[000:00:00;00] the the, [000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i am peter live out nato's ukraine. proxy war against russia is not going well thus far. too much anticipated counter offensive appears to be going nowhere. and nato itself is

deeply divided on the issue of ukraine joining the alliance. the by the ministration must be wondering if it was all worth it. the prospecting nato's war. i'm joined by my guess, jack ras, most in san francisco. he's an associate professionally beacon nomics at st. mary's college as well as off the rub, discourage of neo liberalism in norton. we have kyle and so long as the opinion editor at anti war dot com, as well as co host of conflicts of interest. and here in moscow we have annual career go. he is a moscow based american political analyst. all right, gentlemen, cross talk roles and effects. that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate kyle, let me go to you 1st and norton, you know, and looking at this counter offensive in the political logic, if there's even logic behind it, is to put the ukrainians in a position where they can negotiate better. i find this really to be a fools, aaron, because if there's going to be negotiations,

the russians would have to be part of that. and i don't see any reason in the world why they would kyle, right? yeah, i in, in, i don't even know if that is the consensus in washington. there was an article in the washington post last month that describes the debate in washington around. you know that the end, the end of the war, whether that counter offensive is successful or not as ambiguous because, you know, there are people who say that if the car successful it is offensive is successful, then that means you know, we need to have another one and so i think the solution is really more wor in saying that all we're going to have negotiations is just something that the american people need to hear because they need to at least believe that one day there's going to be an end date to the spending into the dying, but in washington's right, i really don't think there is at this point in specially sense, as we've seen that this counter offensive is certainly not going to be a rousing success. and it was to be pretty much a failure at this point. well,

jack, basically the same question to you because one of the biggest problems with this enterprise to divide ministration is engineered using nato, is that we don't know what the goal is, other than they want regime change and russian, which is quite vague and nonsensical. and it has actually nothing to do with ukraine. this is what's really vexing, has nothing to the youth where you crate and it has everything and how it wants to impact russia. jack in san francisco. or. yeah, well i don't think the us wants to so much to the so i think the us strategy is what i would call versions get to point out. ringback if you remember, going back to the carter administration, the new versions k, the and if a advisor or even according to his memoir of the approach carter in the summer 79. so let's the stabilize of gamma stay in the government there. so they call in the soviet union, and that's exactly what they did. and for the next 78 years, uh,

there was just a drag on the, on the larry economy, you know, somebody union economy and upset political stability. that was the strategy us went into it for the long term perspective to try to develop, take the russians. and so we're giving you that times the economy and it was a to some extent successful. i think the leaks in the us see the same strategy. they think they're going to do the same thing this time, which means that us as in like for the law, they may play games with. so let's negotiate the, if this offensive is not the affective, and they've got about the 4 to 6 weeks to prove it is or isn't. uh, then the us will look for some sort of a pause in the conflict. and it will offer this security agreement that the talk is going on now to,

to ukraine. but that's just the pause in the longer term conflict the us wants to keep going. yeah, well andrew, i mean, well, on the back of what jack just said about the american machinations ease of the afghanistan, number one, they ended up falling for the same trap. so i wasn't a success in that sense. and i agree with with jack in kyle here. but there's a missing piece. how is this help ukraine? i mean, a pause. what does that mean? and, and you have to have both sides to agree with it. here. i mean, this administration and nato land, they're all talking to themselves in their own bubble. and it's, it's, it's beyond reality here, the russians are not going to quit until they have security guarantees. that's how they started it. that's why it started, you won't recognize security guarantees a russian demand. and then the conflicts started and that is gonna end when they have that. nobody in washington seems understand, andrew. i see. okay. okay. one of the things i think all we need to remember is

that the whole reason why we're in this situation is because russia took the united states off guard by stopping the original american plan to have cuba concord on boss. present a put in early preemptive dad through his special operation, but he actually not done so with the united states has planning to do was have key over concord. don't boss re arm retrain, re equip and so on and so forth. up and so they decided to eventually make a move on crimea. present, approved has opened and spoken about the scenario forecast. now the united states seems to have had many major miscalculations because they were planning for a proxy war between a ukraine and russia in crimea. sometime later this decade, they weren't planning for it last year and we can assess that because if the were planning for this, why would and nato secretary general jan stoughton berg declare and mid february of this year, there russia in need or are in a so called race of logistics if this was already on a plan and they plan to have this happen like last year, they wouldn't be racing to arm ukraine. they wouldn't be depleting their stockpiles

