[000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle is the clock ticking for ukraine's former president zalinski. it certainly appears so it is hard to imagine him clinging to power after his arrogant meltdown in the oval office. can the european save him doubtful? maybe the ukrainian people should decide his fate. the

crossing zalinski i'm joined by my guest, matthew crossed and in washington. he is a professor of national security and director of academic transformation at bowie state university in virginia. we have changed address, he is a former us diplomat and a former advisor to us senate republican leadership. all right, gentlemen, crossed off girls in effect, that means you can jump anytime you want and i always appreciate it. okay, i'm going to cut to the chase. jamie, are you in virginia here? the basically question of this from fundamental question of this program is up. um, is that lensky finished? we seeing him exiting the stage. jim, i think the odds are very good. he'll be gone by may 1st just pulling the number off by year here. i mean, look, as trump said to him in washington, he doesn't hold any cards. and everybody knows that's true. and europeans are still supporting him, but you know what? they don't hold on the cards either. they don't have the money, they don't have the military equipment. they don't have the military production capacity. so they can talk

a brave gain. but let's say somehow get the americans back on board to back. stop him further, boots on the ground and planes in the air as mr. storm reported. they're out of luck to at this point. well, we have the americans and the russians matter, and they will decide what happens next. and the last can view all the was i think the real question is, is whether his sponsors in c, i a, or m i 6 or wherever else decide that he needs to go. maybe we'll put him on the from vietnam will put them on the per jim plan if you won't leave it in matthew, i'll all the more so, i mean, if you look at it, there's a, there's a silver lining to this. i mean his awful behavior in the oval office it gives a reason gives the trump administration to say, hey, we're done with this guy. okay. they didn't like him in the 1st place. he's a grifter, it is well known, and a trump has made it very clear that he does. he has no interest in furthering a war. biden started senselessly involving the united states that

a confrontational proxy war with, with russia. trump has bigger ideas, so the zalinski did him a favor, matthew to, to a certain degree. that's true. i'm always a little hesitant when we, we start replacing leaders and we're not exactly sure what it comes with. i don't know, hey the you hang on, hang on. at the end of my introduction i said maybe the ukrainian people should decide is made. so i got, i covered all my bases that are go ahead, matthew. no, no, i know, and it's not even so much about that. it's more about i just feel rush has also been very, very adamant over the years now saying, we don't really care who's in office in tier, right. as long as the neighborhood itself behaves the way we feel that it should and we have the greatest power in the neighborhood. and that's there is a certain amount of respect and a certain amount of acquiescence. and i don't mean that in a negative way is paid attention to the greatest power of the neighborhood. the landscape could be in place and key of as long as the sort of understood what the roles and the relationships are meant to be. and that's always been his biggest

problem, you know, and tim, the, there's a, the french u. k. put a plan that there was a pass over to trump and visions. i'm quoting your temporary month, long truce in the air on the seas and on energy infrastructure. and then that's when western troops will come in. and it's not been very well explained to me, jim, is the truth. is this a unilateral truth on the part of the ukrainian so the russians supposed to be invited to the street, cuz the ones ask them and i'll tell you they're not interested. so what is all of this plus are coming out of europe? these are all non starters, tim, as well as they yes, exactly. if, if the russians don't agree to it and these troops enter in essentially as combatants, i don't think that's what the british and french have in mind. stormer and the chrome came to washington to try to sweet talk, trump and back, stopping them without which this is totally on viable, as is as large as the lensky goes, that he had half a brain. he was come here,

sign that stupid mineral deal, which doesn't mean much of that. he thinks that's it. yes mister president. thank you mister president, hoping that he would get somehow the same kind of by end that stormer and mccormick, we're trying to arrange at this point, i don't know, i think they're still going to go back to the well and try to find some way to tell the americans, if you can rage a truce with the russians, the russians say they won't settle for as far they only work permit settlement. but i think that's still what their head is, that that's what they're going to try to do. i don't see how it's going to work. yeah, matthew, i mean, i think is also sorry peter, if i could just real quick jump in, is this that? well, i've always believed one of the biggest flaws of what happened in the oval office last week was the simple fact that and when zalinski has been 3 years, travelling all over the world, let alone western europe on all over the world where he has been constantly fed in lauded and praised and you can sort of buy into your own cooling, you know, you're drinking your own cool late at that point. and i think he probably came to washington dc thinking, well,

