the, the, another 12 hostages fried by her mazda, arrive back on home soil. meanwhile, israel released the 30 palestinian prisoners as part of the latest exchange. the relatives of the release hostages have been taken by helicopter to the hospital where their loved ones are due to arrive in the palestine red chrysler society calls on the international community for help as the heads of the 2 biggest hospitals in gaza. our rested organization spokesperson says israel should be held accountable health care workers and permit they should enjoy, have access to the wanted to keep and was they were conducting their mind. stephen mission this, i shouldn't be all responsible putting these and getting these in these it wore it

kind of the headlines were following here on our, to international next on across the top feeder. lavelle touched with his desk about all the options for piece, a new crane that the west ignored, and how ending the complex now is proving most difficult. the hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle, nato's ukraine proxy war and russia. it should have never happened before the conflict. there were options amongst into the complex. there were options to ended . the west refuse to negotiate. now ending this conflict is proving most difficult .

the cross talking ukraine. i'm joined by my guess and nichol, i, petro in kingston. he is professor of political science at the university of rhode island and in brussels. we cross the gilbert, carl. he is an independent political analyst, an author at mazda, of an x pad manager in moscow during the 19 ninety's. i tell him, in cross up roles in the back, that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate nichol. i recently wrote a very, very interesting article i thought quite provocative in and, and compelling in many ways. titled, what's next for ukraine? the outlines of a peaceful settlement. can you, if this is hard to do in television, it's better to do it in print, but can you give us the main con tours of what a peaceful settlement would be? but i think there is a general agreement among the analysts, but of this war is not going to be one by your bright green, therefore needs to seek a settlement on the outlines of this settlement were already reached in march and

april of 2022 uh and they basically, uh, boiled down to an exchange of securities for land. um, the issue that remains of guaranteeing the, uh, the rights of, uh, where the russian minority, russian speaking minority in ukraine. and i think of that can be done by hearing to the stipulations of the opinion constitution and should be made a requirement for you admission for you pray, to which rusher, by the way, according to president boynton has never objected to. okay, but you know, gilbert, you know, as, as we are convening here, the wall street journal is running an article titled, you officials fear ukraine,

military collapse. so a lot of this talk is kind of academic and no, no offense. the academics like our guest here. but the fax on the ground are, are coming a pace, aren't they here? i mean, the, the, if, if we see what's going on in the us congress that looks like the g o. p in the house is not in any rush to help out ukraine, which the craniums have admitted that they're completely dependent on western aid right now. so talking about a settlement is actually quite germane. go ahead gilbert or to talk about a settlement. is it entirely between washington and washington? yep. the there is the assumption that whenever washington gives a week and a come together. but just gesture of its fingers. moscow will little be and will be pleased to be to be considered as a talking partner. and others could nothing could be further from the truth. the history that we're discussing today has been virtually

a daily subject of discussion on the talk shows that russian state television features 5 days, 6 days a week, which are widely watched. and these talk shows have been to my estimation in the past few weeks, kind of going very much in line. but you can imagine is going on every time the russians in their apartment or a board. josh is break. greg, with french, these are, these are the most important and topical questions. can there be a piece and should there be a piece whenever washington says, come hither the consensus that i see there's no way that for once. ok, full twice but full of sweet times. russia will not be full 3 times and the notion that uh that that can be a supplement of uh, utilizing the terms of the, of the ukrainian constitution to protect. so the, the rights of minorities which my knowledge has, it's not just russian minorities,

but on gary and majority of knowledge. romanian minorities who were all treated to the same uh, a very crude terms that the russian speakers i've had experience with the, with the t you be able to enforce such demands on ukraine. that it did honor this constitution and honor the, the general rules of the 4 of you main practices and gives up proper freedom of expression, education and so forth to his restless picking minority. no way. we've been through minutes to it brought us nothing. these you itself is not proper enforcer of these rights of menard's within the you the right. so just to look at the russian case, a russian speak minorities are trampled on and have been trampled on since before. 2004, when the baltic states were admitted, everyone knew was in that they,

that the states or in strict violation of the rules within the d. u for emission based on that protects the minority as well as about gilbert gilbert. yeah, you have to add on add on, i'll throw it to nikolai right now. is that we've had this intense ukrainian ization of culture of language. i mean, and, you know, i, i don't, you know, what i could mentioned, you know, kind of the band or not a vendor id ideology here, but only the last couple of new cycles. there are no russian speakers in ukraine. they don't exist. i mean, how do you deal with a government like that? okay. i mean, and, and it's all fueled on um, by western officials in money. i mean, if the problem is that i want peace as much as anyone else, i really do. but how do you talk to people like that? say, there aren't any russians speakers and ukraine? it's absurd, nikolai. i agree with all the points made. and yet the outcome inevitably is the same. namely that any go she is so many will have to be reached. oh,