. they wouldn't be hesitating to give you a crane model of equipment and so on. and so forth. so we can see there present approved to spoil their plans by pre empting the re conquests of don't boss. and in the long term preventing a larger conflict, they would have taken place in crimea. and the whole purpose of this to build on the whole operates asians, key thesis, which i definitely agree with and fully endorse is the united states wanted to arm ukraine to the point and get, get it to the point where it could be used as needles. proxy for coercing russian to a series of never ending concessions. all of which would have been aimed at strategically knocking it out of the geo political game. a k also balkanized and get in terms of the worst case scenario, which i don't think it's realistic, but nevertheless, so it's how i do believe the west was planning it so that they can then more effectively contain china and take full control the world. so when we look at it in this broader perspective, we can see that this for this time or offensive isn't even working because they

weren't supposed have even been waging or counter offensive. they were supposed to have waited a couple of years before making a move on crimea, but that was all offset when present and putting preempted the imminent re conquests of don't boss that natal want it to be i q as in doing so. this pauses everything in a larger context. my personal opinion. well kyle, i mean, you know we've, we've talked about in crime me is already been mentioned here. but again, there's this, the west to onset, only one way and it's way rush it considers. and part of it's the russian federation and the people that live there feel exactly the same way. so let's say for some magical reason, there is a pause or a ceasefire. i don't think the, the regime in cuba is going to take that very seriously. they're going to just use it as a time to bring more arms into uh, a to support the cab government. and so of obviously the russians will not tolerate that. again, were these then with these western capitals there in unicorn land? go ahead kyle: yeah,

i think that cease fire at this point. it seems unlikely. it doesn't seem like any of the parties involved. really want to go that route at some point. see if i will probably be necessary to facilitate todds. there is at least a couple people in the binding administration who do know that crimea is a red line for russia. and so i think the strategy in the, for the invite and didn't stablish me in washington, is that they think attacking crime. you could push russia to negotiate and get back, i guess. but don bass, which, you know, obviously won't happen in that. i think you're for russia to see the crime in peninsula pad. they're going to feel the need to seize more ukrainian territory to be sure that that territory can not be attacked from ukraine. so as the russian formats are lab, ralph has said, uh, i think a few times now the longer ranges that of weapons at the west gives the kia, right, the more or ukrainian territory rush, it feels it needs to take. and so i do think that's the case,

i think from the white house, his perspective to this is working out as it is. there's a great article in the american conservative by peter bmw deer in for on monday. yeah. and what the van buren lays out is the binding doctrine and to really key points in that as one know, americans are dying. and to there essentially privatizing the rebuilding of ukraine in your i'm a libertarian. so i don't like calling government spending privatization, but you know, that is essentially what we're seeing here, where it's going to be black rock that does a lot of the investment makes a lot of the money here. whereas in afghanistan was like the us trying to micro manage these projects. you know, they're just gonna try to rebuild ukraine rather than rebuilding the entire government. because, you know, for some reason they don't see a problem with, with the politics of the website. um, hell, let me go, let me go to jack before we go to the break here. what ukraine are we talking about? okay. i mean, and we're not going back to start with the special military operation. so obviously

not the don bass, obviously not crimea, of the other regions that joined russia and ukraine get smaller and smaller. so i don't know what this post war ukraine is, and would it be? it would brush and tolerated being part of nato. all of the major issues are not being addressed jack. yeah, well, i would differ slightly uh, on this discussion of what when this thing uh, really was planted began the there's a lot of evidence that the us planning to do exactly what it's doing. it goes back to at least the 2016, the rand corporation, right? so monday, sions are, you know, posting in agreement and you gotta remember as soon as by and gotten into office. i mean, he didn't waste the minutes and the planning began to be implemented. and the us pulled the dramatically out of afghanistan,