i'll be able to influence from despite whatever trumpet said in the past as far as what his positions are. and maybe, as james mentions the french and the english also thought they'd be able to maneuver that. but it always amazes me in this conflict overall is that certain sides of always stated very unequivocally where they stand and what they believe in . and just the other side is tended to say, well, you don't really mean that though, right? we can, we can change that, can't weigh into like, no, no, you can't change that. this is what we believe. and we just refuse to, to buy into what they're telling us. and that put us into problems for the math. they did this, the follow up of what you're say. i've been reading reports that earlier today, that doesn't lensky had had been meeting with congressional democrats. and it's been suggested through this reporting that, that he take the stand that he did in the oval office. i'm believing that that drum could be a would be a pushover, and obviously that didn't work out well,

it's the democratic party that's also the problem here. matthew, wouldn't you agree? or if that's true and i will, if it's the that's true. if, if that's true, i would say what that really indicates more than anything else is how much the democratic party has still not learned any lessons from the election. it just lost that it's taking positions that are on tenable. it's 18 positions that are not realistic and as a result, defeat comes from it. that's actually disappointing in a, in, in tim, i mean, again, if you just look at the main broad seats in, in, well legacy media, they keep talking about a european piece plan. but they're not talking about piece at all. they're talking about the continuation of the conflict. and somehow i hate using the term, but creating a back stop where the americans will come to the rescue. the europeans are not talking about peace at all. they want more, they are the, are the party of war. jim,

the edison edit speech that's and i'm new to hex upset of the force goes in. it could not be a nature of force with an article 5 guarantee. but this is this, i think, a low dollar to democrats, but i think the europeans also want to try the trip for trump administration into approving such a backstop. knowing that it would not be there to police of peace, but find some way to continue the war. and get the americans involved in this war with a day to force. so i don't think was just the democrats advising as i'll ask you to do, is i think was a voices from europe as well. i would say primarily from great britain, because after all here starting or nothing sees the leader of the free world. so i think there's a bigger agenda going on here because what george street is only excuse not his own man. he doesn't have much agency. he's a pop in for the people who for his strings. the question was who pull the strings? what do you bet would truck? yeah, well and, and i think matthew's right he, you know, he's been drinking his own cool aid here. i've never, never be getting a push back. you longer laying the,

the so called the president of the european commission. she says in the last few hours, europe is going to she announce a $150000000000.00 euro defends a plan. matthew, where is that money going to come from? and did anybody in the european union was anybody asked about that? okay, i mean, they're, they want a perpetual war. they want militarization of the european economy, which is in the dumps right now. that can only come from cutting social welfare programs. not a good idea, matthew, you know, and also is sort of it to an earlier point. you were mentioning peter, who i've written about this quite extensively, and it's not a popular opinion here in america. but most of this positioning and that terms of propping up ukraine militarily in this conflict, the entire 3 years never really had a possible realistic objective of we mean a war is in upside, russia is defeated, the war is over and ukraine wins. instead, what happens is just simply,

we use ukraine as the meat grinder and we just sort of inflict damage and weaken rough as much as we can just for the sake of doing it. and that's really the only 2 objective and that is the one area of what i've tried to mention before. people accuse me of being a show for us or, or i'm in the back pocket of food in the long side. trump is the simple fact that this is part of ukraine when you have this position because it's the, you mentioned, it's an endless fail me. it's a meat. the meat grinder is in ukraine. it's not anywhere else. so if you just continue along with no, when the people ultimately you're hurting this the ukrainians more than anyone else . yeah, well um, essentially what the reason why they're doing this is because the crane is losing and it's losing badly. and jim, and this is where we get this desperation or, i mean, you know, looking at the proclamation is coming out of europe, i caught you, i call it officially sponsored paranoia. and the russians are going to take paris any minute now, didn't you? didn't you know that, jim? well, you know, i, i,

