Scott Horton Show - Just the Interviews - 3/31/22 Lyle Goldstein: This War Is a Disaster for Russia, Ukraine and the Entire World

Episode Date: April 4, 2022

Scott talks with Lyle Goldstein about the war in Ukraine. Although Goldstein did expect some kind of Russian invasion to take place, he’s been surprised by the difficulty Russia has faced on a number of fronts. Scott and Goldstein discuss a number of theories and takes they’ve been reading across the media landscape. Among the topics covered are the global dangers posed by reductions in Ukrainian farming, Washington’s alleged interest in supporting a long-term insurgency, and the intentional drought in Crimea— which Goldstein says is an often omitted reason behind the invasion. They also talk about the danger of nuclear war, which both agree is higher than many seem to believe. Lastly, they touch on how China has reacted to the invasion, and how much President Xi may have known about Putin's plan to invade.    Discussed on the show: “The New Indo-Pacific Strategy is Too Shallow” (Defense News) “Remembering Nixon’s visit to China after half a century” (Asia Times) Lyle J. Goldstein is the Director of Asia Engagement at Defense Priorities. He is the author of Meeting China Halfway: How to Defuse the Emerging US-China Rivalry. Follow his work at The National Interest. This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: The War State and Why The Vietnam War?, by Mike Swanson; Tom Woods’ Liberty Classroom; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott; EasyShip; Free Range Feeder; Thc Hemp Spot; Green Mill Supercritical; Bug-A-Salt and Listen and Think Audio. Shop Libertarian Institute merch or donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal or Bitcoin: 1DZBZNJrxUhQhEzgDh7k8JXHXRjYu5tZiG. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

All right, y'all, welcome to the Scott Horton Show. I'm the director of the Libertarian Institute, editorial director of anti-war.com, author of the book, Fool's Aaron, Time to End the War in Afghanistan, and The Brand New, Enough Already, Time to End the War on Terrorism. And I've recorded more than 5,500 interviews since 2004. almost all on foreign policy and all available for you at scothorton dot for you can sign up the podcast feed there and the full interview archive is also available at youtube.com slash scott horton's show all right you guys on the line again i've got lyle goldstein now he was at the naval war college but now he's at defense priorities and he's a visiting

professor at brown university and he writes all these articles all the time you can find him in the national interest. And here he is at defensenews.com. This one is called the new Indo-Pacific Strategy is too shallow. Then he's got this one, remembering Nixon's visit to China after half a century.

A very important story to cover there. And of course, we got to start, though, with the war in Ukraine. You called it on the show. I says to you, I says, so you think Russia's going to invade Ukraine, huh? And you says, Yes, I do believe so.

And now here we are, and it's been about four and a half weeks and five weeks, and a hell of a lot of people have been killed. I don't know the total number from the U.N. of civilian casualties lately. The last one I heard was more than a thousand. Certainly it's many times that. But I guess, you know, what's your assessment of how the war is taking shape in, I guess, the East, or, in all of Ukraine right now well as you said scott i i i i always thought the that the estimates were were for real that you know that that uh you know that there was a possibility that that the war would go forward um and uh tragically it has and uh you know i'm i'm shattered like

like everybody who cares for that region of the world. And just as humans, you know, we look at the destruction and say, you know, did this have to happen? I mean, you know, like everyone, I, you know, I condemn the decision. You know, I think you have to be, you know, you have to be basically insane to start a war of any kind. And, you know, I think it's not ridiculous to say

that Putin may have, you know, acted irration or on bad advice or, you know, some combination of things, you know, I think this is a disaster for Russia. That was predictable. It's, I mean, it's obviously a disaster for Ukraine, but it's a disaster for the entire world, unquestionably. And I'm appalled, sickened, and terribly impacted myself by just the human costs here. So, you know, I mean, I'll admit I probably thought the Russians would fare better from a military point of view, you know, that they still have an edge in firepower, which would have seemed to secure a victory. But, you know, credit to the Ukrainians who, you know, have fought very bravely to defend their home. So, you know, that, I don't think