that doesn't mean that one side or the other cool doesn't claim victory. in fact, the victory is most likely to go to russia, which means that the terms of settlement will be defined largely by russia. but nevertheless, a settlement it'll be and it'll be a negotiated settlement with who uh, that's a matter that will no doubt of evolved overtime. whether zalinski is that person, it looks increasingly, but this is purely speculation that it might not be we could speculate endlessly about who is replaced by might be. it's likely that a success is to zalinski, will do exactly with zelinski, did to put our friend and better friend condition, his predecessor, which was, which is to run it. but these candidate now at that point uh,

russia will still have to negotiate with terms of its settlement, assuming its victorious. and there will be some sort of other patients. and some sort of, i'm queen pro, quote, in order to achieve russia's security objective, that the important thing that is by far the most important thing is go back to gilbert in, in, in brussels, washington for us to go to the table right now. why? why? okay, because you know what russian is not interested in, go shading minutes 3. okay. so, and that's the west is always going to do that. nato is always going to do that by time until they could do it again. go ahead gilbert. first i'd like to ask, what do we mean by russia here, or you can produce an angle of i think my colleague, nikolai will, will find attractive. that is taking a lesson from literature and from, from the arts. the literature that i want to bring in,

it's not great classics but russian classics to be precise laptop. so i the warranties, just total pro, walk the pro largest, maybe a 100 pages long. and it deals with the question, this very topical today. and it has to do with, with the very question you posed, peter, that is, who runs the show. is it the great man in history, the leaders who are making decisions that doesn't have great consequences for their countries in the world? or are they the, the, the expression, the implement, the tool my one might say of the national will. and here it says in the, in the west. it's assuming that russert means one man pushing. we all know he's a dictator. we all know that dictators controls everything that a 145000000 people under them do and so forth. that is a quiet for it nonsense, but it's a kind of fairy tale that is the mainstream understanding of how the world works. it doesn't work that way, and russia,

as it does anywhere. mr. pushing is to many respects. i helped formulate russian policy, but he also is an expression of the will of the people and the role of the people today and russian. by that, i mean primarily the, these are the leads is very much against sitting down to table with anyone coming from from kids. because they, there is the, the, the quick question applies to to kids who runs the show. i don't think anyone believes that's the last few ones, the show or the solution they would run the show or that i would stop it shouldn't put brentwood or so would would run the. busy there is a group, a creek called of neo nazis, and the, the label isn't important. but there is a clique of people who for who, who are responsible for the coup d'etat february 2014, who are still calling the shots. and that's the issue for russian. how those people can be removed from power if there is to be a negotiated. so, let's take

a step back. negotiated settlement, why? well, it is even the build article was last friday, which, which was discussing a secret agreement between biting and shows that they would cut back on arms deliveries to ukraine and try to pressure mr. zalinski to a to go to his people and to call football. there, i'm sorry, i'm sorry gilbert. i'm sorry gilbert yet. that's his kabuki theatre. i mean, um, bite and can call. is it lensky right now? we've got a nickel. i call them right now and tell them what to do. i mean, i, i can, you know nothing about ukraine without ukraine? this is all nonsense. it's, it's nonsense. go ahead. nikolai, as we can rely on all leaders, including ukraine, new leaders to struggle for their own personal survival share and their own interests. one of the leading opposition papers now

managed outside of ukraine. but why is the red still in ukraine? is argued or pointed out, i should say that there had been a, there's been a great empower is ation of ukraine. but at the very top's, people have managed very well and, and indeed are making money hand over fist through the system a broad. alright, well the way that i want to go, i want to, i want to do is come up to after our break here, we're gonna have to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion. then you can stay with our to the, [000:00:00;00]

the, the russian states. never as, as tight as i'm one of the most sense community best. nothing has. so some, some of the assistance must be the one else holes. question about this,

even though we will bend in the european union, the kremlin media mission, the state on russia, funding and supports the r t spoke neck, keeping our video agency roughly all the band on youtube. the question, did you say stephen twist, which is the welcome back across software, all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle to remind you were discussing. you train the let's go back to nikolai in kingston. i'm like, let's finish up on this point on corruption because this is something that, you know, in the very beginning i war and very, very clearly this is, you know,

