Piers Morgan Uncensored - 'KGB Have You By The Balls!' Trump vs Putin | War + Tariffs With Jeffrey Sachs

Episode Date: July 31, 2025

President Trump has clearly run out of patience with Putin, reducing his 50-day deadline to end the war in Ukraine to little more than a week. The penalty will be severe tariffs, which the US says will hammer the Russian economy. Yet Russia’s economy is actually growing because of its extraordinary spending on weapons, and because oil once bound for Europe is selling freely in China and India. That’s why former president Medvedev, a close ally of Putin, says that every deadline is a step closer to a far more dangerous situation. So, who is going to blink first - Trump, or Putin? And what happens if neither of them do? Piers Morgan speaks with professor Jeffrey Sachs before also welcoming former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO Wesley Clark, author Scott Horton, Politics Dean at Moscow University and Russian state television commentator Henry Sardaryan and British veteran war reporter John Sweeney. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent and supported by: Oxford Natural: To watch their full stories, scan the QR code on your screen or visit https://oxfordnatural.com/piers/ to get 70% off your first order when you use code PIERS.I ncogni: Take your personal data back with Incogni! Get 60% off an annual plan at https://incogni.com/PIERS and use code PIERS at checkout. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's extremely dangerous, making ultimatums to Russia that are first unenforceable, but our provocations and escalations. It's not going to end the war, but it could escalate the war. Jeffrey has become an apostle of appeasement. Let's tell the people of your praying, give up on the Budapest memorandum. We're not going to help you protect your borders. We're just going to turn back on 30 years and give up on international agreements. It's a recipe for further chaos.

Jeffrey should know better. You really think that Ukraine, sir, can drive the Russian army out? By what magic wish, is this supposed to take place? You know, Scott, I've been around the military for a long, long time. And I know that they know what the stakes are in this. They know what the risks are, and they're not about to give up. President Trump has run out of patience with Vladimir Putin. That much is clear.

A 50-day deadline for the Russian dictator to end the war in Ukraine has now been cut to little more than a week. The penalty will be severe. via tariffs, which the U.S. says will hammer the Russian economy. The problem is that years of sanctions were supposed to do the same thing, and they haven't. Russia's economy is actually growing because it's extraordinary spending on weapons, and because oil, once bound for Europe, is selling freely in China and India. That's why former President Medvedev, a close ally of Putin, says that every deadline is a step

closer to a far more dangerous situation. Each new ultimatum, he wrote, is a threat and a step towards war. war, not between Russia and Ukraine, but with Trump's own country. So who's going to blink first, Trump or Putin? And what happens if neither of them do, or if they both go to war? I have an expert panel and General Wes Clark standing by, but we'll begin by digging down on the tariffs and sanctions question with economist and Professor Jeffrey Sachs. Professor Sachs, great to have you back on Uncensored. I know the line isn't great where you are. So let me just ask you just straightforwardly, If Trump in a few days launches a massive tariff war against Russia, will it have more impact on the Russian economy than the sanctions strategy, which doesn't appear to have worked?

I don't think so. I think that Trump's threats are basically unenforceable. Russia is exporting its energy to Asian countries, especially to China and India. both have made clear that they will continue to import Russian oil. The U.S. already has demonstrated it does not have clout vis-a-vis China in a trade war. I don't think Trump's threats, therefore, really amount to an end of this war. The problem is that what the Western countries are demanding is not a peace agreement. They're demanding a ceasefire. They're not ready to talk about actually the underlying causes of the conflict. And that's very frustrating because the war could end in a day.

It could end in a week if there was more honesty on both sides about what should be done. I mean, Trump clearly feels disillusioned with Putin because he feels that the tenure of their conversations they've been having bears no relation to what Putin then does. In other words, he says all the right things in the phone calls. but then immediately launches the biggest ever bombardment of Key, for example, after the last call. So Trump now feels he can't trust Putin. But from what you're saying, is that because if you're Putin, you're thinking, well, why do I need to do anything here when it's obvious to Russians that the problem here is the problem they've articulated, the encroachment of NATO onto their border, they have to protect themselves,

and so on, the arguments that you've put forward before. and that Putin therefore feels there's not much that America can do about this, short of actually engaging in direct military action, which they're probably betting will never happen. Yeah, Pyrrhus, you're exactly right. But a strange thing happened. In the initial discussions, when Trump first came in, and he sent Steve Whitkoff to Moscow,

they talked about real things. They talked about NATO enlargement. They talked about how that had to stop and so on. It looked like they were moving towards peace. Then the neocons all over the place in Europe and in the United States said, no, no, no, NATO can't be on the table. You can't talk about these real things. And the discussion from Trump and the Western leaders in general just shifted towards ceasefire

and unconditional ceasefire. We're not going to talk about anything other than ceasefire. And Putin said, I don't get it. Well, he didn't, I'm putting words in his mouth or paraphrasing. He said, but we were talking about ending the conflict. Now you're talking about a ceasefire. And the Russians have said repeatedly every day, we want to get to the root causes of this. This is not just a delay for another attack by the West.

