of the phone land called history, a stable agreed upon a centrally to winston churchill asserted that it was returned by the victors. but this is both of them agreed that it's the battlefield developments that shaped the narrative on the other way around by throwing the media and military support behind the war effort in your brain. western leaders attempted to secure the right side of history, the victory that goes with it, without even fighting directly in the war. are they likely to succeed of, to discuss that amount join, but to re serial alarm associate professor at the courts university in assembled. professor amar, it's great to talk to. thank you very much for your time. thank somebody. now, we are now approaching the 2nd anniversary of the russian military operation in the ukraine. and you wrote recently the tone of western discussions on the possible outcomes or the possible progress of this conflict has started to change in what

way and what do you think is behind a change? i think it's clear that the be now see much more of an acknowledgement of the fact that russia is making progress. but if you want to put advice strongly, i think some people are even beginning to be honest enough. for instance, they're starting to focus on visiting it that it to say instead of ukraine is those things are more. yes, i agree with that. we are hearing some voices of caution, but i think for the most part, the american a and the ukrainian leadership for sure. a still a speaking in favor of continuing this conflict until and ukraine regains its former territories or as they like to put it on to put in is defeated. do you think either side believes that they can achieve that goal in objective terms? i mean, then logistical terms, do they have enough resources to give their, regarding the you pregnancy to sit. but i wouldn't be able to, to,

i have to guess that the president savanski himself is basically division. and that he has become drunk on his own rhetoric as well as the flats are being set to use to receive from the rest. i think this has made it arranged, committed to bed and disturb transportation. i'm trip to reality is to about everyone around town. i can't imagine that. so the appropriate people in ukraine will also have a better grasp of free entities and he does, but they can't speak up yet right now concerning the best. my guess is that quite a few people in washington and in the us way, i understand that they have to get out of this for before out of us can defeat now, do they understand already how much they are going to have to concede? again, i come to one thing that i think is behind this ongoing talk about be the still continue supporting and so on and so on. about 20 flow or even $25.00 being madison

. i do think it's partly in negotiating tactic to essentially and not shows of us inside weakness and montana sort of flip level against the dresser. basically saying, we are ready to be due for the if the house to do, if we lose more as well as your bus even comes up with some of these paper, i'm sure, but now is a bargaining chip. you know, when i read the western and russian analysis of, of this course like this, sometimes you get a sounds, the russian, ukraine and your brain supported by the west. they are not only fighting, totally different for is that they are sort of leave in very different centuries that they use very different frames of reality for analyzing what's happening on the battlefield. and what's necessary to keep this war going because you mentioned bleeding an adversary. this is something that just doesn't happen just in words. i mean here you need the risk or says unit to strategists. in order to do that,

i wonder if your share this perception and if so, why do you think, what do you think explains this huge difference in assessment because after all, military science is, is a science of the some of the generals who are making the decisions they're still, they shouldn't be basing it on some objective facts and measures in terms of the american leadership and especially was quote, the boss and blog. so people said public and government parties think things, popular other offices and who read it together somehow to find american foreign policy. i don't think they live in another. essentially i, i think they live in the decatur is actually both stealing from the 1990s. they have come to be explicit about the fact at least the smartest of them, that the moment of so called unilateralism has passed. but if you look at the way they actually behave, they don't display any change of behavior and that's, that makes them so rational, right? now the logic point is,

i think that remember that the been the last k was started. a lot of less than projections into you came out for instance, uncle america of x and, and said things like that. the russian president thought he might put into the lives in a different, centrally, he lives in the past. i think that's a fundamental misunderstanding. and i wouldn't make this person, i think that investment leadership actually lives very much in the present, especially the chinese leadership. absolutely. divani and, and many other powers of the positions as x. so the, the best for collective with the americans for their own reasons. and us where we essentially refusing to drones have tried to for a century, they do not want to make a transition to award and reach the power to be of the deals and in which they really have to live with a much greater number of subs, significant accidents, but they cannot control what or control they were in part of explains this difference in for spec does is the realist versus ideal as the framework because

