he couldn't win. and why did he not win? so there's a situation in the russia, but it is quite devastating. i mean, this is a major power fighting a very minor power and not winning. now, louise with largest country in western europe and some obviously say it's difficult to ascertain the brutal popularity has never been higher because it finally responded to a huge constituency, the majority in, in russia. but you say you want negotiations, you think by who kind of listing,

perhaps he's a subscriber to your organization, i'm not sure. or he was listening to what donald trump was saying in south carolina . that's why he's not supplying the f sixteens. biden called for negotiations over 2 months ago. ah, the russians refused. russians wanted concessions beforehand. so the american position has been that it is also told the ukrainians that he, they have to negotiate whether they want or not. so the american position on this is one, we're not going to let the russians win to, we want to negotiation. and it's putin who has had found very difficult to organize a negotiation because there's so many constituencies some where it to the war. so not that, you know, the majority is on his side and biden's offer. negotiations was surely premised on

the idea that the russians had to get out of crimea. first, they were axiomatic. claims before negotiations would go forward from the american, he negotiate a haitian, you come to the table with certain expectations, expecting to negotiate them away. you don't call for negotiations simply to have the other side capitulate. so when he made that remote proposal several times, obviously he was going to come to the table with a maximum of disposition that that's the way it works. but the point was that russia could not negotiate, given the failure of its 1st offensive. it could not come to the table, it felt unless it, she's a decisive victory. and it hasn't been able to do that. so you don't think that the kremlin policy is actually, and it's been voted for by the duma, is to create this new world order. it's not actually really about ukraine. ukraine is emblematic of eastwood nato expansion, but it's really about di dollarization,

about bricks alignment, about the togetherness with china. i don't know it on the outside thing about but but a foot from the outset. they were a army. there was very small that was not designed to go further than ukraine was not going to explain, attack nato or anything like that. whatever, you know, they fantasized and i don't think they fantasize much. they're very great. realists are. these are things sure propaganda. they want a new world order, they can't even take ukraine. so that's the problem. how disciplined do you think that nato nation media has been covering the war from that point of view? so that we don't see what people are saying in latin america or africa? asia, which is clearly that bruton is a new world leader, and that this has been

a great success to be blind, doesn't matter what they're saying. this is a war and the war will end in a certain way. and that will be the reality. and whether or not the 3rd world countries are celebrating goodner, why really doesn't matter. the real question now is the outcome of this war and how it ends. and even if it ends russia as a great power really doesn't have the economic engine to be able to be at a united states or a u. k or something like that. russia is a very poor country, it's almost a 3rd world country. it has very little effected industry and it lives off the export of primary commodities oil. so it is very hard to see russia as being able to supply the capital that would be needed to dominate the world.

not to dominates out of the world to be a great power. you have to be a source of capital and a buyer of exports. and that's something china has learned and the russians aligned to russia is made it clear. it doesn't want to dominate the world. you don't believe it, all the loss of energy exports to western europe obviously, currently is suffering a great deal of hardship through their arguable self sanctioning. you don't think that it can all just be replaced by china. the new deal with pakistan new deals with the global south that are being organized as we speak well has to be transported. so you can make many deals. but the idea that these countries presently try at that distance is going to be able to efficiently transfer enough energy to solve whatever your, your problems are. and they're doing better than was expected at the beginning of this early issue. i mean that's, that's far fetched. they can meet,

mitigate some of the problems perhaps, but the infrastructure that russia created to serve the europe, i mean, is necessary. and russia needs it badly to well, i mean, i mean, the nod stream was a big project to project with pakistan has been muted in the past few days. you mentioned britain as a great power, i presume. historically, we probably both don't have much time for the i m f, full cost, but you saw that russia is for us to do better than britain, a leading member of nato in the country pouring weapons into ukraine. anybody who tries to forecast russia's economy is fools game i did with the war going on. it had not clear how it ends. nobody knows what to rushes on with. russia's economic situation is going to be nor ukraine's, nor in some senses. even the united states were in

a war and i m f is doing peacetime analysis. now, donald trump's, south carolina speech was not even covered on a network, u. s. television. i don't know whether that's another sign of kind of implicit me to censorship. going on. he is clear and said, this is not russia's soul fault. what has happened in ukraine? what do you think of trump's chances and what do you think of the impact of media censorship of trump's campaign on his presidential chances? it's extraordinary how much ground he's lost in the united states. he has core support. but beyond that, it's almost boring. who it's who had trump is doing. so trump has been a presence in american politics for a long time. he lost the last election show say, behave badly as one of it,

but many, many people simply don't care what he says. so i don't think there's censorship going on as much as indifference. so why is my dogs fox news doing so? well, the most popular cable channel, one that does allow trump to speak, and the ratings of m as m, b, c, and cnn, and those competitors on cable or dropping catastrophically. i watch. fox used to understand the small faction is doing. ah, and it's interesting to hear trump. so in many ways he's become a museum piece. and you know, whatever it is, the seated politicians don't do very well. one of the myths the media has created is that in spite of trump being roundly defeated and profoundly embarrassed by what happened on jurors and january 6, that he still is a major figure as it. what is very neat here is that this is sort of the 1st time

i've seen a defeated a president unable to rise up, being treated as a real possibility for re election. i'd, i don't think when, when you look at the numbers he's likely to get to do for bucket, nodded nomination. sure. treatment. i'll stop you there. more from the geopolitical forecaster and chairman of geopolitical futures after this break. ah, ah. ah .