We know how many people hate us. This is clear. They hate us in Britain. They hate us in France. They hate us in the U.S. We want to get to the root causes. We don't want just a pause. And the Western leaders never came back to even a moment of basic discussion about NATO, for example.

Mark Gruta, the Secretary General of NATO, concluded the recent NATO summit in the Hague by saying Ukraine is irrevocably going to be a NATO member. Well, duh. You know, how are we going to have a peace if the Western countries are basically saying, we're not going to discuss. anything other than what we demand. So it's a kind of a conversation of the deaf on both sides. I mean, Trump may be perturbed that he's not getting his way, but maybe he doesn't understand. The first days of discussion between the U.S. and Russia were completely different from what's happening right now. There was real discussion about the real issues of this war. I know that, because I spoke with the Russian side, I spoke with the American side,

it was actually moving towards a peace. It really was. Then suddenly, because of Starmor, because of Macron, because of Lindsay Graham, because of Dick Blumenthal, because of the CIA, because of everybody, they told Trump, no, no, no, you can't say anything about NATO enlargement, and all of that discussion ended. So this is kind of a dialogue of the deaf, and it's extremely dangerous.

Medvedev is absolutely right. Making ultimatums to Russia that are first unenforceable, but are provocations and escalations. Oh, my God, it's sad for us. It's sad for us as watching this thing. This is not honest. It's not leading anywhere. It's not going to end the war, but it could escalate the war. Jeffrey Sachs, a rather ominous way to end that, but I really appreciate you joining us.

Thank you very much. Great to be with you, thank you. Well, turning to my panel now. Now, just to be clear, I'm away from my usual studio. I'm in New York, working on a very slight delay. So I begin with a polite request for everyone on today's panel to maybe allow each other to speak and to them respond. That would be a refreshing change to some of the more aggressive shouting matches we have got into recently. Now, General Wesley Clark, the former Supreme Allied commander of NATO is with me.

Henry Sardarian, the Russian State TV commentator and politics dean at Moscow University. Scott Horton, the author of Provoked and host of a Scott Horton show. And the veteran journalist, John Sweeney, who spent many months reporting from Ukraine, also joins me. So a stellar panel. Let me start with you, General Clark. Welcome back to Unsensored. From a military perspective, where are? I'll be with the war in Ukraine.

Well, I think we're at a point where both sides are continuing to fight. Both sides are innovating. Russia continues to throw resources into it. The front line's not moving much. Destruction on both sides in depth has increased. Ukraine's able to strike deep more effectively. Russia's increasing its drone production. So you'd have to say that the war is.

intensifying. Professor Jeffrey Sachs was basically saying there was a deal to be done, to bring an end to the war, but that at the last minute, it all disintegrated because there's no acceptance on behalf of the West in these negotiations that Russia's ultimate motivation, as he put it for this war, which was NATO in Croatia, was just not being addressed properly. Do you accept that, or do you think that is a spurious defense put up for Putin's larger ambitions? Well, I think Jeffrey has become an apostle of appeasement. There was no deal to be made unless you say, look, we don't like this war. So let's tell the people of Ukraine, give up on the Budapest memorandum.

We're not going to help you protect your borders. And by the way, the Baltic states, Poland, the rest of you, you know, forget about your membership. NATO. We agree with Russia's root cause. And so we're just going to turn back on 30 years and give up on international agreements. This would unleash a terrible instability in Europe and a global instability as well. It's not a recipe for peace. It's a recipe for further chaos in the international community. Jeffrey should know better. Today's show is brought to you by Oxford Natural, makers of the optimum day. and optimum night, all natural supplements.

Thousands of Brits and Americans are already taking them with incredible results. Optimum day is designed to boost your energy and support weight loss throughout the day. Optimum night helps you relax and get deep, refreshing sleep. And don't just take their word for it. Here are just a few of their success stories. England football legend, Michael Owen, lost 40 pounds. Robbie, the face of AFTV, dropped over 100 pounds. Linda, a top laurel firm executive, lost 50 pounds.

And Anita, an immigration lawyer, shed 60 pounds to watch their full stories and found out more. Scan the QR code on your screen or visit Oxfordnatural.com slash peers. And here's the best part. Use the code peers, P-I-E-R-S, and get 70% off your first order. Get 70% off with the promo code, Peers. John Sweeney, you've been to Ukraine a lot. You know, my brother and brother-in-law, both British Army colonels, we've had long conversations about this situation.

My brother was always from the start clear that he did not believe Ukraine could win this war militarily without the Americans actively getting engaged in fighting themselves, which was never going to happen. What is your sense from Ukraine's side? Because many people thought they would roll over very quickly. That never happened. They've shown extraordinary resilience in this war.