both china and russia practice reality to take the 3 out, you know, being rude. that the actually in reality, you know, then what you want to have, but rather what you can practically achievement have a question about that because the rush is military and diplomatic strategy over the centuries has been favoring a circle, positional approach that is playing as number 2, or with the black fingers in and she has and the hallmark of the strategy is that it doesn't produce spectacular results. but it's very mindful about accumulation and spending of their resources, both the manpower and the weaponry. and essentially, um, you know, makes a bad on exhausting the adversary before. that's adversary exhaust fuel. do you think that's what's going on on the battlefield at this very moment, the long battle? that's the russia is digging. if hill's ho hoping to exhaust not only it's

adversary across the bottom, but perhaps it's adversary across the ocean as well. i think it's clear that the person who's managing has managed to exhaust ukraine. now that isn't such a big surprise if you're honest, because most of it is demographically, a must be the country a 100, nobody and much has started. this is from the army. also the used surprising, the little effort to initiate that. but the other thing i think to have survived that's also happening and this is going back to how is the best respond that is the site is now also exhausting the west and you see it the ends of ways that west from oz production, for example, the simply cannot catch up, although they have declared that a several times and they're still declaring that this seems to be a fundamental problem. i think what's underneath on us. it says that the best doesn't have states. so how strong enough and also it has such a financial lies virtual allies, the economy that when it came to the crunch to actually x tracks, toby's

a score and makes things the experience of establishing difficulties. this because it's promising difficulties. let me add one thing. i think that would be a bad mistake to on the as to it, the west eyes, because that's coupon thing of view. the rest is finding a proxy. well, here. it's a catastrophe. it will never, it's happened. it's syndicate, it's hard, but, but it is for the best of ones are probably for less so for the europeans, but the americans have decided please. so let's not conclude that if the westberg abroad and a large move of conflict, very good. so it's quote, would be spent, is, would you act in the same way that i think would be going to probably don't know that well and hopefully there's a whole not have to learn about it. but the speaking about a traditional westminster strategy, as far as i understand it, or at least as far as it's understood here in russia by military historians, is that the west traditionally favors an offensive,

rather than defensive approach favor and smashing blows. blitzkrieg spectacular victories, but it's also quite costly in that it requires a lot of resources. it requires you to be in charge of the initiative cost monthly and it's, it's quite exhaustive for sure. um and uh, i wonder if uh, i wonder how do you understand the strategy that both the west and ukraine now trying to execute on the battlefield 2 years into this conflict. because clearly the blitzkrieg, the effort to stifle russell by section didn't work. what is the strategy that they're pursuing at this moment? but it seems to be a saying that often has finally to been fully acknowledged that the condo francisco, the summer, has not worked for legal craniums. the sort of an absorbed blitzkrieg scenario blitz, good week with all the necessary resources. right. and it said after that has been acknowledged now hoping he is at the end for some sort of long hole,

some defensive operations digging themselves and much more in fact, copy in so most of us and tactics. right. so i think the problem say is that the fall to exhaust it for this to work. this is, this might have been a violent strategy for your client if they have taken it from the beginning. but they have wasted so much, even with them that was successful in terms of getting territory by last year. and hockey for hackles around target from the park is even them. they've raised that so much man, power and weapons and ammunition and so on, that they let them substrate. so this, this shift now that the here about 2 defensive strategy, i think it's too late. i think it's testing today. now speaking about the exhaustion that you're mention, western strategist historically, i think, have been quite instrumental with that allies when an asset, a geopolitical assets, turns into high ability. the americans usually have little qualms about withdrawing

