the prospect getting trouble and ukraine. i'm joined by my guest on laughlin in payers . he's a university lecturer in history and political philosophy in plymouth. we have patrick senningson. he is the editor and founder of 21st century one there and elizabeth we crossed alexander guerrero. he is an international legal analyst is gentleman cross talk rules and effect. that means you can jump any time you want, and i always appreciate it. all right, let's start out with john. you know, jen over the last few days there's been a lot of insight baseball about, you know, what time is going to do with ukraine and we have these uh, under wide variety wide spectrum of opinions coming from people that presumably will find find themselves in trumps. official or bit in january, but let me ask you, let me, let's ask some very broad, simple questions and most people in the mainstream don't even get to here to the united states and the u. k. through nato and their products are ukraine,

are sending missiles into the heart of russia. well, does rush, i have the right to retaliate against the u. k. in the united states. well, the question of right i think is the relevance to provide the question of whether israel has the right to exist when international relations, what counts he's not right, but might. and here we are. russia has the might and the right i would say, go ahead. well yes uh well i, i don't disagree. i'm not saying it doesn't have the right. i'm just saying that that is not a useful tool for analysis and stuff. sure. relations, because uh, rules are waged exactly when there is a disagreement about right. and ultimately, is, might that decides smoke? we're all here sitting in different parts of europe. your, in moscow, i'm in paris. the, the other company cases around the world. we don't know, lots of biden or whoever is running the united states is going to do. we call that

that no any because we're not close and don't have access to the internal decision making. but also because the people themselves don't know. because in a whole situation, everything depends on the decisions of the opposite side. now we can say, i think as commentators is we know the general line. so we know that the americans are programmed for violence and more violence. i think that's been cleared enough for 20 authors. he is, they didn't really have any of the tools in their toolbox than that. russia, by contrast, does, of course it has fallen, so it is disposal. but it also has a, a receipt which as far as i can tell, is very calculating and very rational. and news that it mustn't push things too far for police knows the risk of pushing things too far. so yes,

on the one hand, i think that's a biden is playing a totally nicholas stick game. it does what they seemed like at 1st a few days ago. when, when he announce this thing, he noticed these missiles being sent into russia, they listed because the goal was simply to prevent from, from negotiating a piece. but this other reading, which the general the retard general who's been at pointed to the ukraine portfolio outlined on fox news. he said, well, maybe this is a kind of employee, so that truck can then come back from that and have some kind of all it problems to, to we don't know. we do not know my, in my opinion, the question is if, if we, if we think as i do that, russia is winning on the battlefield. of course that could hold up and then you can have smoke. but leaving aside that scenario, my, i think the question is, how far can rupture go in terms of its victory without inflicting

a humiliating defeat on the incoming administration in the united states? well, that's really well done. if it's been in good faith is to faith and i and, and this is something that i've talked about with you and others on this program ever since they started the special military operation. the wes, i'm going to and directed to patrick the west deals and controlling narratives. ok, but negative. so in reality we, they're very rarely the same because you want a narrative that baby gives the impression that you are being able to create a reality. well, this administration is bundled that up pretty badly. but patrick, you know, this whole discussion about, you know, trump in 24 hours end of the conflict. and i tend to think this conflict is going to end on the battlefield. natalie, go? she ation table. patrick? yeah, the and donald trump's pre sold this is he's going to get a great deal. he's going to keep, you know, he's got a man,

a from the american people to wine this conflict down, he's going to come back with a great deal. the problem is, is in doubt looking at the so called, subject matter experts that the trump administration has selected. i doubt that they have the really the knowledge and the appreciation for the actual situation as it's develop the last 3 years. and as it is now. and beyond and, and donald trump, himself has a very probably scant understanding of the depths in the 8 ball that the united states and nato are actually behind. and that ukraine itself is behind. with this concept, there is no good deal for the, for nato, or for the west or for the united states, or there's no victorious. what one advisors saying that if, if prudent doesn't negotiate with trump, we're going to open the spigots for aids. going to make everything we've given the last few this far. it looked like peanuts. well, that's music to moscow. here is as far as i'm concerned, because this is death by

