is an influence in the region? kamala horace started her trip on sunday in gala before flying to towns in the mid week where she met the country's president. horace is the latest top u. s. official to visit africa in recent months with the country making a renewed effort to strengthen its presence on the continent and counter russian and chinese influence in the region. political analysts should benson funny, convince washington's renewed interest will bear fruit activities. we have seen historically as been one of them interfere us. you can see the hand of america militarily being very anti democratic. if i put it does way. so they're, they're coming into africa now with this channel offensive

talking about democracy. i think that it does not for many people, we are able to see through russia and china that he started really good relations with most african countries because of not only because of the role in deliberation struggle of the continent. but also that was independence. russia and china continued to provide a lot of technical support, material support, financial support. the most of the african countries will always last for now. but just a reminder for up to the minute the developments do give r t a follow on twitter will ensure you don't need to think about the the

lose. hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i'm peter labelle . foreign policy is rarely front and center and american electoral politics. however, biden's nato proxy war in ukraine construction is turning into an exception, as long as it takes and blank checks are not going down well with the g o p base. can republicans afford to continue to support biden's war? the cross talking the g o p, and joined by my guess lydel in new york. he is illegal and media analyst in miami . we have nicholas davies. he is co author of war and ukraine making sense of a sense was conflict. and in budapest we cross the jordan, sent me well he, he's a podcast here at the gaggle which can be found on youtube and locals,

or gentleman cross our rules and effect. that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate why don't, i guess a very simple question here. as i said in my introduction, foreign policy rarely pays plays a big on a tour of politics in america. but we have a presidential cycle coming up. and the issue of ukraine is in play here, and it's in play very much in the republican party. we seem to have the elite very much in support of it. and the base, not so much. is this good if the war continues, this is going to be a wedge issue, lionel. now the only thing that i will play in, by the way, let me backtrack a bit. it's very rare when you have left and right and whatever iteration this is agreeing on something in theory, they believed in this disconnected kind of a psychotic thing called the war, or in ukraine and supporting ukraine on the front page of the new york posters. ukrainian flag and that's it. so they support some thing. the

problem is going to be from the g o p base is, where's the money going, how much is the money? how long will that? because it's a money issue. it's a fiscal. democrats really don't know anything about it. they have this idea about freedom or something. they are less concerned, but it will not be a wedge issue. it will not be of any importance. the only thing the only because remember, left and right are exactly the same is going to be what about an accounting? what about justifying where the money is going? is it perhaps wasted from the monetary fiscal point of view? that will be the, the, the focus of interest. okay. how about you, george? ok. i agree with lionel. i mean that, that, that's the, the, the wedge issue, that a lot of many in the republican party words the money going, why is it and was playing check, as i said in my introduction. but it's, it is a wedge between the leads and the base, and that's kind of important here. go ahead, george. i agree entirely. i mean, i don't, i agree with you, but i don't agree with lionel. i think it is

a very big issue and it goes much beyond where's the money going? the issue as trumpet. laid it out, that we're heading towards world war 3. we're heading towards a possible nuclear compensation with another nuclear superpower. and we need to stop it. trump said, oh where's, where's the money going? he has said, we need to cease fire immediately, and we need to bring this war to an end immediately that he's blaze, the trail among the republicans. the scientist is trying to maneuver and to find out where he's going to go trumps opponents. the ones is going to say, oh, you know, we all the way it was the landscape. they're insignificant, they're going to be kicked out of the race. by the time we get to new hampshire, but i think it is a very big issue and i think it will be a big issue in the primary and in the general election, because i think trump will probably be the the g o p nominee. and he is going to

raise this issue that this is biden's war and, and i think it's going to be, i mean, if it was still going, then it will be an important issue in the election. nicholas, i find it really interesting where we can go beyond left and right democrat republican, you know, again, we have a presidential election cycle where the, there's an anti war sentiment that is very, very real in the body politic. now, as it goes up the chain of command as it were, we have beliefs that they don't want to reflect that. donald trump, in 2016 if you like them or hate them, it doesn't matter. but he did tap into that and people responded. and so, but i think it's very important that we have some members of the g o p, that we're representing the sentiments of the grassroots now because it's biden's, while the democrats are going to go along with that, they are always democrats, are always in lock step with each other. okay. but the further you go down the

chain, the more people question these foreign adventures. nicholas? yeah, people are and the, and the poll numbers are shifting in terms of the proportion of americans who actually support a negotiated piece to bring this horrific war to an end as quickly as possible. however, i just want to tell you of you as about a recent gallup poll. this was a poll asking americans about quote, unquote, threats to america, and asking and asking them to, to rank them really aren't so on 11 issues that people were asked about the war in ukraine, ranked 7 out of 11 and so. so while, when you asked people directly about it more and more from support a ceasefire and negotiate me, nicholas, i can interact, mentor, this is where i'm from. it's very important what you're saying here,