But we are, as General Clark said, at a pretty much at a stalemate, possibly edging in Russia's side here. How does this end? It ends with Russia being crushed because Putin cannot, does not want to stop the war. But listen, the Russians have taken a million casualties are either dead or horribly maimed so that they're out of the war. and if the war stops, then maybe Russia will wake up from its zombie brainwashing state and go, what the hell was that about?

Why have we lost so many people? Ukraine, in fact, has been doing your brother or your brother-in-law were dead wrong. Without American boots on the ground, Ukraine has fought heroically and bravely and incredibly inventively. So when I, I mean, for almost minds higher,

life as a war reporter from the late 80s, I've been dodging artillery. And that's normally in history, or certainly in the First World War and the Second World War, being heard or killed by shrapnel from artillery was the major cause of death, not bullets, but shrapnel from artillery. Now, in the last couple of years from 23, 24, and certainly this year, it's drones. And the Ukrainians are led with this. Now, what's happened

is the Chinese are supplying an awful lot of drones. And one of the big geo-strategic nightmares about this is if Russia gets some kind of victory, then China will be encouraged to go and invade Taiwan. So it's absolutely in the West interest, not just in terms of

Europe, but in terms of global security. The simple point of principle, which we in Britain went to war in 1914 and then in 1939, is that no nation state should seek to get bigger by invading its neighbors. And that's a very, very good principle. And it leads to stability across the world. And Russia, under Putin, has broken that principle. And that is why there will only be peace in the world or a better chance of peace in the world if Russia is defeated. And the problem has been not Ukrainian courage. There's a lot of it because, frankly, if they give in, if they surrender, then it's over for them and for their nation and all the horrors that. So they're going to keep on fighting, come what may.

The problem is that we in the West have lacked the will to really help Ukraine and we've lacked the common sense to understand that Putin is the killer in the Kremlin. He's no friend of ours. Full stop. Okay. Henry Sederin, what is your response to that? Well, I hope it's not a cheerleading contest or, you know, a place where we come for declaration. If we have to make analysis, I haven't heard of any type of reports or analysis in the Western St. Tank's issued by the Western St. St. tanks, which would ever consider a real possibility that Russia is going to lose on the battlefield. Usually what I see is that the Western countries should put a lot of effort in order to

destabilize Russia inside in terms of our inner politics, try to overthrow our constitutional order. Usually that is the main target, which is set by those big things. So for these years, maybe starting from 2014, starting with Barack Obama, We've heard that we're a small regional country with a disastrous economy and that we're going to be destroyed just like this. If the Western countries decide to start sanctions against our country, then Russia is going to be destroyed. And that started in 2014. And up until now, each year there are interviews and panels like this, which are usually discussing. How is that possible the Russian economy is growing, Russian army is growing, et cetera, et cetera.

So it is obvious that no matter what are your ethical values or your view on the conflict, it is obvious that the way in which the Western countries reacted during these years on Russia's, well, at least questions which were put by our political authorities, the way the Western countries reacted is not efficient. It doesn't work. Because initially, before starting the special military operation, Russian authorities, Russian minister of foreign affairs and our president, they ask only for one thing, but maybe we can meet and discuss the security structure and security architecture in Europe.

Because we have a lot of issues which really are problematic for our country, because during this year, starting from 1991, Russia hasn't moved towards NATO for an age because we never have enlarged our military union towards European countries. But each time, we've heard that in order to contain Iran, we have to take Poland and Baltic countries as part of NATO. And that's why there were many, many issues which were usually problematic for Russia, and Russia wanted to discuss them. But usually the answer was that we should shut up

and that no one is going to discuss anything with Russia. And each time it happened, then we were asked that, you know, you should stop, you should stop this, you should stop that. And as a result, we can even look into the negotiation process right now. For a year or two, Russia was telling that we are ready for ceasefire, and we were told by the European countries that no ceasefire is needed. We need a full-scale peace agreement. Now when Russia said that, okay, we want to discuss a full-scale peace agreement, which will include all the issues that should be dealt with, we are told by the European countries that, no, we need a ceasefire right now, a 30-day ceasefire, I don't know, two-month ceasefire, but no full-scale peace agreement. And my personal opinion is that a peace agreement is it could be reached, but with all due respect, that is an issue which should be discussed between the President of Russian Federation and the United States.