this is everything that's just been said. i think there's another institutional ingredient. look, we've seen raised for the 1st time by eli musk by a representative massey. i think a center lead from utah. the idea is that the americans might actually leave nato. and, and of course this is something i've been calling for for years. because remember on like a treated the has to get through the setup, the president could pull us out by his own signature, just like trump did from the i there pretty and bush did with the abm treaty. i think that terrifies them. it also terrifies the you, cause what is the you, it's not much more than nato's concubine. so you've got people like uh they don't want a fond of lion and kaya carlos or somebody like this. i think they're terrified that at some point if the americans try to europe lose their individual european countries are gonna start looking out for their own interest rather than what these new york results are. jim is we hit the break here, may be with the us will pull out, it's back, stop as i say,

the europeans would sober up and actually negotiate something. oh, come on. i know it's there, inc. capable right now, but they might have to be forced. all right, i'm not, no gentleman, we're going to, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on zalinski say, with our team we look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except we're so shorter is that conflict with the 1st law show your identification . we should be very careful about visual intelligence at the point, obviously is to place a trust rather than fit the various jobs. i mean with the artificial intelligence, we have somebody with him and the

robot must protect his phone. existence was alexis the. this is a story of offense from off a century ago when devastating psych lynch of a struck the remote island of my wishes, the, the cost of the cycle and there was a mess in motion that to no follow. uh no uh yeah, cause uh telephone lines and all has been damaged. always email me there or not or the whole issue is completed. so appreciate that lets the options have yes and so, so yeah, and you know, cuz our pool much new is more pretty short because most good because like poor much

missile. that's the movie pump our school day for me. what is the 2nd deal? so that's kind of how much we serve your school. so you deal with blowing for them to open invoice. the 14 i said that he's 75. literally sally's our brand new deal. now not from a pro se if it's that the still know to yourself to deal with me with the dot org charlie, charlie, you mean used to be as it how legit and it it goes to be thought. yeah, i'm not sure if i'm going to publish in their p i to last year for no mother you can about them for me yet. obviously. either way i, i will indeed on there but can one year solve warning and demonte the risk go to use their pool. most the the welcome back. across stock were all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle. true manager were discussing zalinski,

the okay, now were joined by patrick hennings and in plymouth. he is the editor in founder of 21st century wired. come welcome to the program, patrick belatedly, but welcome. i. i don't know how much of the program you've already heard, but i want to go right to the u. k. prime minister. he said this and the last new cycle. russia is a menace in our waters in our air space and on our streets. obviously he's trying to imitate churchill in some form or another very badly i would say. so patrick, you're in plymouth right now. right. right now. yes, that's okay. can you look out the window? are there any rushing troops on the streets f, i know the i'm if i, if i'm listening to the u. k. prime minister that that's the assumption that you draw patrick. i hate to disappoint you peter. yeah there's, there's no sign at all of,

of the red army patrolling the streets of plymouth. know this, and this is of the fed association of, of history the, the, hitler eyes ation of the russian president. these are all problems that are emblematic of everything that has gotten europe into this mindset right now, which is a very dangerous mindset and they can't pull themselves out, is just quite extraordinary. that is curious dimer is uh, i think political called him the, the leader of the free world. now, according to the headline this morning, and it's, it's so funny how it's kind of brought a britain back together with europe, you know, breaks it and everything, bury the hatchet. we're all together all for $11.00 for all. and this is called me, this is your own 8. 0, now this is natal without the united states. but the problem is the main card that they've been playing for the last 3 years is the threat of an article 5 trap or like

a trip wire. and are they going to get that article 5 trapped with without the united states? you see, because everything hinges on that threat of the old, you know, the ultimate war that breaks out. oh, is attack on one. is that attack on all? this is what everybody has been banding about in europe in order to poke russia and ukraine was supposed to be the ultimate trip wire. zalinski himself said this is my mission. this is the reason for my existence is to bring ukraine into nato. and if that's not going to happen, which doesn't. yeah, but it's going to happen. yeah. but he was, he was on the casting couch and he got the job. okay. so i'm not sure if it's his mission. it was the people that hired them. a matthew, you know, we had the, the, the french president again in the last new cycle. they, you know, if we don't, and i'm paraphrasing right now, we don't stop the russians now they're going to be in mel dove in romania. i mean, does he have any knowledge of geography?