because when you think about it, the day lose of, of our media coverage from the, the legacy media about the conflict and you're saying it rank 7 that tells you a lot. and most of these media outlets are very, very liberal in step with the democratic party. so that tells you a lot there, lionel, and let me go back to you in new york. why don't the republican see say, this is biden's war and be done with it? i mean, that is elaine, that's open please let me clarify something and i don't disagree with my dear colleague george in terms of the issues i'm talking about what is on the mind of the american voter 1st. they don't know anything about that. so if you told them, you know, there's about $800.00 military bases and 70 countries, they have no clue. trump will not be the nominee. this is, this is,

this is collapsing before your very eyes. there is, i mean the more he speaks, this is an aside by the way, things are changing drastically. it's going to be a battle by the way, between gavin newsome and whoever decides that they're stupid enough to run for the g o p nominee. what the american people think has been generations and generations of the fact that we don't have anything to worry about that over there. vietnam taught us nothing. it we don't care when i see we the average joe 6 pack middle of the curve, kind of an undecided sort of and nominal voter believes that these wars always kind of shorted take care of themselves, nuclear and theoretical. but that's over there. i say this not out of out of a joke, but people couldn't find ukraine on a map. that's critical geography. this means nothing. so what they do is they have this idea of supporting this, this heraldic, this, this,

this some romantic zalinski with a t shirt. spiting, you've got of course, you know, the left in hollywood coming in. so they believe this kind of a kind of an, a more fish kind of idea, but supporting so good with that. so down inside, it's a line and he's thinking about yeah, where they're just there and so you, they're just all being lied to hear. judge george, let me go back now in budapest, um it lionel brought up a vietnam. we could bring up, um, iraq, afghanistan, syria, we can bring up a la libya. um, but those were all on the periphery. this is toe to toe. if i could quote the, the great film, doctor, strange love me. this is insanity going great. powers going toe to toe, as i've said many times in this program, that creates an existential equation. one power could and will lose george. yes sir, that's right. and the end, the record is surely that on the american voters vote for peace,

or they don't vote for the war candidate. and the george w bush's was in iraq. and he barely won in 2004 questionable whether even one, but in 2006, 2008. that was an overwhelming anti war vote. and that's really the, the record in the united states now, so far on the, this war hasn't really hurt americans. but if this continues, the biden cycle continues inexorably towards a serious collision with russia. then americans are going to really feel it. and that attitude are, well, it's over there and it's nothing to do with us that's going to disappear very quickly. and there's going to be great deal of anxiety. and then the candidate who says this is madness. we have to get off. he is going to be the winner nicholas, and this is not to say, this is precisely om. why?

the media at the corporate media here in the u. s. have have presented a picture of the war to the american public. that says, this is a war that the u. s. is not directly involved in, they don't want americans comparing it to iraq. i'm. which is, which is what medea and i just did. ah, in the, in an article which we titled, ah, better than not so winding road from iraq to ukraine and bad weather people are going to get that in time for the election ah, remains to be seen as long as they followed the wall to wall coverage presenting this as not really our business, but we're just trying to help these poor people in ukraine and as long as a lot of people still believe that, ah,

then it won't have much impact on the election. okay, well line up real quickly. if the, if is this biden's war is, or is it a unit party war? it's even more complicated. we haven't even gotten to the parts that way till 2 years. you moorish, i'm his work worked way till this. and america realizes this is going to be a frozen conflict. there is no resolution. there's no, there's no battleship missouri or whatever it was. this is going to be the 38th parallel. again, this is an ending. so wait, you throw that into the mix. you're going to have a dysfunctional rump state, maybe this thing called ukraine, which, which, which wants to be part of the west, which implies nato involvement, which russia has said, absolutely not. explain that to people. this is going to be north. this would be korea all over again. there's no cessation. there's no finality. throw that into

this cosmic well, we're gonna, we're going to consider that issue as we approach the breaker gentleman, we're gonna go to a short break, and after that your brain will continue our discussion on the g o. p in ukraine. stay with our d. ah ah ah ah

ah nice to come to russian state to never. i've stayed as i'm phoning this house on a week within the city battle defeat. okay, so mine is 2000 speaking with little fan in the european union. the kremlin? yup. machines. the state aren't russia for date and split our t sputnik. even our video agency, roughly all band to on youtube with patricia bigoted. is chris with

a welcome back across stock? were all things are considered. i'm peter as well to when you were discussing the g o. p and ukraine's. ah okay, let's go back to george in budapest, we entered the 1st part of the program, look, looking at a possible prognosis and how this conflict was good is going to end in ukraine. i will i express very different opinion that it will be very definitive. okay. that's why russia is continuing this conflict. it's not looking for a ceasefire. not looking for an off ramp is going to continue until ukraine is completely demilitarised. d, nato eyes. and we'll have a government in power in care of that is not hostile. that's going to be the outcome, george. well, i don't know whether that will be the outcome. i think that's the russian objective