States, because the issues which we should settle, or as President Trump likes to say, the deal we should make, it includes a lot of questions which are concentrated not only in Ukraine, but around Europe as well. And that's why we need those negotiations between the leaders. We need to address those questions. But I personally, really, I don't know how we can make a deal in the way the European countries want us to make it. During the three years, the only thing we hear is that the European countries are getting ready for making a war with Russia. I hear it each time from German Chancellor, which says, or the German Minister of Defense, that in 2009 we are going to have war with Russia. I think that's not the best rhetorics we need

if we are going to reach disagreement. Okay. Okay, before I go to you, Scott Horton, I know you've been waiting patiently. I just saw you gesticulating with facial expressions there that suggested John Sweeney, you weren't entirely agreeing with what you were hearing there. So very quickly respond. Yeah, well, we've just been listening to the Kremlin Strass. The reason why the Baltics and the polls, for example, do not want to be any part of the Russian world is because the map of Eastern Europe that Putin wants to go back to

was drawn up by Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin and the Midnight Pact of 1939, the Nazi-Soviet Pact. And in that, the Nazis got Western Poland, and the Soviets, under Stalin, got Poland, eastern Poland and the Baltic states. And then after the Second World War, pretty much the whole of Eastern Europe. So guess what? The moment the Soviet Union collapsed, all of those countries wanted to divorce, to join NATO, which is a defensive organization, because they didn't want to be invaded by Russia

again. Russia is not a democracy. It's a fascist state. Russia invaded Ukraine twice. Ukraine has fought like a Bengal tiger for its freedom and independence. And Henry is a servant of a tyrant who murders his critics. So Henry has been talking utter rubbish. One thing that I've in common with Harry and Megan is that we all value privacy if you've ever Googled your own name and discover bits of your address, phone number and employment details hanging around

you'll be aware that your data privacy is under siege. That's because your data is purchased and sold by data brokers without your consent. Today's sponsor has a solution. Incognite contacts those shady websites and gets your personal data removed automatically. No forms, no emails, no ransoms. They handle all the back and forth for these brokers and update you on their simple dashboard.

Incogni does not stop after the first sweep. They monitor and keep on removing your data if it pops up again. If you care about privacy and you want fewer spam calls, fewer junk emails, and a reduced risk of identity theft, this is a smart move. We've teamed up to give you a 60% discount on an annual plan at incogny.com slash peers. Use code peers when you check out. That's incogny, I-C-O-G-N-I-D-N-I-R-S. Use code peers when you check out.

Okay, let me bring in Scott Horton. Henry, you can't respond to that later. Scott Horton, I mean, many things can be true at once. I don't disbelieve for a moment that what Henry is articulating is Vladimir Putin's view, and is probably a view held by many rights. Russians, nor do I dispute that John Swinney from his work on the ground in Ukraine has his view and is equally sincerely held as his general clerks. In other words, depending who you talk to, the view of this whole war is very different, isn't it?

Yeah, well, look, I should say that I agree with your first two guests in sentiment as far as my sympathies are with the people of Ukraine. I think this whole war has been an absolute catastrophe for everyone involved, including the United States. for all of our foreign policies in the world we got to live in going forward from here. It's a disaster, but I believe General Clark and I agreed on your show last December that, in fact, the Russians are ascendant on the battlefield. If you look at the battle maps, as, you know, by the experts that show that the Russians are taking more and more territory all the time. And the problem for Donald Trump is that he just got inaugurated at the wrong time.

So he's trying to call time out when the Russians are winning, but their strategy, of course, is just to fight a war of attrition rather than just seized territory. So they have not yet succeeded in taking all of Donets, Ziproja, or Kerson, which they have claimed to have officially annexed since September of 22. And so what's happening is the Ukrainians are just losing more men and more lives as the thing goes on. and Putin essentially has no real reason to quit now. And the Americans really had nothing to offer him, even if Trump gave, you know, dropped all the sanctions

and gave him full normalization and promised, you know, put it in a treaty never to invite Ukraine into NATO or something like that. Well, Chelsea Clinton or somebody could become the president in a few years from now and go back on all that when, of course, the entire American establishment would be against it. And so be pretty difficult for the president. the Russians to rely on that. So I think they're going to just keep fighting, which is absolutely horrible. And, you know, as I showed in the book, and it's been a few months, Pierce, I don't know

if you've had a chance to finish reading provoked yet. But as I show in the book, even the most hawkish NATO expanders and the most prominent American grand strategists that you could possibly name of our era, Henry Kissinger and Zabigna Brzezinski, they both said, we have to come up with a special status for Ukraine. We have to make it like Austria in the Cold War so that it's neutral, so that it's a bridge between East and West, because if we try to take it away, the Russians are going to invade and break the thing. Just the same as John Mearsheimer warned, just the same as Jeffrey Sachs warned back years ago that it was American meddling that was forcing this issue, and that does not justify what Russia has done here. Again, the book is called Provoked, Not Justified. But the

reality is that America, Washington, D.C., our government got our Ukrainian friends into this mess. And unlike what the second guy said, Mr. Sweeney, that, oh, this is going to end with Russia crushed, you have it, right, Pierce, that unless we're willing to send in the 82nd airborne in the U.S. Navy, that we cannot reverse the tide for Ukraine here. So where does that leave us? And General Clark said last December on your show that, okay, yeah, but we shouldn't talk like that and betray our position of weakness in any upcoming negotiations. Well, now it's the end of July, and they've done nothing but lose more men and more territory