cleared the table in order to deal with this situation. this plan in ukraine and from the pull out of can stand in august. the 21, the pretty much the u. s. was ratcheting up the is preparations and the pushing. those on skin care have to take, uh, you know, more aggressive positions. uh, so, uh, this thing is as long term planning uh, the us empire does not go into these conflicts on this for the moment. and as far as the nato agreement, i think, if uh the offensive is most successful, the us has to start looking like its interested in resolving looking like uh, you know what the lease are opposed increasingly in the us and okay, not about i have to jump in here, we're going to go to a short break, and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on nato's war in ukraine states.

the the i look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except we're such shorter. is it conflict with the 1st law? show your mind, anticipation. we should be very careful about visual intelligence at the point, obviously is to great trust rather than fit the various jobs. i mean, with the artificial intelligence we have summoning the theme in the

robot must protect his phone, existence was on the face, slid out of as low as before, the voice of the you know, the comments will go before the service people's orders but, but somebody's board under so there's actually just need the lawyer to do better. who look into this and you have to wait, we'll put that, but i would just give you by, with leisure when you don't been removed from the truth. because look over the distortion. a really good question and it was more

than the the welcome back across stock. were all things are considered. i'm peter roosevelt . true mind you were discussing nato's war and ukraine. the . okay, let's go back to andrew here in moscow. gentlemen, i'm not going to let this thing go about negotiations. okay? i'm not gonna let it go because i don't understand how it's gonna work, andrew, andrew. okay. let's say you can give you the ukrainian side. okay. well we, we want to cease fire, okay? why would the russians agree to it? because they're not going to it, would you agree to a cease?

fire is a strategic to feed for russia. why would they do it? and number 2, my friend, why should they believe anything that comes out of a western capital and what they have to say when we learned what the leaders of, of france and germany thought really thought of the minutes agreements and all of that. what, what, why should the russians, they say, no, we're gonna, we're gonna do what we set out to do and accomplish it, and it will be a faith complete. i don't, i don't buy into this rush. it needs to the go. see, i don't see it, maybe i'm wrong, andrew. okay, so if i had to play devil's advocate in this scenario, i'd say that there are several compelling reasons why russia would at least seriously consider as these for the 1st being that this is obviously aware of logistics, which dolton burke and also setting the same speech our reference in mid february as a war of attrition. so this is going to be a very long and costly slog to achieve rushes. maximo objectives having some that promotion is indeed making piecemeal progress. we saw that the military strategic trends are moving in his favor since the liberation of sol adar in january. and of

course, last month's liberation of our to on mosque. but nevertheless, it's going to be a very far away to achieve the original goals that were set out at the onset of the andrea and i understand you're andrew, andrew, so they're at keeping their goal. so why should they change course? i think that all sides were taken off guard by the way in which the situation involved. as i mentioned earlier in my previous response of the west and not expect present improvement to intervene. and they thought if he did, and he wasn't deterred by sanctions, rushes economy would collapse by sanctions. and if anything, he would focus on don't boss, not a we bought broad swath of ukraine. i think that from the russian side, russia is having some challenges in dealing with this influx of natal equipment and arms and training and especially the intelligence support. i think that neither side is the drums. i'm sorry, again, i'm sorry to interrupt you again, but if there is a pause or

a ceasefire that nato equipment and technology will continue to flow into the country. so again, i don't see the clearly let me hang on, hang on, let me throw that same question to to kyle: do you agree with andrew? go ahead call. i think there's going to probably be limited circumstances through the war, especially if it drains out for years. we're rushing may be open to different cease fires. we saw from syria, you know, where russia was. uh, allied with a side where the syrian government developed the strategy where they would, you know, surrounding area and then establish a deal and slowly paid territory. that way. you know, the, it's a far different situation dealing with the ukrainian government than with, you know, the outside of guys in syria. but at the same time we've seen russia do, you know, utilize this strategy before. so we may see some of that, and there may be times throughout the war where, you know, russia logistically needs a little bit of time to move their forces where they want to move them in. so maybe they agree to a cease fire. even the, even though they know that ukraine will gain some logistic,