. but i do agree with you that the frozen conflict of possibility is out the door. the united states is all in and they're not going to just allow a frozen complex to stay there and just and then okay, we'll, we'll give russians a break for 5 years. the bigler administration believes that they've got the russians on the wrong. that's what we believe, but those saying that that's the correct view, but they believe they've got the russians on the wrong. and then they just need to keep pouring in more and more and more. and eventually they're just going to bring russia to its knees. effect the regime change in, in moscow, and maybe the only gosh, will throw up that's, i think the way they're thinking. so there isn't going to be the frozen conflict, but we had the car was in, in georgia. i think it's, it's all the way through to the end and, and what you're glue the way that you've outlined that may well be the final

outcome. it will take some time before we reach it. but the, that, that's all the georgian solution are old and the goal car box solution on the trans mystery. i don't think that's a possibility in ukraine. george means have such a good point. and i, my question will be intentionally very provocative. ok to kind of who pull this, pull the thread on this here. nicholas, my, my point in this theory is that going back to great power struggles to me during the cold war, it was proxies on the periphery. no major part of the soviet union didn't feel the any imminent in american attack. the united states was never imminently going to attack the soviet union. but now the biden administration is set it up where it is toe to toe with major powers, and neither is going to back down. and that's what makes this so very dangerous. that on top of it, we have a regime in care of that is willing to send its young and into a meat grinder. okay. have its economy completely, a collapse turning into

a failed state. okay. the and so i don't see, and this is why i'm so worried about this as, as conflict goes on, that neither side is going to back down. there is no win win here. nicholas. ah, yeah, well the, there was a win win on the table in march. i got as far it reached the point that a president, so lensky and ukraine went on national tv to basically announce it to his people and arm to reassure them that he was not giving away the store. but it was, they had reached in a matter of weeks and a resolution that was acceptable to both sides, which involved, ah ukraine, giving up its ambitions to join nato. ah, and committing to not host, ah, our western military forces or missile miss our batteries on its territory. and in

exchange for that, russia was willing to withdraw. ah, you know, from all the territory that it had occupied since february the 24th. it's hard for me to see frankly, that even as the war has escalated well beyond, ah, where it was and on the u. s. and nato have got more directly involved. busy since then, and hundreds of thousands of people have been killed since then since the u. s. and u. k. persuaded, ah ukraine to say as boris johnson put it to stop talking to putin and concentrate on defeating him. so as far as i can see, ah, that that basic, that basic, ah, framework for an agreement. nothing, nothing that went into that has really changed. and um, so i think far from being a frozen conflict the head, the really,

really needs to be for the sake of the people of ukraine and the people of the whole world threatened with nuclear war. there needs to be a genuine resolution that both sides sit around the table and agree that they can live with not, not like um, what uminski agreement that the west never intended to comply with. ah, but a genuine resolution that that takes everybody's um, genuine interests. well, that's that, that goes back to the very beginning and, and nicholas before i go to lionel here. so lensky wasn't persuaded. he was ordered . okay. i was told not to do that to you. ordering a sovereign country were told, ah, not to invoke engage in the process of saving its very existence. okay. would wrap it with brands like london in washington camp doesn't need any enemies. okay,

lionel, i'm glad that nicholas brought this up because we already know what the russians want everywhere. what spook and thinking, what is russia one? it's all, it's patently obvious. it was made known in december months before the conflict. have a european security architecture that involves russia, that it is not against russia and does not exclude russia. the what this is patently obvious, the blueprint for peace, for a peaceful settlement in europe is in front of our eyes now. but washington refit avails, to respect that line all looking at the initial, if you will, the prologue, gum, vernon and the, you know, the preface of our discussion today. you asked about how is this going to impact g o p. electrons, whatever, in 2024, and i'm talking about this now from an election point of view versus what you're saying. and you, everyone here is 100 percent. correct. and in terms of a path to peace,