since then. So where are we really going with this? Yeah, I mean, General Clark, I mean, historically, Russia has shown a remarkable patience when it comes to warfare. They will keep going and keep going and withstand losses that many other countries would simply not tolerate to achieve their aims. I'm not quite sure why looking at the state of this war, why people would think that Russia are about to be crushed. I don't really see evidence of what John suggests there. And from a military perspective, unless America gets involved in a more direct manner, isn't the reality that Russia's military vastly outweighs Ukraine's and therefore is highly unlikely to lose. You know, I think it's, I think this is like saying

peers in 1942 when Germany was at its maximum penetration of the Soviet Union, that no one could see how it could possibly be turned around, that the thousand-year Reich was going to be there, and you would have told Stalin, why don't you surrender? I mean, why lose all his territory? Why risk Moscow. Why don't you surrender? Look, the people of Ukraine understand very well what's at risk in this. They know that should Russia dominate and take this, and there will be massive ethnic cleansing. There will be millions of people liquidated. There will be huge refugee flows to the West, and the rest of Western Europe will be destabilized in one way or another, and there are enormous consequences on China.

So, yes, all of the leaders of Western Europe and most of the United States wants Ukraine to prevail. And I'm not saying about the threatened 100% tariffs working on Russia. I think the answer is the United States fumbled early on in this by not giving Ukraine greater military assistance, by not appreciating the skill and the diligence and the courage of the Ukrainian warriors, And I think we'd be making a big mistake right now if we assumed that Ukraine cannot win. I believe Ukraine can win. And when you talk about Russia, don't talk about Russia. Russia is not some great public work, democracy that wants to go one way or another.

Russia is a small group of people at the top, dominated by Vladimir Putin and his intelligence organizations that crushes Russia's opinion, that dominates, that, bullies, threatens, imprisons, and murders its opponents. It's not a democracy. And under Putin, it's not a state that you can consider as a good actor to be brought back into the international community. And that's why nothing happened in January, because even with all of the goodwill that Donald Trump wanted to bring to Vladimir Putin, he and his people recognized, you can't deal with this man. So the United States has not tried to destabilize Russia. Maybe we should have, but we didn't.

But Putin's going to do a good enough job himself by continuing to draw off people, by exposing the Russian people to these casualties. Already, St. Petersburg, Moscow, people know what this is about. Given the slightest setback, Putin will be pushed aside, would be my expectation.

So he's afraid to have a ceasefire. He's afraid to pull back on his objectives. He's afraid to let the Russian people know the truth about the sacrifices there. So let's not say Russia is a – don't look at this like there's Russia, there's Britain, there's France. No, there isn't. There's France. There's Britain. There's the United States.

And then there's Putin. General, you really date that Ukraine? And Hitler represented everybody in Germany. Do you really think that Ukraine, sir, can drive the Russian army out of Lujansk and Danyetsk, Zaproja and Kersan, and even Crimea to retake every last inch, like in the promises? By what magic wish? Is this supposed to take place? You know, Scott, you know, Scott, I've been around the military for a long, long time, and I've been around some of the people in Ukraine for a long time. And I know that they know what the stakes are in this. They know what the risks are. And they're not about to give up.

And when you have people who believe that fervently in what their future is, don't write them off, okay? And it's not in your place to be saying, oh, we don't think you can win. We know you want freedom. We know Putin's a bad guy, but we're going to give up on you. We're not going to give up on Ukraine if we can summon the will of the West. This is our civilization. But general, just a second, just a second, you give up on Ukraine.

The next thing is the Baltics. And by the way, the Russians have already published video propaganda showing how Russians would parachute into Gotland, take Gotland, surround the Baltic states, demand that NATO move out and dare us to and then threaten nuclear weapons. These plans are in the books. So look, look, I appreciate your sympathies. I know you're trying to find some area of agreement with me. But look, this is a battle that the West. must face up to and face down Mr. Putin. Okay, but the thing is, you correctly deny that Russia is this single organism, but you talk about Ukraine as though it is, when in fact we're talking about a conscript army, and according to the Associated Press in the New York Times, with hundreds of thousands of deserters, people in the hundreds, at least drowning in the river, trying to escape from Moldova, conscript press gangs kidnapping people off the street,

This is like Woodrow Wilson saying, oh, the people of America have volunteered in mass. Here's the thing you may have in terms. It's not true. If you look at what happened in May Don last week when President Zelensky said, I think we'll get rid of the Anti-Corruption Commission. There were tens of thousands of people out there. Ukraine will fight for its independence. It does, look, and let's be clear about something else, Scott.

and to all those who say, including our guests from Russia, the United States did not, in 2014, demand that Ukraine come in to NATO. In fact, it had been dropped, really, since 2008. All the Ukrainians wanted was to be out from under the thumb of Russian corruption. That's why they wanted the association with the European Union. Look, Russia is a corrupt, Mafia, intelligence-led state, head by Vladimir Putin. It's not the way you can deal in the modern world.

