and the mobilization policy, i mean, what is the plan? because again, business needs some kind of guidelines for you on to sound this yourself having being in business for a moment to play for the next year. you know, to keep up the defense and other to achieve all the objectives that was sets out in the military strategy. we must continue to mobilize this summer together with my colleagues from the cabinets of ministers we worked on. once we've heard that the economy needs to be protected from the cabinets administered by delta 7 resolutions of the sections of west texas, which will re, for all parties up and number of people to we must continue mobilization epitomizes, we issue the problem. but ukraine is facing, at this point. they have grand plans. so they've made all these problem. is this the premiums, as well as to that into the actual back is about what should move child to offend since about recapturing last territory about driving russia. but i don't the other

have, you have reality? well, you can simply run out of able bodied med, motivated men winning man to send into the grind and to achieve the goods the landscape has promised every one castillo. no, i washington and moscow have radically different ideas about peace and security. so is donald trump pledge the in the ukraine conflict in 24 hours time? this guy thinking are a necessary radical solution. cross talk to make the the,

[000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to cross stock. were all things are considered on peter lavelle? canada. trump said he would end the ukraine conflict in 24 hours. well, he's now president elect time to keep that promise. the problem is washington and moscow have radically different ideas about peace and security. the cross walk in ukraine, i'm joined by my guess, can feel ca, steve, in mound jackson. she is a retired us air force. lieutenant colonel, having served at both n s a and the office of the secretary of defense in london. we have in proud he is a senior british diplomat, an author of myspace in moscow. how british diplomacy and russian failed and killed

. so we crossed through pasco, natasha. he is an associate professor at t auto university. right. crosstalk roles and effects that means you can jump any time you want. and i always appreciate before we talk about um uh, a suppose. suppose a trump piece plan, i'd like to get your reaction from all 3 of you about the recent spouse of appointments that trump is going to bring into his administration. karen, i mean, i know that, you know, it could use some people like coke. some people like pepsi, but it's still colla and then that's my feeling here. karen? yeah, it really is. i mean, he's got a mix of neil kinds that we recognize extremely pro israel appointments and then combine with that. he has some of the, uh, people like tulsa gabbert, who have been a tremendous critics of what's been going on for the past couple decades. so we have a mix. okay, and how about you? because, i mean, one could say this is all about designs. is that um, there'd be a lot of in fighting. maybe that's what trump wants. no one will have to gemini,

they'll all have to look to him as the mediator. i mean, you've been in a bureaucracies before what you read on this as well. the obvious conclusion of join is the jumps, the tensions by much tiny tools and what's happening in the middle east, and also what's happening in china and taiwan. and apple. focus on, on ukraine and support for the life of the day is going to be on the city decline much as the site in in is like some campaign and i'm house go. i mean, it's a, he's, it's stress during the campaign and even his victory speech with that, he's a man that he wants to create peace and wars with this, with this lot coming in here. they don't seem very piece driven to me, pasco know, and i agree, i tend, is owens one of those famous news anchors into us. she already put out an emergency message to trump saying like you are being subverted by the, the, the less or no neal cons in, in,

in the us. and that's what's happening. so instead of having your colleagues that are focused on the us, ukraine, more you have, neil comes, we're focused on eat on and on china. and apparently these are the people that he will appoint and i don't know whether he knows about that or not. but it seems that john mir timers, prediction is coming true that the blog always wins out. yes we are. is it, it's, it would seem to be the case here if you can change the president. but the hedge a monic tendencies are almost impossible to reverse. ok, let's talk about peace plans here. karen is all stairs leaks all over the place that are rumors about what a trunk may propose. i don't think he has a clue of what he wants to do. so, but there seems to be a lot of people. i'm thinking about this vague telephone call between trump and putting the is trying to divert our attention or make us assume about certain pro, uh, dynamics that we deal with the there can be no deal if there is no common understanding