anybody really predicted that so much and and it has been impressive you know it just as a human story but i i and you know i i think the whole certainly our country has been caught up in this kind of war fever a kind of enthusiasm which is a little troubling especially for those of us who were recommending solutions there were you know i continue to think there was a way out that we didn't have to get there get here um but um now that we're here you know it's i and others are thinking about how to stop the killing um but right now you know the dogs of war have been unleashed and and both sides seem to be have the kind of quest for blood and destruction which and uh you know right now i'm not really seeing a way out unfortunately

Well, so as far as, you know, all the narratives about that the Ukrainians have been, you know, really doing a great job fighting against the Russians and all of that. I wonder why the Russians didn't do like H.W. Bush and W. Bush in Iraq and bring in heavy air power against the armor divisions and, you know, the heavy concentrations of Ukrainian military, at least in the east of the east of the army. the country before they sent their tanks in. So it seems like they just, I mean, obviously they, I guess the most obvious answers just be the public relations of all that footage of all those explosions, kind of a thing. But this isn't much better than that, is it? And it seems like, or is it that they were worried about anti-aircraft.

They couldn't call in their heavy bombers. They might have lost some. I think it was a little of both, but more the former. I think it was a kind of miscalculation. gamble, you know, they thought that they could do, what do you call it, a thunder run, you know, I think you remember that phrase from... Did Richard Pearl promise Vladimir Putin that he'd be greedy with flowers and candy? Well, you know, you laugh, but I've just seen an article recently on Vienna Abazrenia and literally

the title, that's a military review in Russian. And the title of the article is, you know, why were... why we were not greeted with flowers, you know, basically in Ukraine. And, and I mean, you know, it's the violence. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, it's kind of stunning to see such an article. But it's, you know, I think the Russians themselves are grappling with this. Like, how did they, you know, how did they make this mistake, this miscalculation, what, what's going on here? I mean, you know, I'm somewhat surprised, you know, Kharkiv.

I wouldn't have thought Kharkiv would be, you know, holding. out still or something like that. So, you know, it is interesting. It certainly speaks to the fact that Ukrainian identity was more powerful. I think, you know, I'm just speculating here, but I mean, part of it may have been that a lot of the Ukrainians who were inclined to be kind of more pro-Russian that many of them did leave, you know, and I think millions have left, you know, over the past 20 years have gone back, gone to Russia, basically. And I think that may be part of the explanation. words like the Ukrainians who were pro-Russian are already in Russia. And as far as I can tell, those people are very vocal in Russian political circles and in, you know, on the airwaves

and so forth. And so, you know, they've been maybe beating the war drum, but also relying on some false assumptions about what, what Ukrainians thought. Well, now, as far as the disaster for Russia. I talked with Douglas McGregor earlier, and he was saying essentially that despite whatever costs they are paying, that Putin has clearly decided that it was worth it. They will

guarantee Ukrainian neutrality, and they will guarantee the end of the war in the Donbass, and they will, you know, achieve you know, depending, and it's still, I guess, not altogether clear how much of eastern Ukraine

they intend on keeping. It seems like probably just the Donbass, and not everything east of the Niebuhr, right? But so they are paying a hell of a price, but the price, Putin believes the price is worth it, right? Yeah, I mean, I tend to, you know, McGregor is extremely wise military analyst, and I think he pretty much has it. I mean, you know, I mean, we've all seen a lot of the stories that are coming out of the press or, you know, turn out to not to be true and so forth. So, you know, there's misinformation happening on both sides. So it's very hard to grasp what the actual military situation is. But I mean,