or abandoning it altogether. i think it's happened in clear sight and i've gotten a son in arrived before to some extent in a syria. is it likely to happen in ukraine? i think that it's likely to happen if the next president it might happen earlier. if it's the, it's a sucking bus in advance, for instance. but if the next president is donald trump, into the document behalf of my doesn't quite quickly. and if the next president is again, joe biden, for some reason i can't really imagine that, i think he doesn't stand a chance now. and then i think about also how i think steven board is right about it. he's just published if he's in foreign policy ways, that's the bone 3 months of a difference. the reason bye button isn't doing up now is because he still has the electrons i have, but yes, the drop you're fine. this raises another pretty dangerous, but those are because i think there is an additional security advantage to both

russia in europe to kim, this war going at a low to medium intensity because it keeps all the weapons that have been sent to your crane from all over the west in or around the battle felt like they are sort of concentrated them. they're being used for the war effort. but once the constrain is not there, there is a huge risk of illicit weapons trade. and i'm pretty sure that the russians uh, with the put in vigilant uh, security the apparatus, uh, cognizant about that thread. but do you think your opinion leaders are equally aware of the of the blue rang a fact that the oldest weaponized ation of your brain may bring to their door steps . i don't know, i do so. and it's not on the weapons, right. let's don't forget that, but the rest has done in your brain and it has, as we say, normalize a file, right? is very aggressive. fire right? is a stream the militant, they're both very reluctant before the last it works. and once you're trained to be

treated in some ways, essentially, like i've gone to stonewall as far as with non goes treated in that state, right. the ends of him being i just want to go back and you finance will be angry. not only about the on the, the civically angry this, the so called our eyes who have a view step. and i think this is what the west has done to them. they've also still be angry before us, or for very long time. i think they shouldn't have any of those instead of australia as i've told the enemy eligible. but if it'd be right in groups of us, that's fine. well, professor murphy have to take a very short break right now, but we will be back in just a few moments station, the

or the, the, the the

welcome back to world support with to the serial amar associate professor at the courts university in symbol. now, professor armoire, the most painful thing about this more for me at least, and i have and ukrainian heritage is that it certainly didn't have to happen, at least not for the direct participants. because i, i strongly believe that russia and ukraine could have settled their insecurities and their interest in and negotiate a peaceful manner. they were all the objective preconditions for that. there were even talks in, in turkey, in the beginning of this conflict, rent,

everything was possible. and yet, uh, the war efforts continued because at least i believe that to be the case because of the interest of the west and sponsors of this, of this conflict. and this is what i want to ask you about. do you agree with that? and if so, what do you think is the primary objective of the west in this war hasn't been satisfied. so $483.00. i think the roots of the board really a good back to 2008 the infamous. because summit, when boz, georgia, and ukraine both looked by the best interest in the same position of the same one that you're going to be in nato. but not now, which of course expose them and made sense to that's for russia and phones that it's sort of spawn itself out. and by the time you go to the 201314 prizes, all of these became very if you would for ukraine them many long was a smaller agreement apartments towards a virtual techs, most definitely

a basis for, for getting out of this peaceful the, it was not only abandoned of a single task that's been done on the whole and also i don't think anybody treatments to day, but i have long come to the conclusion that the best estimate treated as the worst . and so you're cringing dealership, right? so then the negotiations and, and the list, and then turkey, it be now know that there was a very serious chance of endings of one of them. and that would have saved or spans . you'll find most of it and it could easily have been done now by that device do all of this. i think for 2 reasons. first of all, it would simply not give up on this idea of expanding metal, which in itself is an insane idea and ukrainian neutrality was much better for the countries i'm engaging. that's as far as promise. and the 2nd thing i think was a, was a long term jew political strategy of got it, got you all don't of taking up out. russia has recovered from the 9 to ninety's.