what is going to happen regarding the election is as follows. number one, keep in mind, most americans don't understand nato usa. they don't know when nato, they don't understand. the e you, there are no brussels in your own. does it, it's this, they're the good guys somewhere, somehow. ok, they're over there. what buying is going to do? what the democratic to was? they're going to claim victory, victory, peace went on, or whatever you want to call it. they will order their statist sock puppet media to announce either that the, the war, the conflict, the military operation is over. there rush has been drowned. that zalinski is victorious. and we're going to make some kind of a, of a tacit or implicit withdrawl or something. some form of cessation and victory, which the very gullible voter will believe after having been saturated with a media approach that says it's over good news, the war is done. we're finished. let's move on. meanwhile,

what the rest of the world knows what you know, what you think of what you read is going to be completely different. there needs to be this cessation, here's the best part, left and right. democrats, republicans will both celebrate it because it's time to move on. this is not the subject that american voters are going to be really hanging on to. they think about it. existentially perhaps in a rear view mirror, what america's worried about his crime and taxes and, and his weird kind of a crazy society that we're living in. so what's gonna happen is, remember, you heard it here 1st. there will be this declaration of either cessation victory, whatever that will completely i'd contradict reality. but as far as we're concerned here devoting or the voter and 2024, it'll be fine. let's just be done with this and move on, because this is a theoretical issue that most americans think about, but don't stay up late worrying about, well, i don't, you know, and you're going back to what nicholas said, you know, with the,

the initial piece proposal that we had a few weeks after the start of the conflict that sarah could have worked out with what you just said right now. but george, we're way past that point right now. because george, the objective is regime change in moscow. it's as nothing to do with ukraine. i can't see how they're going to call this off george. no, i don't see how that can work at all. and if i can get, try to do that. but we've got peace with on a. he will be absolutely. hummel for all sides, from all of the republicans, and that would involve the will, the intervention is or like the mitch mcconnell and mccall and all the red lindsey graham and the rest of them as well as the kind of the and teens eventually it's like a modern retail agreed, they're all going to pylon biden is not going to be able to pull it off as a kind of piece with on it because i broke when nixon did the piece with on in 972, it did look like

a piece went on i did look like america had achieved its objectives. here, as you say, feet of the objectives are, they want to get rid of putin and they want russia to collapse and disintegrate. and then i'm going to be able to pull off and say, you know, losing half of ukraine and say, hey, we want, we pull this out. so i don't see how that can work. yeah, i mean, nicholas, it would have to the only way it could possibly work in the most imaginative unicorn universe is that? well, you could say we won because i'm moscow didn't make it to paris. i mean, it is week, i guess they can go that path. good. i mean, i'm serious. go ahead there. well, they certainly could try that. and i think what it was to most americans don't realize, of course, is that the last time the united states actually won a war unless you count recovering small, neo colonial outposts like, ah grenada, panama. and i'm

a kuwait. i think they're probably the only ones um, other than that the u. s. has not won a war since 1945. and they, and they really only one that one because they were allies of the soviet union who did most of the fighting. i'm here once again we have a war in which others are doing and really all the fighting. and i'm, i think little by little americans ah, realizing, ah, that, that then not being told the truth. but oh, out what point at what point, what will it take for this to rise from number 7 out of 11 threats to america in a nation wide pole? at what point will this actually really take hold as,

as something that americans actually see ah, that their own existence as being threatened with. in other words, nuclear war we, i mean we have dismantled the entire right truck. that was developed after the cuban missile crisis class. unfortunately, you gentlemen were brought out of time, but nicholas is ending. point about arms control is one of the greatest casualties of the last few years. and one of the reasons why we are where we are right now. it's all the time. i want to thank my guests in new york, miami, and in budapest, i want to thank my thanks for watching us here at r t c a next time. remember, across a, a nation's may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities and other countries. the united states of america is

different wherever people long to be free. they will find a friend in the united states for with a little bit about it all to anybody basie. so the city jaw. you look at the incentives and we figured a few color rebel notions is one among several means to reach the goal of conquering foreign lands and bringing them onto the help of u. s. weston economic interest. people inside it, i didn't that needed to go back to give them a new training class. so no, we just say low their softball. m a. and the final goal of these seem revolutions

is to ensure that there are no independent players in the world anymore. ah, walk out with the united states, his name, just the main initiated of antique russian policy. foreign policy assumes an absolute rejection of neo colonial practice. and had you been in moscow liaison to foreign policy priorities, branding, western actions against russia, hybrid war, foreign minister, love raw funds, the country isolated. so these ready for dialogue, and then you multi polar reality. saudi arabia agreed to join the shanghai co op.