So you just have to sort of pull up your socks and say, look, I know it's unreasonable. You can't believe a free country can mobilize its opinion and stand up against a juggernaut like the Red Army. Well, they've done it, and they're going to continue to do it. That's what my prediction is. Okay. But in your analogy, Hitler has nooks. the support for Ukraine. And we can't...

In your analogy, General, Hitler has nooks, and Stalin has no choice but to surrender. I'm not going to feel an analogies like, Scott. He didn't think the Western allies to intervene. It would take the Western allies to directly intervene, and we can't. Scott, Scott, I know, for example, I actually, there's a friend of mine who's a Ukrainian soldier, Vladamchenko, who arrested me for being a Russian spy rather comically on day two of the big war,

and I saw him very recently. And he's still fighting for Ukraine, as are all his friends. And he has, now let's be clear about this. In 2022, the Russians invade, and they take a fifth of Ukraine, and they've got still a fifth, and they've got a little bit more, but not much more. So why aren't they in Kiev? Why is the Ukrainian army fighting so strong? can you answer that question?

Why has the Ukrainian army managed to stop the Russian army from taking the capital? Is it because they believe in what they're fighting for? Is it because they believe in liberty? Sure. You're like Lord Hawhor broadcasting as if you're from Nazi-occupied Berlin. Come on. You're like George W. Bush saying we can't cut and run now or our boys will have died in Bain, so we have to stay in the war.

That's what you're like. I don't know, but there are ordinary Ukrainian soldiers are fighting for their country and their idea of freedom. Ordinary Iraqis. We're fighting with Americans for their faction against the other side. We can't leave now. I mean, I don't know whether the same thing. Listen, mate. I don't know whether the KGB guy underneath your table holding your balls. Oh, give me a break.

That's really all you got. Oh, really? Oh, so I can tell you four Russian people. I know who were critical of Vladimir Putin. What percentage of the army are conscripts in Ukraine? Natasha Esmerova, Boris Nemtsov, Alexei Navalny, all shot or poisoned, right? Now, you cannot say this about the critics of Zelensky.

The critics of Zelensky were out in the streets of Kiev in their tens of thousands. A lot of critics of Zelensky have been charged with treason and kidnapped. And you serve a president in dictatorship. Yeah, a lot of dissidents in Ukraine have been rounded up and put in prison. Let me give Henry a chance to respond. First of all, Henry, John Swinney said you were a servant of the fascist state. What's your response to that? I think it's getting too personal, and I don't think that's a serious question to answer,

because if you want, I can describe you what fascist means because I'm a specialist on Italy's history, so I can give you a very qualified answer to what fascist is. and maybe the modern leftist liberal ideology is going to be the exact analogy of what fascism is. But believe me, Russia is that you're just using the Western approach towards trying to describe any nation in the world, according only to the Western view on itself and on its own history. The world is not divided into three political regimes, which were described by the Western political philosophy. and then each time any country is analyzed, it's either liberal democracy

or it's going to be authoritarian or totalitarian state, which is nonsense and doesn't describe the world in the whole variety of different models which exist there. Also, I would like for Mr. Swinney... Let me ask a different question. Can I just make a comment on Mr. Swinney told before? Because you told me I can react. Just one sentence, please.

Mr. Swinney, I guess you were a little bit emotional. That's why you made a historical mistake. When speaking of Poland and its borders, if you don't like the borders of Poland, which were drawn by Stalin, it's going to be twice smaller because Poland in its actual borders were really drawn by Stalin, as well as the Baltic states, as well as all the post-Soviet Union states, they were drawn. I don't know, fortunately, or unfortunately, by Stalin.

then the Soviet Union and the Eastern bloc collapsed, right, exactly in the borders drawn by Stalin. So if we don't like Stalin's borders, it's going to be the borders of the Russian Empire, which are much bigger. I don't think you would like it more than the Stalin's one. So that's just my comment. Please, pure story. Yeah, well, the question I was going to ask is that Russia, clearly when it launched its, as he called it, a special operation, the rest of the world called it a war, invasion of a sovereign. democratic European country. But when it did that in three years ago now, there was an expectation on the Russian side. It was steam into Kiev and it would take control. Zolensky would go.

They would overthrow the government and they would take charge. And that didn't happen. And here we are, three years later, yes, Russia is a nuclear power. Yes, it has a massive military. Yes, the sanctions haven't really had much impact. In fact, Russia's economy has survived and actually, thrived, you could argue, pretty successfully through all this, which makes me think the terrorists may not work either. But it does beg the question, if Russia is so powerful and has right on its side, why is it struggling so badly to win this war? Well, first of all, the difference between special military operation and war is the scale. The general is much more experienced than I am in this question.