people in boston did not want to accept that. that sort of situation for verse douglas anomalous. usually russia isn't that week. so the fact that it came back have to be faxed to them. and instead of integrating this reassertion of process of which they were born to repeat this, the right both of us knew those are good sets. they counted it before blonde policy of trying to take rush that down wrong the way you can to nauseous to make it a much less significant power. honest as a straight estimate was a stronger and effect i, it says well into the american strategy that you have been describing in one of your articles, you said that the america, the american literature historically has had this unique ability to disturb peace due to it's extraordinary concentration of economic and military capabilities, but my question to you is whether if can actually fight ward reward if

push comes to shove, the united states has to face russia or china directly north via proxies. but directly, do you think it would be able to stand as ground with its current level of military capacity with its current level of strategic capacity and with all the other capabilities that it has, its, its disposal for how to speak to that i would say uh, if i bought it into my computer, so i was waiting on tests that because look, the, the last was that americans have actually experienced in their own country, most of the american civil war, and everything has they have for the roads. it's been an offshore balance. so they go to other places and break to them. that's what they do. and usually they do it with an in the most mandatory super over to over their appointments. so that it's, i'm sorry to use this term. but usually the mexico truck is shops, right. and the only thing that gets in the way, i sometimes get rid of compounds and sometimes meeting them at 1st. so is that is

big enough to actually push them back, which is happening all the promotions. none of this, however, is as painful as a large scale war against p. a competitors. the americans will have to clarify so near peter competitor and understand that in certain metrics they can be using that that's the case. but if you really look at what most i can do, if it's means 5 mountains, you're getting a demonstration of that. it's a pure competitor. and so i, i, i would not try that out if, if of us but, but we don't know because was my sense is, that'd be tunneled. rely on american best finality. i think the american leadership is not very low intellectual quality. and again, i don't mean just as an insult. i mean that as a description they um, i extreme, yeah, geologist david might do this. i have some dr. natives. they refuse to engage with the reality or support. i can be count on them understanding that such a big war essentially what,

what would be self destructive for them even before nuclear weapons, even with all those being used. i don't think they can count on that to, to migrate the regret, to have to say the professor mar, this is a very serious question because aaron guns coupled with uh, insurance. uh, they do produce a very detrimental results. and you suggested that this declining american empire declining not only in terms of fits and military resources, but as you mentioned in terms of it's called native abilities. and i think we can see it on all levels including presidential, it represents. and your challenge for the international system due to both it's of central size and it's somewhat or quite irrational behavior. how do you think this challenge should be or managed, in order to on the one hand, minimized is disruptive, deliberately disruptive and seating k of potential or capacity of the united states . but on the other hand,

to hopefully encourage washington to act and the more judicious in life affirming or progress affirming way, ideally, uh by stop determines, i think, so united states needs to be contained into turret. this is ironic because the united states of course, sees that serve as a country, but it contains into church. it's greatest adverse survey. and so i'm, i'm all as piece of the soviet union until the ground. i think they have long reached the stage of history. but other powerful states, those with nuclear weapons have to contain deters united states and they're gonna have to don't in the very blogs. but besides that, because the united states doesn't react to sort of segments anymore. i think it has to be done very, very crudely as a 1st time during the cold war. but this times, the biggest problem off the board, i'm really convinced of this is to united states. that doesn't mean everything will be fine. once the united states becomes a smaller and less aggressive power, quite the opposite. but right now, for the next,

i don't know to k tools. what else? our biggest problem as a state is still not that states. the single biggest problem is the single greatest potential to do an immense from to on of humanity. now, taking advantage of you being a historian, i do want to ask you is how much philosophical question about history? because to some extent, the current, the american culture is a stance against history or against the very nature of humanity there sort of in a very good i like way they're trying to read the moment because supposedly so beautiful for them. even though, i mean, if you talk to regular americans, i don't think they would actually agree with that the, that the assessment. but that, you know, itself is a pre k remarkable. i believe that somebody, a nation, even the most powerful nation can stop the flow of history. you mentioned the soviet union, and it's a, you know,