is advisors have any knowledge of geography? how are they going to get there? they're going to have to go through all of ukraine. i mean, these people are imbeciles, matthew, or what? i think what's funny is how we use we don't even have to go that far back in the history. we can do just more recent history, modern history, to know the absurdity of, of the paranoia that it would just spoken about is russia didn't do anything with the baltics join made it, it didn't do anything with poland. join made it, it didn't do anything when hungry joined may, though it didn't do anything when sheffield joined, may tell. but now that they were flirting with ukraine and, and always at all from the very beginning, ukraine is our red line. we can't allow this for multiple and many reasons. please believe us, that we're not bluffing. and we challenge the bluff obviously. but so right, you're telling me that russia is going to spend 3 years going through the meat grinder, that's ukraine. and that's their leaping pad into the earlier places that they could have jumped without any interference. it's just, it's a, it's a logical,

it's a logical in a rational. so you just make sure i have to ask, why do we talk that way? and i think it was mentioned earlier by a buyer, a new guest is that that feeds the panic that has its own agenda, an interest in europe, if we can make people afraid of the russians again, the way we used to be afraid of the soviets then we can do certain things in our own, in our own neighborhood that we want to have the defense wise, militarily european power wise. yeah, well, to me, i would advise europeans to be afraid of their leaders. they're more of a threat to their life. and then, then the russians are, you know, jim, it's interesting is that, you know, we've had nato, which is the european security architecture, was designed without russia and against russia. they want to redo this all over again. they do not want to be in a position the european side is to negotiate with the russians. that's the fundamental error, jim. well, that's right. i mean, look, what was the original formula americans in russians out,

germans down and you can write that large as europeans down. you know, we, we talked earlier about, well, we'll ukrainian people at some point decide to replace the landscape. i mean, right. i remember that the other russian demands are, do you not certification demilitarization? something's got to change and what is ever left of ukraine? and i think the same fear exists in other european capitals that the leaders, they currently have these, these, these people who are really, i think traders their own nations. they need to be replaced as well to, at some point the peoples of europe. what are the linguist germans differential ever need to decide that they need better leaders and the ones they have that you know, patrick, over the last few weeks i've been debating, discussing, with my guess like a yell to 2 point. oh. and more specifically, um, uh, nixon goes the china in reverse. i think this is, you know, this is what trump is thinking about if he can do it. i don't know, but i think that's what really motivates him. and on top of it, you know,

when you have the british and the ukrainians yelling at the top of their lungs, trump remembers russia, russia, russia, they're not scoring any points with him at all. the is trump thinking big picture and i want my audience to now i have a lot of problems with a trans foreign policy, but not on this issue. patrick. now when you say you alter to point out peter, you know that, but i don't, i don't rage. i don't say it in a negative way. i don't think it's a dirt. oh no, no, no, it's not. it's not. but it, remember you all to it was the winners of world was coming together. so what trump is doing is trying to re position himself to be on the winning side. he doesn't want to go down with this disastrous proxy war. this vanity project is i'd like to call it nato's vanity project. europe's vanity project, trump wants to be on that you all to stage with vladimir putin and whoever else is sensible in stain enough to want to sit next to them to make it a, you know,

a try factor. so this is the other problem is europeans have sculpted the language . you guys have talked about this previously, this unprovoked war or, or pollutants or of choice, the full scale invasion, full scale invasion. yeah. right. okay. there's a reason for this and even all the troops about the budapest, memorandum, and russia invading georgia in 2008. all these things are on these watch. we're drawing heavy rotation because they want to preclude any chance of diplomacy. so there's the build. they've been building a narrative that russia can't be trusted to do diplomacy. they'll never abide by any zalinski did it again when he started in the oval office put in as violated all the seats fires, gluten violated the mixed agreements. we tried, but put in can't be trusted, that's what this is for. and then the other thing is reparations. the whole thing about ukraine being destroyed, most of the damages in russian control is going to be in russian control. there. is there going to be doing the reconstruction?