you know, I think at this point there's no disputing the fact that the original Russian war plan has failed, maybe not failed entirely, but failed to some extent. And that's why you see the pullback from Kiev that seems to be somewhat occurring. And also you see them digging in around the Mikhailiav in the south. So, I mean, that suggests a major recalibration, which I think, you know, reflects from what I'm seeing reading in Russian sources, for example, that they're even quite candid that they just, you know, to attack in force along these three different vectors was just too much to ask, you know, well beyond their capabilities. And maybe they were best casing when they shouldn't have been. You know, I read a thing by Scott Ritter, who's a former Marine Corps. captain and he was saying now all this stuff was just a faint while they're taking maripole and building

a land bridge between crimea and russia there and solidifying the greater donbass in the south at least there on the azov coast and so all this you know armed column uh moving on kiev and all that was just to tie up and a few other places was all just to tie up the ukrainian military is that after the fact rationalization you think or maybe that's right i think i think it might be i mean look ritter he's smart too and he you know has a like mcgregor that both the military man and and have you know very wise uh things to say so i don't dismiss that at all but i my sense is from everything i've been reading uh the kiev operation was more than a faint it was it was i think for real uh you know there was

There was significant hard fighting there. There was significant forces there. And if you look, you know, studying the maps of Ukraine, as we all have for the last, you know, a couple months, you know, if you go directly south from Kiev, you basically arrive at Odessa. And my, you know, it seemed to me quite obvious. That's why they were pushing so hard from Hirsan onto Mikhailiav because they wanted to launch that Odessa operation. I think that's all been scrapped. now is they realized it was just too far too ambitious we can talk about odessa but it seems to me they you know sea mines may have played a role in that you know i think there's a lot of people angry probably in the russian black sea fleet as i said this was our big chance to do something right a hell of a prize yeah right a hell of a prize and and i think they were close to pulling the trigger but uh you know for a variety of reasons they called it off but one reason i think they called it off was because the war just hasn't been going well in the west um now um so so i i think No, I mean, in the West, you know, I think things have been not going great in the East,

but I think that they, you know, they've more or less been making progress from what I can tell in the West, you just mean a potential land invasion at beach invasion at Odessa or something like that, or you're talking about actual Russian armor west of the Neeper River. Yeah, I'm talking about west of the Neeper River. I'm talking about, really near Gerson and Mikhailiov there, you know, I think there have been some setbacks and there were, you know, I think some setbacks around Kiev. So those, that, that, you know, I would call them maybe the northern prong and the southern prong. So if they had pulled this giant pincer, you know, coming from Kiev south and from Mikhailiev or, you know, Odessa going north and they had pulled off that giant pincer movement, now that would have been, you know, they literally would have owned, you know, 70% of Ukraine and would have cut off big chunks of the Ukrainian army, but I think they fell short that this is, you know, again, I haven't seen any war plans or anything like that. This is just what I've seen on the maps and stuff. And now they're readjusting when they're now that realize it's too ambitious, so they're going to readjust and try to work on Dunbass, as you suggest. And, you know, here maybe I agree with McGregor that, that, you know, this is probably a more feasible approach. Now, you know, I do think it's hard for a military once you've kind of lost the initiative to get it back. So, I mean, that could be hard.

And I don't, you know, Don Bass may seem like an easy operation, but what I'm seeing unfolding is kind of a bloody mess. So, you know, I don't know that this is going to be the nice, it's certainly not going to be a beautiful, clean victory for Putin, whether he'll be able to pull out, you know, pull, you know, get away from this and say, I did achieve my objective. objectives, you know, that is I destroyed the Ukrainian military and I secured Donvass and maybe I got the water for Crimea because, by the way, that is quite important to, I think, as a war objective. We'll see. We'll see. A lot will depend, you know, I think it's not just a military situation, Scott. What I'm reading a lot is Russians are kind of scratching their head going, how, okay, they have these captured areas. What do they do with them? Like, what? what do they become, you know, do they become these people's, you know, the Lugansk Republic or the Danyetsk Republic, the Kharkiv Republic, I've seen even the Kharsun Republic, you know, I mean, and then, you know, at some point in the future they vote to become part of Russia or something. I mean, anyway, it's just, and I think a lot of what I'm trying to say is, and I've seen Russian analysts say this, is the problem is, you know, the Russian invasion has.