you're only making it worse, the corruption in ukraine and it was very bad. and, but prior to the conflict that was, that was a talking point. ukraine's one of the most corrupt countries in the world. and then for about a year, you couldn't say it and then suddenly could start saying and because they really weren't getting their money is worth meaning the, the tax payers in the west here. um, there's going to be a reckoning with that. i mean, i've often surmise that even if there is a settlement, there's going to be a lot of people being held account or should be held accounting ukraine. where does that all that money actually go? well, we'll probably never know for sure, since even the pentagon can't do them, they can't even do an audit. sounds yes, sir, but i did want to get to the, to reiterate the point that there will be negotiations between moscow and ukraine for any settlement of this war for any ceasefire,

for any armistice. any step along the way will require negotiations. and i have little doubt that people will step forward whether they want to or not, whether simply because the field of people above them has been abandoned and everyone else has less than they are, the only ones left to hold the bag. nevertheless, there will be people with whom these negotiations will be undertaken. of course, they will be in a week or position because they will, to the extent that they're interested in reaching any accord with russia. they will be abandoned by the west. and as a result, they will have little choice, but to concede to russia's demands my warning, however, drew rushes that we all have something to lose here. okay. it is quite possible that russia will push too far demand too much for even too quickly into territories

that it really does not want in your brain. and therefore opening its up itself up to counter strikes and moves and more military stalemate. so there's danger on all sides to be aware of. that's such a good point in. um i think i'm pretty sure both of you read an article written by john mearsheimer recently. and then he comes to what kind of settlement will it be? well, he believes that like we all do, that russia is going to win, but it will be an ugly piece, which i thought was a very interesting way of describing it. gilbert, i don't, i don't think that a rush. it has maximal as views here. it would be split down the, the word is already been mentioned on this program, it will solve a lot of problems. finally, take seriously rushes, security demands the rest of it, believe it or not, can be a detail, just details, but russia wants it security respected. and i think from that point, if things could actually um, and reasonably easily,

and magnanimously gilbert the 4 times back, none of the slaves they would have to the people up to us on the green and on the us side too. and i don't see it. so which people are just uh, but i didn't get a chance to quite finish the remark about the build article. the they have agreed that if you create and cannot hold up consent and entrance negotiations, then they would be content with the pros and cons. but the idea of approach and conflict has been floated united states repeatedly over the last month or 2 and it so, and it's dealt with is if it's a natural thing to happen because we all know that they are at an impasse and that's no one has won the war. well, that observation is strictly one of the of the washington line. it doesn't the correspond to reality on the ground. and it has a that needs that behind it. the concept, what floor is about,

which is no way to take someone took out rushes own definition of this objectives, not america's definition of what is subject to should be its own definition of objectives or to destroy the ukrainian armed forces and not to seize territory. this is not a territorial war from the russian perspective. and from their perspective, they are winning the wonderful because they are in fact destroying demand power reserves of ukrainian army. so they would be content i believe, with a frozen conflict, but not the that's not, that's a point. good washington thinks it will take. the frozen conflict from the musket perspective would be one in which russia takes a guess, a moves up to a transmit street and closes the ukraine from the black sea essentially leaving the country a handicapped. it's not a failed space to fall into the hands of d u, and to be massively subsidized forever by the u. that would suit russia fine. the main issue, as you have said repeatedly,

is that the russian security and that will depend not on assigned the street is simple, depend on the facts on the grounds that's ukraine's borders. a sufficiently far that ukraine's military potential is sufficiently handicapped is that the west is perfectly understanding the attempt to install the missiles and other other military equipment threatening. the russia will be leach with the response that is devastating, perhaps not just on ukrainian territory, but back in germany or whatever else this equipment is coming from. so russia will look after its own security that doesn't need a security guaranteed uh from the united states. so you, you to protect itself. well, i mean, well, well, you know, you in security doesn't happen in a vacuum and this sideways perfectly to where i want it to go. nikolai has the 3 of us. i very rationally and i think, compassionately,

and will all of us want this to come to an end. they stop the killing, but you know, we have um, next year, the 75th anniversary of nato. okay. and they're coming up with, you know, little magical ideas. how they kind of twist and turn, and you know, we can slip them in this way. slip them in that way. i mean, it's quite grotesque. okay. because the even stilton burge, the hit, the secretary generally admitted off the counselor by mistake. i don't know that yes, nato expansion was the origins of this conflict, but they're still talking about nato expansion. i mean, what, what, where do these people come from and what do they want to achieve? well, nato has the purpose of expanding nato. ok, okay, there you go. that's their, that's their mission, right? yes. okay, well it's just, it suffices for survival and funding but i think of