a 1000 cuts for nato. and it means ukraine's going to be weaker. it's going to be a dysfunctional, rob state, and they might very well lose odessa in the process and from a g, a strategic point of view, that's game over for nato southern front as far as really, really, i'm just saying that i just wonder all of these a pseudo intellectuals, opining all the time. do they even understand the significance of odessa? i tend to doubt it here. well, it, alexander, one of the things that the i've been saying from the very beginning is why would moscow negotiate with any of these people? we've already gone through minutes one minutes to a stem bowl. i mean again, you know, i don't want more to continue. but the only way for this war to come to an end is a and a determination on the battlefield because the west is de legitimized itself as a negotiating partner. that at least that's my point of view, alexander. and that's why russia basically needs to keep proceeding with a it's

a rash on the battlefield, just to not only possibly date this regions where they are at present to you. but also let's see more and more lance, which will be able to be, look, i wouldn't say negotiated that that wouldn't be seen in the future as arrived of russia to hold and to have peace on protection and security with this kind of buffer zone built into play, so united states wants to keep spinning your band forces to use, for example, long range and sizes, or even like medium range missiles or gas or some sort of this means that us, you will have to decide that they need to continue more and more interior of the brain and so maybe they reach tier because if what the rest, your needs is, security, warranties. and presently russia has not many depth. and also russia has another fear, which is they have the ability to choose whether they want to have the initiative

or not on the battlefield. what they have on the west end side is only attempts to react, and the more we try 3, we're against russia by pushing them to the leaving it. this means that the rest of it will not be able to sit on the, on the, on the table and discuss any kind of preconditions because russia has, like people said before, not only rights but also lives. and even this will be lost and you saw these last, the ok, the weapons use on the battlefield. this has best of 2 worlds. this means that russia can use a kind of weapon that no one in the west has an equivalent. but also it can have a deterrent effect, but at this thing done, it is the same role as nuclear weapons because it doesn't have the side effects, it can be more additional, more localized to go through. so if worse, it has this wonderful guy. why would the rest of the side? it's from the beginning,

the only plans that they have when this stuff is especially going through a correction, i don't see any reason why they should be so and you know, tell me what's really missed and all of this clap trap that we keep hearing is that this in no way shape or form is actually helping ukraine mean and this was always missed in these discussions. go, yeah, i, i agree with said the 2 previous speakers about. so what i'm trying to emphasize is that war is the continuation of politics, by other means. in other words, you 5 people in order to obtain a piece, your advice will in order to obtain an outcome and of the i see for russia now. because as i say, we don't know want to the united states, he's going to do, we know how the american foreign policy administrators stablish from it is structured. it's very one dimensional, it's will violence violence. the russian side is more nuanced. but in the way that presents the bigger island,

because how is russia evening assuming is alexander says, and i'm sure he's right, that they can be progress on the battlefields, maybe even to care for whatever my question is, my, my, my, my, the thing of the quest i, putting to myself is how can such a military victories if indeed they are, leads to a political settlement? that is the problem. of course, they can lead to a political sacrament in ukraine. they can be receiving change in ukraine, and that can be so lensky can flee and go off to wherever he's got his video or whatever that could happen. that's one scenario, probably the only realistic scenario actually. but us, we will know this is nothing more with ukraine, is what with native to how can russia a chief of victory on the ground by me like she means and then have a political agreement with nate. so when both sides, russia and nato have puts the issue of defeat to a victory on the next,

the central level. because russia says it's a alexis central president. of course, nato says that it's an exercise. john, i think the idea, let me throw this a patrick on, i think for rush it is because it's fighting the collective west. ok. and western countries are supplying material and intelligence and personnel to tat the russian russian sovereignty. the rest is not packing the. okay. and so attacking the united states, maybe it. so maybe that's a different conversation. but it is thought makes essential for nato. it's reputation only. it's maybe that's a central but not from a security point of view i have to that's, that's false, patrick. yeah, it's, it's, the problem is the data, something's got to break the balancing act of narratives that john just laid out so eloquently. there something's got a break, and this, the united states isn't going to this, this position. and it's, it's the approach to this europe. however, i think will be the breaking point politically in any way and what's happening. i