about security. and that's the crux of the problem here. karen? yeah, that's true. but the common understanding of the ukraine situation, he just have some people in place of it and get that. certainly. i mentioned, told the guy with but judy vance also gets it very well. he's following ukraine, so he understands it's trump delegates to some of these people to push ukraine off of his uh, front burner, which is what he intends to do. then we are going to see compromise. we're going to see cox communications, and it's going to be based on what actually happened. so i'm hopeful in that regard . but as you said, with the term, the neil con attitude towards china. in the middle east, we see this persistence. but i will say this, the, the d c establishment is enraged. they are enraged and they are frightened and that is got to be a good sign. it. but i think in the, the,

the talk is it's focusing on a ceasefire. now i could understand what, why the ukrainians would want that they are losing. i could understand how washington feels that way because that will give them a breather. but that a ceasefire simply is not in the cards, but it all of the pungent tree on cable tv is talking about a cease fire. this is done intentionally. it's trying to determine the, the parameters of what some talks could be, which is a non starter for moscow in well, the fighting has to stop. and tonight has to be able to see 5 years back see what it needs to be. is it an actual kind of plan for delivery of piece now maybe we can spoken about going back to the march 20. 22 is simple agreement. that seems to be a good place to negotiations stop but, but his pause that places that of, of actually having a piece plan and the funding does actually need to him. because as you say, you kind is losing on the battlefield. so i think i see that the to own loosely exclusive pointing stuff, but also that does need to be

a long term 5 that needs to be nice bushes, critical, national security interests. you know, the final big thing with a whole kind of nature issue is a big goal. and another key area for discussion is what happens with sanctions as a piece plan impulse plus go again. when i look at um, um, uh inside or uh, inside baseball form policy. um they were actually there all kinds of gravitating to a new minsk agreement, which means one and 2 failed because the western powers failed to fulfill it. russia is not going to buy a mince 3. no, i rush, i shouldn't buy. it means 3. but at the same time, russia still has an interest to find some sort of way out because the dangerous right now is that russia might win the war, but lose the peace. i'm not losing the piece, not losing. what comes next has to be top priority. and unless

russia is willing to swallow ukraine ho, which would include the entire western part of ukraine, which would be a place in the dispute. that would be a really, really difficult thing to, to, to achieve are impossible. so there needs to be a settlement, a piece of paper that is signed by everybody in order to get to the next stage, which implies that the need to be negotiations, which implies that something's got to get from the side of nato, but also from the side of russia, and that's going to be very tough on russia, i believe because they are there is going to be hard bargaining still involved unless you want to go for old out occupation. yeah, i, i hear you. i don't think the incomplete occupation of ukraine has ever been in the cards. i mean, that would be this something untenable. anyway, and it would, it wouldn't be a gardener. any benefits for russian in the short or long term. karen, one of the, one of the industries here also is

a can rest and trust these to the next administration. i mean, under trump, i mean, trump was a russian agency, the hoax, but i mean, trump was hard run russia than any other american president to mean? where's the trust? and i want to ask in that because he's a former diplomat. go ahead parent. yeah, there's, well, there's no trust and the idea of mints is course was really into because the guarantor was germany, which admitted admitted that this whole thing was a hoax to begin with. so there's no trust. i don't think any nato countries could really be trusted to oversee this, and the truck administration is by it's very nature, it's kind of reactive. it's kind of uh it's, it's not completely clear where it's going. it's is not necessarily trustworthy in terms of the so who is going to help bring these place, these 2 countries together bring, you know, your crane and russia together. and the other thing is having to deal with, you know, for a long time. zalinski said i will not deal with code. no one ever deal with boot

and and now zaleski isn't even a legitimate leader anymore. you know, he's a effective dictator and no country can effectively negotiate with that guy because he is, he doesn't have legitimacy. legal legitimacy as a, uh, as a, as a leader. so we've been problem is that i think one of the things they'll look at is some, will zelinski be replaced with someone that can trust some agency and can come to some sort of settlement. same question to you and i mean the level of trust that is we, that's really the 1st step to the 1st hurdle as it were here. so i can tell you that the, that level of pressure from here, looking at the west, it's 0. i mean, you, you gotta make me a deal. you've got to can, you've got, you guys have to come up with something that can be credible because your, your, your, your record is deplorable. and that's subjectively true. it's, it's not my opinion. go ahead, you know, i agree and i see back in 24 team. so things got very,