a rump ukrainian stage without an outlet to the black sea would leave a territory that is sizable attached to nato. and that wouldn't be rambunctious in nature, and that wouldn't be dangerous to russia in perpetuity. it's one of the reasons what 1960, the 16, why prime minister of the law of a said we should not annex galicia. so in, in a memo to, sorry, nicholas the 2nd because we would not gain anything from it. and one of the wisest things i read is that russia has no interest culturally historically. or in terms of security a to an ex, regions that do not want to be part of it or could not reason a reasonable amount of time be pacified and, and uh and,

and with the majority would not be comfortable being part of russia. and i'm afraid that much of western and even now central ukraine falls into the category that territory and its relationship to russia. add to the, the end to europe. that still has to be negotiated. and that is, in fact, the central point that will have to be negotiated in any larger uh, pioneer p in security arrangement, which should be at this point already. insight as part of our objectives. well, what we just heard from nickaligha is possible, but if that's the goal that they want to achieve. well, i got a i, i differ slightly with you, but i think at the end of the day rush, it has that security interest at heart. that's it's number one issue here. how that is translated into policy and dealing with the neighborhood can go in different directions here. but i mean, i'm not sure nato is interested in security in europe the. and now the difference

is now, is that russia is the official enemy, remember they? oh, where does a defensive alliance? what watches bottom, you know, our enemy? well, now that has changed right now and rush, it has to keep an eye on nato, considering its already expanded during this conflict. go ahead gilbert. the most expensive nature that we've seen since the admission of the bowls exchange has been counter productive for the security of europe. i think that my, i used to correspond very closely with steve cohen. and he was saying that nato is not a fraternity club of the university. it's the idea of admitting new members should be conditions on one question. will this increase or decrease the security of the existing members? that is passively clear to just if it became a actionable only several years after the fact that the meeting the baltic states was a big negative for security of the existing members. okay,

so is true or for admitting of finland, but as 1200 kilometer long border this to be defended by population of 9000000. it's absurd, it can only be a good track detract from the security of europe. now, i don't think the russians would be to put out if the display to them brought into it a rug. uh ukraine, that is some distance from, from where you're creating and borders were. yeah, before all this, this war began in the, the fact that that brussels would be controlling the other was insane. people running ukraine as preventing them from, of triggering a pan. you repeat, and it's not global war. but i think that in itself would be positive. but only after ukraine has been so reduced in size, as in population, that's and removed had a greater distance from, from russia's,

a borders stay under those conditions. i think with russia could live with a new member ukraine. whether you, whether the naval members fall live with me, it's all about the risk is the last 30 seconds, a nickel, i will react to what we just heard from gilbert 30 seconds. go ahead and i think that effectively transforms billable into the bumper state. the rush is looking for what i don't need to keep going. i, i, i just think it, it closes some problems by the raises others. and the legal issues is really what we need is advance of leaving us. we need to, we need another helsinki process. okay. well that's, that's what we really need right now. rapidly, i'm running out of time. i want to remind our viewers. nicolai's a s a is what's next for ukraine, the outlines for a peaceful settlement. you can find it at anti war dot com. it's all the time we have a one, i think, my guess and brussels and it takes and,

and of course i want to take our viewers for watching us here at r t c. and next time and remember crossed off the, [000:00:00;00] the is already those lines. it's can be started by lines. these can be started by turn. the importance of we can never be kind of a study since that transparency is an extraordinary john. mystic, patrice then just succeeded in finding documents that existed in making them available to the was published. i mean,

what could be more holding back by publishing information and sharing information with the public. he was exercising the right to free speech. he did so in the public interest and wants to so long realize tends to me, and golf and the slate of late continuously. i know why advice may assume that no one who is the guy that illegals anymore wisely bought. adjustments for being on box weighing a 175 used to go through the sentence. are we going to let that stay?

the dread that is the number one feeling of americans in regards to 2024 presidential election cycle according to a new yahoo, you grab survey just released sky. now here's that on this edition of $360.00 view . we're going to examine white americans are the reading the 2024 election. is this more about the world events happening, or the tone and tenor of politics in america today? let's get started. of the in just under a year, americans will be heading to the polls for the november 2024 election. and it's never a good thing when a country's electric, you're just words like dread exhaustion or probably the worst adjective in difference,