just got back from central europe and hungry. having spoken to people in the ministry defense and so forth, they're very clear that they want to cease fire and they've wanted to cease fire for awhile. so slovakia hungry central, you have to close your to the front line. the more sanity you hear the further away from the front line, the more crazy the talk. so how is this going to play out politically? if europe isn't sustainable for europe, for europe in natal members, if they ended it today, this, the donald trump in the united states could talk a wind for nato. they've militarize the entirety of the new line of contact between east and west. trump can say you got to pay your fair share, spend your 2 percent 10. the guy that happened, jump in here, drug have to go to a hard break, and after that hard, great, we'll continue our discussion. i'm trumping you brain. stay with our to the,

the russian states never is as tight as one of the most sense community best most i'll send send up the, in the 65 to 5 and speed. the one else calls question about this, even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin media mission, the state on russia to day and split the ortiz full net, keeping our video agency, roughly all the band on youtube. the payment said this was a request, which is the

portion near wes, lots of stuff is a lot out of the heat at the fortune of us. and that suddenness portions here goes away with the result of the story and bushek, nate or studio. and i see for sure, option that list be so for ship. oh, for starter the critics will go straight and you won't have to worry the was a school in your welski territory. so this could save the natural logos of it. so form wish portion or the for you to talk about a football i still knew about chavo in gold and i'm a site is close. i you was a category stores for us at ocean and continued to go out and dined it building out . probably not sure the south pieces don't see a bar stool bowl, so it could be so full, so comfortable at the blog post and discovery. smith gosh, can't foolish voice coming out on the subject, but before you're still going to me. so i'm on the publishing. i'm kind of,

i just don't look up the line, you go use the talk about some of what you get to of competitors dorski provides bundle of g the conflict of the some about on there. not. i mean, yeah, the best. uh, but we have tulsa shipment of stuff, some of the the welcome back across stuff where all things are considered. i'm here a little strange. we're talking about trump and ukraine. the okay, let's start out with alexander. i have the solution. ok, everybody, everybody in write it down but are not a posted in, put it in your wallet because peter lavelle has the solution. if i'm being serious,

actually we need a helsinki 2 point. oh, what we need to do is we need a european security architecture. they've been so reality as of today, we work out and then we've worked in what do i need? all players, we solve security issues, the indivisibility of security. west is forgotten that term. it's not part of their for lexicon anymore, and that will solve the ukraine. prices, the ukraine dilemma, as we work in words, we don't start there. we start here, then we go there. alexander and my right. yeah. beautiful. i mean cousin case have been trying motion for that full inspection is not in the original idea on my part . sorry. yes. yes, yes, we all know that that's the risk of try over and over. but the west all is rejected it. why? because they thought they, they didn't have a domain. the control over all kinds of you political decisions worldwide. so until

we have this in the west, i think it to be highly unlikely to watch such a scenario to be enforced unluckily on the battlefield. but well, why? i mean presently what we have is the west. we think itself in a position. why don't you have only an alternative capitalism? meaning that you have to go for the military solution and once you get the ads, only after that, they'll finally be able to recognize that there is no other alternative, rather than accept that then the other side is superior. instead of having a balance, which is what everyone desires and gets the best solution for everyone, i need to pull the ballast worldwide, which will be able to work with all different forces, present the phone line, and we would use the united nations for that. i mean, until now, do you like the admissions was for creative for this, for us. and what we are witnessing is one side, trying to get the other side,