a badges as well. but i do think that if russia achieves as goals at that point, they would want to establish a ceasefire. and then use those negotiations to try to get as much of recognition from the world as possible for what they've conquered in ukraine. and hopefully, you know, come to come to some kind of end of the war where, you know, whatever is left of the, you know, ukraine, key of whatever they control is. uh, you know, agrees to some sort of neutrality as well. okay, but the for jack in san francisco, the way it's being played out on this program and all wonderful guest drive here, one side has to accept this strategic defeat. that's how it's being played out right now. your thoughts go ahead. yeah, well i don't think the talking about a ceasefire is really the question. what i'm talking about is by the politically for support of the you know, is allies, if the offensive doesn't, doesn't succeed, is going to try to talk about

a security agreement. and russia will sit down and talk, but that doesn't mean there's going to be a ceasefire. i mean, there's going to be a continued military conflict. i believe i just looked at what happened to be a number they talked about for quite some time, was a conflict intensified. i don't think the rush is going to agree to a cease fire. i mean, it's too close to the $24.00 election or rush is going to sit it out until it sees what's happening with the reaction into us. and by the nice thing is going to lose . so why should a degree do it stays? why a one year before the election, but it will sit down and talk. i'm a china and others a made a big effort to try to propose a peace agreement. but there be no peace by who doesn't want to these and rush it as mine except a peace agreement. it's not going to stop when the key of loses it's offensive here

i believe. so they will sit down and negotiate and talk about the shape of the table kind of discussions. but that doesn't mean it's going to be a ceasefire. ok, but andrew is, you know, we, we all know that there's the upcoming, that's, i'm it, nato. so i'm getting billed this and they're talking about different, you know, they don't, that membership is not on the table right now. okay. there is a, you know, i, i have to wonder what tuesday and these people think about that. we do this all for you and what are you doing for us of return? i mean, that's an interesting historical turn that but that's about the topic of today's program. but i mean, tam is going to have to buy into whatever security arrangement is being discussed when it's not in the room here. um okay, i don't see a lot of the on the altar, nationalist, neo nazi types and, and then we're going to want to go along with that. okay. i mean a, they'll take the money, they'll take the equipment, but they're not gonna take a truncated ukraine. that's, that's not in their dna, andrew. okay, what i think is going to merge on to the upcoming needles summit is we're going to

see more serious discussions about presenting a, a bilateral security guarantees to ukraine. it's unclear whether it will be extended throughout the course of the conflict or afterwards. and the president for that is the us south korean mutual defense pack that was read shortly after the ar missed. so there is a possibility for that. and my crone has talked about it uh to go back to the car, all kinds of the but it, but andrew, andrew, andrew, i'm sorry, i mean, using the north korean example is that all the players agreed to that. okay. it is kept the piece for you know, for better or worse. again, my friend, why would rush, you agree to that when it's winning incrementally, but it's winning what, why doesn't need to settle it? well, settle until ukraine is neutral and the regime has been changed into that's the in game here. the west. well, all i can say to the west, you can hold my beer, andrew, a real briefly. i believe that both sides have made some strategic advances

throughout this conflict on the russian side, russia is about to deploy a tactical nukes to below roofs cleaning broad as fortified. it has offensive and defensive capabilities rusher has successfully field of hypersonic messiahs, and it has reportedly opened up a military bridge with iran, although both sides denied over the caspian. on top of that, we also have the fact that russia has proven itself very formidable in the race of logistics. one country against the block of 31. that's quite impressive. russia has achieved assisting a gains on the ground and the territory ukraine claims as his own. and the sanctions, i totally failed from the needle side. they could spin any type of are slow down and fighting as a victory by saying that the expand and, you know, they were able to consolidate. and, you know, there's the deployment of very heavy weaponry and central europe, which violates the nato russia founding active 1997. so they can spend that as a success. and they can also talk about the rules based order for the liberals that are, you know, that things, that's something good. but i think that basically both sides can find a way to say that the got something out of the so far,