ah ah, memory loss is unusual, forgetfulness, a form of memory losses and ability to recall past events can be general, were concerned, some specific events only in some cases, the memory laws can extend back decades start an intensive course of memory recovery on our t. welcome

back to going underground. i'm still here with the geopolitical forecast and chairman of geopolitical futures, george friedman, you think there would be a war in europe if trump was president biden, of course, was sending in weapons and special forces are ahead of the 24th of february last year. well, we're trump tries to, to get his, he supplied poland with many of the tanks and weapons are when he went there, they were to call it off for trump, if you remember that. and he was instrumental in setting it up, which was reasonable and possible. but the idea that somehow he had a magic formula to deal with, ah, the russians, remember, if the russians were to take ukraine, nato, from the northern parts of the southern part would be facing russian forces. then

the question would be, what will the russians do next? and that's the question that the russians may not know, or they may know very well. and i frustrated but dizzying up ukraine and simply walking away would have bought them directly into the cold war again. and i don't think trump or any other american president wants to sit at the fold a gap and try to experience there's a cold war except that representatives, envoys of the united nations representing most of humanity, did not share the opinions of western europe or the united states and did not condemn what russia believes is a saving of the people of don bass. i mean, south korea refusing to aid what the detractors of nature say is nature's war on russia, through ukraine we had president lulu has been on this program. he said in the past

few days, the war on poverty in russia. i am desperately fast neighbor. people say, i'm far more interested in what they do. and we had one vote in the united nations condemning russia's attack, which even china abstain. only 5 countries voted against it. and so the changes, so that vote was taken at a man. nothing. and other votes voices will be heard. but we're in a war. and just like the condemnation of adolf hitler not to compare them. ah, it didn't mean anything to how the war came out. so on both sides, what noncombatants are saying? doesn't really matter. united states cannot live. and europe can't live with the russian forces directly on the border of nato. because that says out of the war and russia cannot live with the united states, 260 miles away from moscow. these are serious people, sadie,

serious war. and most of those are offering opinions really don't understand. and just are saying things. your famously wrote the book coming war with japan and 991 . so for a while, south korea refuse to aid. they just war japan as well. even you must have been a little surprised that it's a change. it's constitutional. most of the that the $45.00 in terms of it's rearming you now think for japan still poses a threat or is this part of the future that you saw? every nation with weapons poses a nest potential threat to everyone else that stuff interesting. japan has decided that given the dangers emanating from north korea, but even more out of china, that it must have its own navy, which i think is a prudent thing for them to do. it is allied with the united states and that's fine

. but over the course of time, these things change, we don't have to assume that it will remain the same. but it's not a surprise at the world's 3rd largest economy. should be acquiring a military force equal to that. and you believe that russia can't win the war in ukraine. you've seen the friendship grow between bridging and moscow . do you believe that the united states and what some say of the vessel states of europe are prepared really to fight a war against china and russia on 2 fronts? it is impossible for china to aid russia. the distances involved are just enormous . this is a land war, having a navy or something doesn't matter. and in that land war, transporting the $500000.00 troops physically and then feeding them is simply an

impossible thing, which is why for a year, china has steered clear of involvement in this war. if they were going to get involved, they get involved much sooner. but stock going to happen, it's logistically, impossible as to will the united states continue? well, the alternative is to bring have russian forces on the border of poland, of slovakia, of hungary, of odd romania. and the question then is ok, we voided this war. now we face at russia's option, war farther to the west. so it, is it initiated this war? what is the next word initiates, and under these circumstances, a prudent political leader has to say, i'm much better off holding them back in ukraine than i am for watching the march on vienna. i'm not sure how much hungary is so,

so bother to head that out. i'll give leave it then what about the economic war? you say the pipelines are going to be billed quick enough? the energy gas will be fact in the u. s. and coming into europe and replacing the russian energy. surely the way that the 2nd cooperation organization sees it. and certainly here in the middle east, they see it. of course, out of your age, you're in the you a famously didn't take biden's phone calls to increase the oil supply is, this is an economic war that is gradually being one against u. s. and germany, whether it be the dollarization or energy and resource exploitation. well, if there's a di, dollarization, it is not a pro ruble that event. but if you remember, d arabs said no now, but the arabs live and die by selling oil. are the ability of many of the countries