very by the contents in front of mind. even the lesson presidential administration, she told me that actually all the trusted gone and it will take a decade to the store trust. and that was in 2014. so the minus sign to take it to kind of really, but still just on both sides and take it on the bus inside the guy trusting us and vice versa will be right on time coming. chinese have post bmo, but we still have to deal with each other in the here. and now if i came by briefly on the mistake reading, so i slot a kind of a take a different view from count, haven't the place and passed on to was these little time on risk minutes to agreement, fall apart because the americans and the british didn't wanted work and actually that they really kind of conspire to kind of look sanctions in place and make minsk supported to the sexes policy effectively making sanctions against what's appended the us government was never invested in misconduct. was invested in showing that means, you know, to failed, and that's indeed what happens. i think, well, you know that that voice maternity doesn't now is it if the us administration gets

find some sort of need piece plan that will be great to a level of investments in it when it comes to actual trust. yes, you want that to relations between much in the us collapse during the previous trump administration, you know, weapon supplies to ukraine, undermining the knolls team to pipeline that sort of things that some of talked about on the campaign trail. but that as long as you down to the dynamics on the hill in, in dc itself, actually trump did have a pool repeating events, right? one of these difficult times met and spoke with peyton. and there was a level of a pool and trust with this multi between the 2 of them, which means that they can actually trade and discuss and come to the right now. and they'll say with in, before we go to the break here. i mean, the diplomacy was criminalized under bite and how do we get away from that a well, yeah, i you 100 percent agree with you. i mean, by never spoke to prison once you input from the point of the little salting. i see

the pregnancy is basically criminalized on the, on the case side as well. that has been for over that day. yeah. but actually will people advice and trump the site and use it? you know, we have to engage. we have to to new trump the site and he has google extremely pretty well. we'll see. we'll see every 2 hours. so let's say, alright, i have to jump in here. we're going to go to a hard break. and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion on ukraine, stay with the the the,

[000:00:00;00] the, the russian states. never as tight as i'm one of the most sense community best most i'll send send up the in the 65 to 5 must be the one else calls question about this, even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin mission, the state on the rush of funding and supports the r t supposed net, keeping our video agency roughly all the band on youtube tv

services. for what question did you say a request to change the welcome next across stock? were all things are considered? i'm peter level true. mind you were discussing, you create the okay, let's go back to the pass code killed. so one of the things that worries me in this interim period here and obviously impacts of the what's going on and ukraine, but also in the greater middle lease. the issue of escalation, so i've asked around, it seems to be a split decision. i tend to think that the vitamin ministration will escalate before trump could come in to de escalate. if that is,

if that is his plan here. but escalation can create political facts on the ground that the next administration just has to inherit. and i think we saw how obama tripped up trump when he was coming into office in 2017. i don't know why a bite and wouldn't want to trump up a trip up trump on um, before january. go ahead plus go. i'm a little bit less worried about that one, because by now it seems as if though, the pentagon puts a hard stop on the idea of strikes a inside of 3 people, the 2022 russian territory. and that it just depends, have gotten that actually calls the shots on these decisions damage. that's got plastic. oh is that apply to the british and the french and the other is a nato. i, i, i see that this is an option that could happen, but i honestly think that if the american say don't do it,

they won't because they are on the shore. they are on the lease. so, and it's only 2 months from now, even the germans will have like these, these elections coming up and mr. merits, who might come in, he even need for his closest date to do anything is like february or march. i think it's too little time to do anything that's stupid, although maybe i'm on the right from the view. definitely under estimating. definitely. i think so. who knows? maybe we'll have a november surprise or a december just surprise to and i have an idea and you know, cuz i, i obviously want this conflict and because it's conflict never should have started in the 1st place. it were so many ways to avoid it. and i want to ask all 3 of you this. what about another helsinki 2 point. oh and then pan european security approach. and so, and so instead of just focusing on ukraine, you focus on the entire picture. and by doing that,