but never the less. i do expect that both will continue moving forward. i mean, there are quite a bit and terms why i predict, hey, i, i want to go, go back because it's got a call here. i again, you know, any kind of compromise that, that andrew is mentioning. it's very logical is very smart guy. i know him well, but in russian doesn't want to have to go through it to do this again and in 5 years or 10 years time. this is, it's going to be done one way or another one side wins. one side loses kyle or? well, i mean, i do think that's likely the course, but it's always important to remember that war is unpredictable, right? you know, crazy things get all always happen. a young leader, people in leadership positions, you know, go through changes in mind for various reasons. and so i do think it's got to go the way that you're saying, and i do think this nato saw me coming up here, is a big deal because ukraine is not going to get the guarantee that once that once this bore and it's going to get nato membership, and so i think that tates,

a big incentive for kia, have to negotiate off the table if they're not going to get nato membership at the end of the war. then they're probably going to receive less support from nato once the war ends. and so, from their perspective, there might be a reason to keep this or going. yeah, just a tech, it's really interesting is that, you know, nato can claim, you know, the russians. so i want, i wanted to make sure that you know, ukraine never joined nato, but natal got larger because of finland and sweden, but then either and ne, token pad itself on the back. we expanded at the expense of ukraine. i mean, what, what a pirate victory. that is jack. yeah, well, you know, nato uh, nato can really move east into ukraine, so they gotta call it by a different name. and that's what the security agreement. ready is all about, but rush, you, i don't believe we'll buy it. i mean, they've been burned by minutes. they're not going to be burned. the 2nd time and

rushes, the engine solution is a euro wide, the security agreement. that's not what's going to come out of nato, but that's a move by nato in that direction, whether they go all the way to that, at some point, will depend upon how much ukraine is defeated on the ground. and that's really what, what the key is here. uh, you know, all the opportunities will change here once it's very clear that, that you crash been defeated as far as you've trained going along with whatever us and nato it says, uh it has no, no alternative, no choice. and you know, the, the nazis uh, you know, in the government and on the ground are going to be very upset. and maybe the us changes leadership there and uses some general. and the sense zalinski is sort of the, a salesman around the world. get him out of the picture. i don't know. uh, but uh, very, very clearly ukraine has no choice here. us is calling the shots. uh and uh,

it's gonna have to do whatever the us says, but the us doesn't have a solution to it. i believe because he was doesn't want a solution, as i said in the beginning, it wants this thing to continue. and all this talk about the security agreement is not the kind of security agreement that russia want. exactly. but it's all part of the, the keeping the alliance together because there's some real big splits occurring now. all right, generally we've run out of time with so many different threads. we could go and discuss longer, but unfortunately don't have the time here. i want to thank my guest in san francisco, norton and here in moscow. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at our t c. next time. and remember across the top of

the the russian states. never as tight as i'm sort of the most sense community invest, not getting all sense and the in the system must be the one else holes. question about this, even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin media mission, the state on the rush has proved inc. s r t spoke back, keeping our video agency roughly all the band on youtube. the fitness center for question. did you say it would twist,

which is the as a cps? because they cut the square foot? i'd be is that and then use familiar email, few are just going to fit into the rules. the non c theory of racial superiority finished style for years of creating an ssl all the place and 14 concentration comes. so the full prisoner of war labor comes 10 prisons really well, you know, thing to do these call level. she's going to be, in your opinion on the scene, in your opinion, even though the chest is really to get over the few, the deal is going to be approximately 25000 people went through the occupied to go finish camps according to official figures. these move stuff, dudley looked at it the ship. did you put in? i gave you an idea. nauseous to snyder stuff. so the youngest, i me,

i'm not sure what the sign in disease forced labor to achieve by the wording. so formulas. what was the last it also need you to do was to take that to you, but that it's a terrible human off with those who put in these 9, push these things up to give you what you meant to do to create the rules. thousands of testament crimes and the impunity of criminals. when you look on here, you know, one or 2 due to speed 90 and a good idea of what a good i see it are released upon me is that the same sort of weight is done. so you can just do because you put 10 as being yet i was put in the middle of