Maybe he would confirm this, but we didn't have mobilization in our country, only once for 300,000 people. And then all of our military servants, they went for a voluntary contract. We didn't have obligatory mobilization in contrast to Ukraine. That's the first thing. Secondary, as you know, and General said it, and Mr. Sweeney said the same thing, that the Western countries and NATO are doing everything possible. they are supporting Ukraine as much as they can, et cetera, et cetera. You've given them almost everything you could,

at least the European countries. As I know, you did everything possible and impossible to help them with your military aid, with your financial aid, with your instructors, with your intelligence, with your... Everything possible and impossible was done to help Ukrainians fight Russians, as you know. So in reality, Russia, with its special military,

in the territory of Ukraine. We are facing the NATO instructors. We are facing NATO tactics. We are facing NATO weaponry. We are facing financing given by the Western countries. And each time we hear that even the Western leaders, they say that if we stop financing Ukraine for one week, the war is going to be over because Ukraine is going to collapse.

That's why I think when you ask why Russia takes so long, for Russia to reach the objectives. You should understand that Russia at this moment is combating the full scale, the possibilities of NATO as a military union, although NATO officially doesn't involve in this country, but still we know that almost everything it could do. It's been done during these three years, almost four years, for Ukraine.

That's the second thing. Third thing, I want to stress it out that each, time it is said that Russia was going to overthrow the political power in Ukraine in three days, and it was going to take only three days to take Kiev. That is the commentary which was made for tens of times by British political authorities. You can never find a single video when Russian political authority, I don't mean journalists or speakers or experts, but Russian political authorities never said it's going to take three days, four days, one week, one month, or one year. It was usually said by the British political authorities, which said that it will take

Russian three days to take Kiev, and then on the fourth day, they said, okay, Russian military is not so strong enough to take it in three days. That's why that was a whole narrative. Let me jump in. Let me jump in. The reason I think that Russia may be maybe a bit smoke and mirrors about its military strength is I was fascinated by two things. One, that you had to bring in 10,000 troops from North Korea, which I found extraordinary. If you've got such a massive military, why'd you need to do that? And secondly, the way that Russia basically ran away from Syria

and let Bashar al-Assad just fall was also, to me, extraordinary and showed me that maybe Russia's military was being, Russia's military was being stretched in a way that it could not sustain for a long period of time. So, Scott, I'll come to you, but first of all, Henry, your response to that. I mean, why did Russia give up on Syria, seemingly overnight, and why has it been relying, it appears, on North Korean troops to bolster its forces?

Okay, I think you're a very intelligent person to understand that if Russia has 2 million personnel, army, 10,000 Koreans are not going to influence the battlefield so much. Why use it? I will surely answer it, because that's a very big gift for

Korean Army because they have an opportunity to gain experience in fighting the technologies, which is going to be, I think, pretty useful for them in the future. As for the Syrian problem and the Syrian political regime, I personally think that the failure of

Bashar al-Assad is a tragedy for the region for one single reason, because if you see the persecutions of Christians and of Jews people in Syria right now, I think that's a catastrophe and that's a tragedy. And I wouldn't make it a story to brag about or to be happy about because that's a real tragedy. That's tragedy of Syrian people who my love and who are great people. They had a lot of problems which maybe Bashar al-Assad should have dealt with before. and could have dealt with before. But I'm sure that when you bring ex-jihadists as the democratic opposition, and you call them progressive jihadists,

they come to power and start persecutions of Christians and of Jews people in Syria. I think that's a real catastrophe for anyone. It doesn't matter if you like Bashar al-Assad or not. That's a real catastrophe. All right. Let me bring Scott in. Scott, you wanted to say something before. Oh, yeah, just about, you know, the Russian troop strength and all that and why the war is taking so long, which Mr. Sweeney had asked me as well. Yeah.

It's General Clark's former right-hand man, Lieutenant Colonel Douglas McGregor, or pardon me, Colonel Douglas McGregor, and his former guy, Lieutenant Colonel Danny Davis, they are both active war analysts. And they have said all along that the Russian strategy is to fight a war of attrition. In other words, to move very slowly and just take the land with artillery and airstorms. strikes and try to spare their guys by chewing up the other guys rather than simply just moving to take land for its own sake. Because once they're done breaking the Ukrainian army, if that point ever comes, then they can walk around and go wherever they want. And so that it's a war of attrition in that sense is part of their strategy. So at the same time, though, I think it is pretty clear that if they could just go in there and snap, pow, take whatever territory they wanted, no problem, and they would do that.

And in fact, I thought it was very telling that even Victoria Newland, Robert Kagan's wife, who did so much to get us into this mess, that in her exit interview on a podcast that, I don't know what podcast it was, but she said, you know, this really goes to show that the Russians are a paper tiger. And that all this talk about their threat to Warsaw and Berlin is a hoax. They're not coming for Europe. And that's the thing about the book Provoked is the weapons of mass destruction of this war, peers, is that Putin woke up one day and decided he wanted to recreate the Soviet. Union or the Tsarist Empire. And that's why he did this. The reason he did this is because