you can solve that problem bits in the center of it all. i know what sam dishes. if i told donald trump this, he probably would go for it because he get a nobel prize. but this is the only way for because this is the only way to where everybody gets the terms and conditions of security. everybody lines that up the rest of it can a follow go ahead parent. yeah, i mean, that's a great idea. that is a wonderful idea. but the problem we have is nato. well, that's really about, that's their problem. ok, my opinion go ahead. yeah. it's, um, no it's, it's a good idea. but when you mentioned nobel prizes you have to remember obama also got one. well that's so that's why trump ones one. okay. oh good point. good point . well in let me throw that to you. i mean your, your experience diplomat. i mean, is it, that's, it's a bull's idea. um, a lot of moving pieces here, but the goal was very specific. security for everyone. and i think that's the best

way to approach this. go ahead in. yeah, because the problem is that the both the opinion and the nights, a creepy of deposit from that kind of why to multilateralism actually and you see what's happening in ukraine but also in the middle east is representative of the type of diplomacy and phone policy in which western powers went to pick sides and the conflict between one side and the other side by is completely incompatible with some wide multitude. i shall have page with the security that'd be stay as individual. and so, unless you can kind of break that central kind of by lateralism to lateralism, which kind of dominates the way nation way you kind of phone policy is that you wouldn't be able to kind of get to that point. and in any case, you know, that is being overtaken by what's happening to, for example, the bricks movement, where they are actually leading that, that debate, you know, gone, you know, security can a bit lodge in the absence of engagement with some pounds. well,

pasco, again, helsinki to fully know what's wrong with that idea. i karen's absolutely iraq. it is the nature wouldn't like it. but nick, because of nature, we have this conflict in ukraine and, and so that has to be dealt with here. but if you are approaching the bigger picture may be the way forward in a face saving for everyone involved. absolutely, i mean, you're totally right now, so i get 2 point. oh is exactly what we need. but the, the side matter of the fact is that the people in charge at the moment that leads in the european capitals adding washington don't want that. i'm not sure about the washington anymore because the change might actually, trump in bands might want to go for that, but i'm not sure to block those the, the, the thing is that a neutral you, craig would have been to help. thank you to point out the thing is that in december 2021 rush, i asked for help and get 2 point. oh with it's draft reduce that he'd send over. it

ross has asked time and again to create a call, a common security structure. and timing, again, was rebuffed and it is, it's really, really horrible. but if you look at it into terms of the cold war, we always had ups and downs where people were like more willing to actually do common, mutually beneficial agreements and less times. and right now we're in the time where they are less likely to do that. because right now the europeans are not able to think off a mutually beneficial solution. they think that anything that is good for russia is necessarily bad for us and anything good for us, and it must be bad for us out there for days. no common ground. it is, that's stupid, but unfortunately we're in that kind of mindset, unless we get out of that mindset, there's not going to be a win win solution which we need, which helsinki to put no or would well care. the indivisibility of security was a term that was used quite often during the cold war. that was the very basis of the helsinki process. i can remember, well, after the,

after the special military operation started a rush, it was a good, it's a guy talking about the individual butyllithium security and the us state department acted like it and never heard the term they probably had the yeah. are we haven't had a diplomat in the, in the american government for some time, then i guess we won't have one for a while to keep going. yeah, no, i mean uh if were, if it's true that they're putting rubio in as the secretary state, i don't know if that's true or not, but yeah that, that means that it won't go back to trump is trump once something he'll, he'll try to negotiate it and it's not clear what trump really, you know, trump thinks in the same terms that we're talking about today. but another issue you have to look at is the money. you know, ukraine has been a dump for money, and many people have been profiting from this. your people on this and you know us, but also your pin comp, companies and other other states that are close by and um, you know,