russia is, but the want to extract reparations. well, what's that? that's the $300000000.00 plus in russian assets and reserves and risk escrow and euro clear. so they're, they're making a play for that. parlaying that as quote reparations and then the reparations that ply get shared amongst western europeans and perhaps america, a black rock and whoever it's a heist is what it is. it's a k per a. what i need to add to the patrick same because i think there's a really great point to that isn't being talked about here in the states, at least that when it comes to you also 2 point oh and the only mixing you're going to china, really a critical element of both of those situations was that in terms of, in this case, the quote unquote adversary, russia and china were more respected like as legitimate partners on a global stage. and there are too many actors on the western side right now that are really steadfast, determined to prevent russia from having that kind of position, that it would not be allowed to have any respect on the global stage. and russia

has spoken about this open late for years, is that part of this maneuvering in ukraine has been the idea that you, we will make you see us because up to now you refuse to see us. you will not listen and you won't see. so this is the only thing you're going to respond to and, and it's just ridiculous because when you see what's going on in gaza, in the sense of the full scale invasion, just google image, gaza, and google image downtown t of and let me see, let me see if you can compare full scale and visions. i gotcha, that's absolutely spot on here. jamie, i could say you wanted to jump in, go ahead. yeah, yeah, just a, just to pick up. all of you said about nixon to china, and wouldn't matthew said about providing some respect to russia. i mean, look of china and, and the soviet union were all very much at odds back in the days of dixon. i think that part of the thinking of washington would be, not only can we do a reverse nixon to try to, but we can still now drive the russians and the chinese a partner,

i think that's part of whatever strategic thinking is going on. i'm sure the russians are aware of that, and that's not gonna work. so i, you know, again, i think part of the, the basis of what is it seems to be the attempt here on the part of washington is isn't going to come to fruition. yeah. patrick, yeah i, i take it on board. what you said about the winter is that you all to absolutely brilliant observation. and that's what trump is. that's what trump wants because he wants to major powers. going back to a early 20th century 19th century paradigm, the only difference is the u. k. is that at the table and that's why there's so angry, they've made themselves so irrelevant. go ahead and i'll say this is the big danger right now is if the united states pulls out of ukraine is, or is not occupying the diplomatic and that geo political space. there's a danger that in that vacuum, someone else can slide in and cause a lot of trouble, like britain, for instance, that would drag the united states back in later,

after provocations against russia, who's been behind all these provocations every time. there's been a potential breakthrough. all of a sudden zelinski attacks targets inside mainland russia is happen time and time again or something happens. and so these provocations could really cause trouble and it could both force the us back in that to me is a huge risk. and trump and the united states have to be very careful that they don't, uh, you know, to come to that kind of an outcome. because that would be, could potentially be a disaster. that is going to cause a whole nother well face any problem in my defense. i've got a lot of push back a few weeks ago even a couple of months ago. but i said this could always escalate. and now i think this is where we are right now. the foolishness in short sightedness of the europeans. they obviously want to escalate. i hope the russians and a trump don't fall for gentlemen. absolutely fascinating conversation, much appreciated, and that's all the time we have one to think up my guess in washington, virginia and in plymouth. and of course i want to thank our viewers for watching us

here at ortiz. see you next time. remember, cross on the the, it needs to come to the rushing state. never as tight as i'm one of the most sense community best ingles, all sense and up the, in the system must be the one else holes. question about this, even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin mission, the state on the rush to day and split our t supposed neck, even our video agency,

roughly all the band on youtube. the services for the question, did you say even closer to the you mention all size area might tons of the images for l, as far as far as set and of course, freezing temperatures. now, while you might have the wrong sort of any of those things today, we'll show you a different side to side barrier. one way asian traditions with cutting edge innovation. the this is a story of offense from off a century ago when devastating cycle into a vase struck the remote island of nourishes. many nations stepped into healthy

young independent republic, fled by its 1st prime minister and founding father sir. see what's the governor? i'm going down the we decided to start you any sort of history with the archive for the most unbiased and accurate information the, this is the national library, keep the old newspaper. maybe it is about $240.00 volumes newspapers set to printed and published in lucius. that is, that sounds uh yeah. 1777. up to date. the newspaper weekend that has reported cycling that has is tuck lucius island on 66, february 1975. it has been so disaster as us. so many houses have been

damaged. clubs have been approved it and 9 for us and died. the, the small island of nutritious in the heart of the indian ocean is often battered by tropical cyclades. when winds of up to 280 kilometers per hour can sweep away everything in the us off the cycle. and there was a mess in motion that the no firewall, no, to the telephone lines and all have been damaged or should've is enclosure dean. as soon as you know, you know, these are some pictures of the destruction and yes, oh, there rose or destroyed by me the cycle, the trees, electricity. ok. i remember my place the yard is a big one,