the job every vile over it. and it says on trying to spread its own ideals to the other side. so this is a matter of survival and the survival can only be achieved through the capital ation off your phone. and so we'd be, if we wait as less than those aren't putting ourselves in disposition, then there's no interruption. but there the, the, the, the solution, the right solution, of course the, that's the one that you mention. we need a, you were being solution security solution for every and then that's when i say about when i speak of european, i'm not mentioning what usually in the academies me see, wait national level as we blue are, which is your opinion. and yet, because usually i hear who saw on the line and then other other sherry pole uh, body stronger in unit speaking. i'm up to you as if you were being union is itself pure and then you have the rest of the law. but we have central, we have eastern europe, we have all the balkans. we have rush,

you will have georgia, we have the congress's region. they are, all of them are included in your initial or not only with them, but also with many other players that can help as a key security, stability and balance worldwide. we have many other players, no business turning into the ideal. i idealist podcast here. so john, please for lots of cold water, go ahead. guest of that's what i would like to do. i'm sorry to say that i think that's, that's a completely unrealistic scenario of how much like you, i may wish states in another universe in a parallel universe in the matrix beyond the matrix. the fact that you, you said just now you started and you finished, you said, oh, sorry, alexander, did you know the russian has been one thing that since then, since you didn't finish your sentence. alexander russia as being one thing that since at least 1899. since i least nicholas the 2nd, when uh, nicholas the 2nd to convince the 1st type of peace conference,

which was contained under the initiative of the russian impress, then rushed to try it again in 1938 in the road to munich. demetrius agreement was scott, but largely because the western power has refused a collective security agreement. then, obviously as being as, as pizza said to this, being helsinki and 197172. that is the, i see in 1990. all these attempts have failed. and therefore, i would say that the best outcome that we can hope for. and i say this with a heavy heart is and you called well, i think that's what we will have the cold, who gave us a balance. and he was a piece, the cold war was a piece. it was the so source of all but it was until and much as i would once again, i wish there was another outcome. but i called the c one i called the c one. and i'm afraid, i think that the breakdown has been so severe. and so a radical, the breakdown of relations that i absolutely cannot see any way in which they could

be a collective security agreement for generation. well, the john, you know, meanwhile one else, i mean, i liked the separation, i left the west coast. so with a mean every waiting with the, you know, their troubles are now wanting around the world. okay. they need to, they need to resolve their own problem just before the export it to everybody else, you know, but some patrick b. um, um, we will um, professor mirror sam or he, he came up again wrote a paper a little over a year ago called an ugly victory and the russian will probably achieve because it will be of the battlefield. i have a coal or larry too much along the lines with jump jobs that have a lovely victory, miserable piece. but that's probably what the best we can hope for. patrick, the meaning of the currents credit crisis right now, especially what's happened over the last week is very instructive. if you look at the whole basis of nato. so what vitamin putin's just after the attack comes,

we're launched into russian territory due to the argument from the west, is how they sold is we're allowing zelinski to use us weapons. that's the argument that the west is selling. what put and then what russia is saying as well? well, he's doing an article 5 and reverse. they like to tell this tropi an attack on one is back on all the improvements challenge, the western saying, well attacked by one. in this case, the us or britain of france, we regard as an attack by all. so that that's a real crisis from nato, because think about it. if pressure was to respond to striking nato military facility in poland for instance, or another country, they've taken enough hits on the chin with regards to a missile strikes in, in russia, russian territory. how is europe going to regard that action by russia? are they going to look at as a response or an unprovoked attack on they don't know. i think europe will make the

political calculation that this is getting out of hand. and they also, many in europe will throw their hands up at that point. the conversation is changing rapidly around, you know, like i was below so, but they have to make that calculation, peters what i'm saying in the political realm, this all matters and it becomes military strategy. it'd be on top of that. you are there lots of good, good. the logic is impeccable, but, you know, uh, you know, i always try copious notes for these programs and i, here's one line, year of western leaders, a group of imbeciles. i mean, how can a group of imbeciles make rational decisions? mean these people are not serious. john, i'm sorry, let me go to you. you know, they're, they're not serious about patrick is right. uh, patrick is right. we use oh, on the other hand, patrick you said it's a military decision. it's a political decision. that's what i was referring to earlier. yes, they are in the sales, but they also put units and we've seen with this with shots,