they have uh uh that money is drying up the wars ending. there's not enough ukrainians left to die. we've pretty much this project has destroyed the people of ukraine. so the investment potential is really drying up rapidly. and the money people who really drive both the new kinds and the other, the rest of government, which i'm not sure how much is left after the new kinds. but whatever we have discover minutes driven by money, it's driven by the big investors. and what they hope to get from something so that they are going to, they're going to be a factor here that we're not talking about, which is going to accelerate the decision to stop this thing. there's no financial benefit to continuing it and that that sounds very cold because there's all the dead people, all the destruction of the environment, but just the terrible yes, the refuge problem, everything. all of this driven by the money people in many ways. well, you know,

let me go to in here. i mean, is a war is awful, obviously here, but what has been done to ukraine is a crime because this shouldn't have happened this. there were ways around this. ok . this was a complex that was wanted by washington, i would say, by london as well, because of their misperceptions of, of russia's abilities and whatnot here. but even is they think about any kind of a piece plan. ukraine doesn't really play a big role in it. and that's, again, it's really quite pathetic. go ahead. yeah, yeah. he kinda is becoming ahold of that come out of the state of this become most of the populated over button with huge amounts of debt to spite of it kind of billions and so so you can create it from the west and it's becoming like an empty dysfunctional shell in the field state as well as the west and past k on, you know, as normal they increase in the focus on the kind of domestic concerns. you know, has, in fact does have options. so, you know, the needs of people, bailey,

to have suffered from this. all you training people in to be in the big scheme of things and, and if you really care about the cranes fee due to a choices, then the best way to do that would be to end the will. it's most jump this point to do well, a pasco, considering the potential, we don't, you know, none of these people have power now, but the names that are being bandied about the will you think that there will be a big struggle within the trump administration and how to move forward or maybe, you know, trump says he has an idea, it was a good campaign slogan as policy. now it, you know, it's brunch time here, but i mean it with the collective wisdom. if these people have any wisdom at all, is that what he's going to rely upon? and that's very good. people are good analysts in this administration. now. i mean, chevy vans has proven time. and again, with his, with his talks and with his book that he actually has some clue of what is going on

till c, gabbert and others have done so too. but as in every administration, you're going to have different a variety of opinion. and unfortunately, right now what we're seeing is that means in terms of pointing more to more people we know learned, you know, come to, we know, are a to 0 sum game kind of thinking. and they are, they are unfortunately now probably going to be a majority and they can, they can count on having people in the back who think like them as well in the, in the bureaucracy. and unless that changes, unless the, the, the, the, the reasonable people can override those guys, i see that the current way forward is going to have a harder time of going forward. and maybe going to have a, maybe going to see some change when it comes to ukraine. that's the biggest challenge for change, but not for a year on. it's not for china. this one is going to probably continue that the, the,

the titanic is going to continue to drive to work that iceberg when it comes to these 2, which is sad, health care. and yeah, do you think that this time, next year we'll be talking about a trans peace plan i would like to think that has already for power has been implemented and that was over. you know, it occurs to me to, with the way that trump is putting his appointment's forward, the really smart people. but he is putting in to the various positions are not new guns and the really stupid people. and i think i'm being objective here, the stupid people brovio. okay, not to break the of some of these others is the guy they're putting in for the d o . d. i'm not very experience. very reactive. not exceptionally bright. so these guys are fodder to be fired. well, can i, i, we can, we can, and we can add down this note. i mean, personnel is policy. after all, we'll see how it unfolds here. the good thing is people are talking about ending the war. that's good. okay, i want to thank my guest in london, kyoto, and in mount jackson. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at ortiz, the next time, remember,

prospect, the, [000:00:00;00] the take a fresh look around his life. kaleidoscopic isn't just a shifted reality. distortion by power to vision with no real opinions. fixtures designed to simplify will confuse who really wants a better wills. and is it just because it shows you fractured images,

presented as fast? can you see through their illusion going underground? can the, [000:00:00;00] the very will welcome this is all the international be russian form. and it's just like a lot of profits right now addressing the media and the u. a where he's attending an international piece on security for him, son is missing in law, has already said what it has to say about a man and has to be spending