it's treated with degrees and the pores in the west. but even the soviet union was based on the idea of development and utopia, and we'll just stop in development. but um, you know, the developments known to last. what do you think behind these drive to sort of put an ad to history and to freeze the historical development of the entire human race at a point that favors and suits the americans, the st. the deep by your logic of woods? i think america is actually a very good logical issue on it's not just the country, it's a sort of civilization. right. and it's not aware of that, right? because for americans, they think ideology is what the solve is used to have. or maybe the most career has knowledge is if a state is valid, you want to find your logic and that'll be a book that's all laid down. indoctrination will be very open months on america's extremely audiological and it is steep in a set of values that do not function but any more. and there's

a conflict between these values and the rest or not the whole rest but, but the large part of the, of those other inhabitants of the planet to buy the rest of us. and america, solution to this is to impose itself. and it's very, that's what's called privacy rights. that's why the, on top of american primacy, america is not yet ready. i, i see very, very little of an awareness of the fact that the united states can be plus plus. and it can be sufficiently powerful under could take health on this new judgment interest in a voice chat with others who are truly different. they don't see the word like that . i, i'm sorry, it's important. so for me, but american and let's see the board as a place that must be constantly of a shape not only to a politically that's a given but even geologically so that by changing the blood, they make it safe because they have way of life. and this mother, they no longer work because the power is declining. and if they fight against this

change, then you know, on in grave danger, i think that's where we all want. cuz right now, you mentioned the issue of values and some in russia attribute this american drive to for his history to be loss of the say, crow whether in the form of religion or in the form of traditional or collective values that you know and, and these are increasing to towards a very individualistic or i would say narcissistic. world view. and there's this idea that there's nothing above man that the, ma'am can be fully in control of everything else. and i want to ask you as a he story and not as a person of faith or belief, but as a he story. and when you look at the historical process in all its continue to do ever and get the sense of the inexplicable of something that is perhaps beyond human control of some patterns that you know, inspire or look,

i can tell you. but i'm speaking from the 1st from doing the story was very just as a roman catholic and but now i'm relapsed roman catholic, but you never really stop being but it's impossible. but um, i do have such a sense and i tell my students about it and i can give you a very concrete example. the more we learned about the cold war between say, 4789 and the last century. the more i try, my students is the more it takes to brian intervention for us to still be here. it was such a close winds thing. it was not very managed. we went slowly please 3 to 4 weeks. 3 minute angel was defies is, but it's basically america that didn't stop short and nuclear weapons of each of the right. you can tell us now. um i how some of you to even explain vibrant didn't buy each other out or at least stop human civilization. performative fuel, you know, native and freezing somebody goes left,

but somehow is as happy of you're going to be that lucky the next time if you keep tempting fate or whatever it is, i don't think this can be done for i, but at some point, as a spaces we really but have to look it up to night. well, i'm the, we have history for that, but history that i think the latest here is, has been true. the in the west more as material or products in the very consumers way rather than something that you know, needs also to be treated with the degree all 5 really draw safina sounds. but if you don't temper with it and you try to learn from it, but you don't try to bend the to your to and for his arm are, this is all we have time for by thank you very much for they say inspiring conversation, at least towards the whole divine intervention of with northern brandon. this is less time. thank you very much. thank you. thank you for watching culture, sir. again, on was a part of the,

there's no end in sight over how you're going to continue to destroy the or excuse the case for the mess. and as of the people i tried to go to the gym, but i'm certainly not ready to fight russia. this is also a soon, this is the 3rd world lunacy re washing press for so the funder line likes to say we have the tools while we just start with stability and business. see, i'll see what i need. somebody living on not have said eclipse propaganda. you know a price here in new york. i think we don't know the aftermath any time that you're not allowed to ask questions, you should ask all of the questions. some more questions ask

a better. the answer is will be the result. so is this all good to the west, to sponsor a quoting terrorist attack on a, basically in the c times. so i kind of say again the lives of at least 20 civilians that wounded 10 of the dozens and will remain tracked under the rubble. the escalation, i was the literacy of the a power name, the latest $36.00 strikes on who the target is. india man, according to washington, also had the lose of is a is cool on the yahoo. going to sit down with the administration's failure to bring back hostages. how via the.