to receive the oil physically is difficult. so we have to be very careful. all sorts of nonsense is in the air. you know the idea, for example, that hungary, ah, is simply for a russian or anything like that. i returned to position did because expected the russians to overwhelm ukraine very quickly. when they didn't stave kind of sat there wondering what next to do and i'm from weren't born and angry. sorry not to do that. ah, this is very important to understand. it was saying we have in america, money talks, i'll say, other things walk. so there is so much jabbering, going on. look at where the artillery shells fall, look as with the casualties are. that will tell us what's happening. well, i suppose one thing that keeps coming up here is that russia was somehow taken by

surprise, by the response. do you really think, when so many analysts were predicting that actually the west is dying, the united states is dying. the famous 40000000 people, you know, in poverty, in the united states, that these powers are now ending the u. s. empires, and of course they would all coagulating this kind of way as the new age is created . to look at a very clearly, he did think he could eat, eat united states. he was wrong. he has been wrong thus far. because he was listening to those people who were arguing, united states was dead ever since around 950 europeans had been declaring the death of the united states, the united so far from collapsing its sir, it's the largest economy in the world. ah, and it's the most creative in terms of technology, and it has the ability kind of technology from china,

for example. i think it's really a mistake to see the united states this way. but this was another example of the failure of russian intelligence. they believed that they were hearing. if that was why they went, surely they intended to take ukraine. and surely they would have done that if they thought united states was going to do what it did. but it did do it and now they're floundering well of our visit. they didn't want to take here. but you've also written about budgeting isolationism. i don't know whether that relates to the well steve bands famous phrase for trump, the american carnage. that as you say, the united states has so much to offer, but is leaving behind such an underclass. do you think that is one of the factors there in a new isolationism? that may be, well, i don't know, give me a time scale for it. well, i have a weakness here because i'm living in the united states and i don't see this

massive destabilization of society. we are in washington and you just have to go up the road. i mean, live life expectancy live lower than have an are in some but i live in texas. okay . and in texas we have the mexicans and so and so forth. and the united states is far too complex the country to reduce to pardon me. simplistic models like that, ah, there are people dying in the united states is there is an every day. we also have enormous numbers of immigrants trying to get in. so as a form arrogant. i know that the countries that are best of the ones i want to go to and they're not struggling to get into many of the countries that you would give a why are they leaving because of the u. s. foreign policy has so many said i'm going to just finish george with one question about julian sanchez being on this program. and you must be really annoyed, by the way, if any one has been

a victim of wiki leaks, it was you, there was no, it was suddenly the strap organization, despite the enmity between the 2 of you. and i would say i spoke to judy and i did say strap for was a, was an important publication. the one that you found it. would you still call for his freedom? nevertheless, i wouldn't call his freedom or refused to use the legal system of britain is just fine. as for what he is, i think kit he is. ah unreasonable wrecker. and yes, he heard me by doing it. he didn't find anything there, but he has made his name for himself and history will judge him. is another one of these things that are interesting once that matter, not twice. well, journalists use his work all the time. and if the american caught the espionage act, of course that, that got him, i suppose just finally than in 20 years time. i mean,

i'm sure you get it exhaust all the time. what's gonna happen? oh, are seeing a changing of the guard. one of those powerful countries in europe now is poland. it has after britain gree to really the 2nd largest effective military force. our st. japan become more a military. ah, we see russia trying to come to terms of the limits of its power under these circumstances. so we're gonna see change as always takes place and the popular opinion including mine. so i was always wrong as to what's going to happen . saturday at night i was told many times of europe did. united states is finished . well, will it, that may well be case, but hasn't quite happened yet. we have to be very careful of casual opinions. george friedman, thank you and that's it for the show will be back next saturday with another brand

new episode and it's not centered. keep in touch with all our social media and had to watch and going on the grantee on ronald of come to watch new and old episode to going underground. see very soon. mm hm. ah, ah, ah . oh, the western countries are very concerned. the china might be sending russia b, so weapons as a way to help brush us military campaign in ukraine. personally, that's my just personal view. i'm very suspicious of the i don't buy doc to

contradicts to what i see. the basic logic of behavior puts on the phone, the chinese state. ah ah, well, russian forces edge closer to surrounding the city of lost him all goals. he examines the destruction call, then going back retreat. can ukrainian troops destroyed critical infrastructure? the headings, i think russian, a head of a neo nazi group that came to responsibility for a deadly attack. you know, russian border region as mix the operation was coordinated with the ukrainian military. it wrong denies accusations that have enriched uranium to near weapons grade level to wrong belongs western power. all the countries white fund of the 2015 in.