shots is now fighting and deluxe, and on the issue of peace, that small, nothing. you know, that's quite bank. if the biggest country in western europe is fighting a data election between paysimple between the s p d and the c d u, that's not nothing. my call is that was in domestic terms, but he tried stone to forget in 2022, not very effectively. so, i mean, of course, i don't even want to contemplate this scenario, patrick, do you just outlined? although it's obviously on the table, what will be the response for europe? god knows, i mean, i even measure what it will be to riley to double down and riley against russia because you are just present. i bought spots spots. we don't have it though. and sandra, what, what europe are we talking about here? i mean, as far as i can tell,

there's never been an election in the european union about this conflict. okay. again, it's an elite, elite agenda. okay. well, why is schultz in this in this dilemma? because these more of this war is not popular. it's very detrimental to me, i would even say, well, certainly for the existence of nato, which could go in passing into the night and i would, i would be very happy. but, you know, then you have the respect of how much you love or hate to european union is there and it's suffering as a result of this, of this war. but it's political leads are not in lock step with their people. go ahead, alexander, that's a desktop and it scares me the most is to see a witness that they've been you and you know, we don't have any kind of for elections. we just vote for the environment and that's it. and from there, what's that really? what's allow me for i've gotten what's the phone, says mark martin, that's flowers. as you know, they can only vote for the commission and that's pretty much the powers that they're being following on test. so it's kind of an attempt to fool everyone in

european union. the citizens to demonstrate that they have any power over anything, but in reality they have absolutely none of because suddenly out of the blue, you can choose a new and you're being condition. either you can choose a, comes commissioners from every member states and you are not even going to check x . for example, they're interested, they pass that just going through the volt and they're going to be best. for example, when i see colors linked with the information after everything that she has been saying, i don't think she is the right person to push for the research solution that it's under uninstalled to, sorry, uh the opinion doesn't decide military policy in spite of its claim off, that's why we need to concentrate on this the national policy of breaking products in germany and of course of the united states. that's one matches. that's why that's why i don't understand. if you realize when you check them up, united states, you can find also the same when we speak about vitamins policies. well by then

suppose these, they are not, it's cheese on policies. they are surely developed. we a lot of actors that we, most of them, we don't know who they are, and by then he's only the better to bring the mask, choose the news to read the message. let me let me get down the last minute. we'll try to be any different. and would you be any different, john? as well, of course i think he will be different. i mean, i say as cool. so i think yes, i think he will be different. i mean, in spite of everything, in spite of the must have reservations, i have about his appointments. he is a narcissist, he wants to be big. he wants to pull off a great show he wants to put on the legacy. and you know, that would be lots of big promises, putting an end to the wolf as state. and so him, he loves a deal. uh so um and as i think i mentioned earlier,

the general who is appointed for relations with, with ukraine, claims that the escalation by biking is a way of giving him some room for admin role. kelly his and well known to stops news viewers. other than that, we'll have to see gentlemen, that's all the time i want to thank my guest in paris, plymouth, and in lisbon. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at our pc next time. remember prospect rules the in the 1941, the radical right wing was stone shall be nice. ation seized power and foam. the independent state of croatia, pull on the 10th, which kind of of um with a still a system of these 300, not one of the main targets was children. historical sources say because gosh,

killed over 72000 children. business it. my god, they have done a roll of nose up that of course i say you can bring that down one up front that be upset them with general just goal of fish. the on on that even the germans themselves were horrified by the atrocities committed by the starship. fluttering of that. so there's a lot from bill of global mistake. a theme is at least our stuff to possibly be too tight and not to allow me more research on the

the russian intelligence reveals was to say, so profiting. so up to par ukraine, aiming to freeze the cold very by sending tens of thousands of circles. please keep it syrian um, sauls is coming from the ongoing, fighting with terrorist groups on the outskirts of a lead to more opportunities private to give things a little bit files and present upset i go makes the announcement time because the end of is really cute agreement. and power the is yes, go on the 11 p. m here in the russian capital. welcome what ever you're catching the new dial from today. this is all.