Joe Biden would not negotiate in good faith over NATO and over missile emplacements in Ukraine. The strategy at the end of 21 was to warn Russians, the Russians, they better not do it. They refused to negotiate the treaty in any way. Derek Chalett said the only thing we'd say about NATO is it's a defensive organization and you're just going to have to get used to it. The door remains open, even though, as we've discussed here at the start of the United States, of this discussion here. They're not bringing Ukraine into NATO anytime soon. Joe Biden said that too, not for years and years because of all the corruption in their political system and in their

economy. They can't be a part. They'd be lucky to even get into the EU. And General Clark was right. That's why they were trying to join it was because of the anti-corruption parts in there. That's why Yanukovych wanted to join it before he was forced to change his mind by the Germans hardball there. But the thing is, they're not welcome to join the West because their system is ranked even by George sources, transparency international, compares their corruption to Uganda, some of the worst kleptocracies in the world. So there's no way that they ever can be NATO in NATO. And yet, we have to keep that door open. And the open door means that no third country's interest can

ever be taken into account, even when we're talking the Russians. And even when they're making themselves clear that they'll support one side of a civil war for years inside that country and that if push comes to shove, that they'll invade. You know, I'm sure you've read Pierce the Rand Corporation study extending Russia from 2019, where they say one way to weaken Russia would be to increase support for Ukraine because that would increase costs for Russia. On the other hand, that could provoke them into actually invading and sending in the infantry and taking territory,

which would be a huge loss for us and for our Ukrainian friends. So it was as though Biden read the Rand Corporation, but forgot the disclaimer, that you better be careful about how you do this, because if you calibrate too much support for Ukraine, you're not going to deter an attack, you're going to provoke one. That was their own words.

Okay, but we're running out of time, so very quickly, General Clark, if you could respond first, and I'll get a jump. You know, you're a student of history. You know, you're a student of history. You should know that from the time Vladimir Putin became prime minister and later president, he wanted to restore the Soviet Union's space.

That's not true. That's not true. That is true. And everybody was a state's been in. Let me finish. Everybody was a statesman in Eastern Europe. Do it. People came to me and told me. They had the captured documents.

They had talked to Russian diplomats. They knew what the- This is John Burke Society conspiracy garbage men. At 2007, at the Munich Security Conference, Vladimir Putin made it very clear what his intent was. We in the West didn't want to think it's... People should read that speech. It doesn't say he wants to recreate a Soviet Union. Can I finish, please? People should read that speech. You're right.

Can I finish, please? Thank you. Today, there's a campaign of sabotage in the West run by Russia. No. To read the media. There he is. And you can read the Russian media. That's debunk in my book, too. Eating the Trump saying, we're at war with NATO. United States is not saying that we're at war with Russia. NATO is not saying it's a proxy war. Our officials have said it's a proxy war.

We're not running a campaign of sabotage inside Russia, but Russia's running a campaign of sabotage against us. The simple truth is that Western democracies didn't provoke a war, don't want a war, and would like to end this war. The aggression is all on the part of a man who wants to restore the dream of a war. controlling Europe, a dream that was possibly partially realized by Joseph Stalin, and Putin sees himself as the logical successor. And you know, Scott, when you get, you throw everything else aside, you're dealing with human beings. These people in Eastern Europe have been under Soviet

domination. They don't want it again. They don't want the kleptocracy. You talk about corruption in Ukraine. Look at the corruption in Russia. Why do you think Vladimir Putin is the richest man in the world. You don't know that? Do your homework. He is. He gets a piece of everything that's done. And it's a communist country.

It's the Soviet Union. I want to wait. Gentlemen, I want to win our time. But you haven't gotten to the heart of the issue. Read my book, General Clark. You're wrong. Okay. We've run out of time.

I do want to give John Swinney. I want to give John Swinney the final word, gentlemen. John, just very quickly. What do you think is going to happen, John? I think that Trump, who was terrible to Zelensky in the Oval Office, is beginning to get it. I'm worried that Trump's words are cheap and I want to see deeds,

but it feels like, and partly because Malana, who herself, of course, is from Eastern Europe, from that part of the world, she understands the threat from the Kremlin. Never mind these useful idiots we've been listening to, the general is right. And what's going to happen, I believe, is that Ukrainian courage allied with an America that's led by Donald Trump, who's beginning to understand that Vladimir Putin is not our friend. And that spells trouble for Putin. Remember, when Progogsian staged his mutiny,

he moved from Russian-occupied Ukraine into Russia to Rossovon and not a single secret policeman in Russia, Vaughnizondon, lifted up a finger to help Putin. So I think Putin is a fragile monster, and yes, things are hard for Ukraine right now. I'm not saying Ukraine is winning. I am saying Ukraine is doing bloody well against a Russian bully, and I think, so long as the world stands by,

Ukraine and in particular America, then Vladimir Putin is in trouble. Okay, gentlemen, I want to leave it there. Thank you all very much indeed for joining me. I appreciate it. Pierce Morgan Unsencent is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Pierce Morgan Unsensit on Spotify and Apple Podcast. And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate and entertain.

and we'll do it all for free. Independent, uncensored, media, has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you.