created a humanitarian disaster across all these areas. So, I mean, I think a lot of Russians are worried that if this disaster gets even worse, right, Maripol is an obvious example, but I mean, if it's the point where people are hungry or, you know, they don't have a roof of their head, you know, shelter, you know, at that point, you know, Russia looks even worse than an aggressor, but looks like, you know, that they can't put their house in order. So not even close. So, I mean, you know, the risks here are immense. And, you know, anytime you start a war, you're gambling very high stakes.

And here it does seem like Russia made a huge error. Now, so Archive is in the far east, but in the north, sort of. It's a funny-shaped country, you know. But does that account officially as part of the Dombas region typically or not? That's right on the border of it? Yeah, I think it's its own. And I have, you know, I think I'm, did I say, I have heard mention of a, you know, a Kharkiv Republic also, you know what I'm saying? So, so like, is that what happens that the Russians hive all these parts off?

And then they may do that and somehow it might become, you know, it might, it might settle down, you know, whether there's an insurgency is a question, of course, whether they can, you know, where do they get the resources to rebuild these areas? I think, you know, if I'm living in Siberia somewhere and watching this unfold on television, I'm scratching my head going, well, I guess we won't be getting an upgrade to our, you know, electricity and water and bridges or anything else because all that money is going to be flowing to Harkiv to rebuild it, right? So, I mean, I think a lot of Russians are, are, even if they don't have skin in the game, per se, are also upset, you know, that, you know, the national wealth is going to be on this Ukraine project.

Well, so if you go back to 2014 after the coup and the war broke out there, my friend Eric Margulies, who it's funny because I can finish this sentence in so many different ways. He's an expert in this region of the world, particularly. I could say the same thing about Afghanistan and the Middle East and the Far East and every other thing. So he knew all about this. So he explained right away that, you know, there are major reasons why Russia doesn't want the East. even though they could just take the Donbass going back now to before this war a few years ago. Yeah. It's an incredibly poor place and it's just a total net drain and it would be essentially like signing up and conquering a territory full of pensioners and just an absolute net drain on the economy and the Treasury in Moscow and how their industry is all old and decrepit in Soviet.

other than a couple of very fancy rocket and helicopter factories I've come to understand, but otherwise, mostly their industry is old and decrepit and would need billions of dollars in reinvestment to get back up to speed, to be competitive and this kind of thing. And it's just the whole thing was an albatross. It's something that, you know, no, we don't want them, you keep them. In fact, I read a story where the claim was that Putin misunderstood Poroshenko. But the story came, that was the explanation. for it. But the story, either way, it doesn't matter because to me the interesting part was

Putin claimed to think that Poroshenko said, why don't you just take the Donbass? You can have it. And he said, I don't want it. Are you crazy? So now their part of the story was Poroshenko never said that, but that's not what's interesting, right? What's interesting, well, it sort of is, but what's more interesting is that Putin was like, man, don't give me the Donbass. I don't want it. They tried to join in 2014. He told them no, right? Yeah, I think that's right. I mean, I'm not an expert on 2014, but my read on it is they, you know, they, they were kind of waving Russian flags and hoping very much that they would be allowed to join the Russian Federation. And, you know, I think that echoed across the years. And, you know, not that I'm any better at getting into Putin's head than anybody else, but I mean, I have to wonder if that, is that, that memory of that moment where he refused them, basically, and they, you know, made them stay out. side, you know, in sort of purgatory, that that, you know, created this kind of guilty sense where that he, you know, he had to correct that by, you know, as it were, saving them in this

circumstance. I think possibly that's there. But everything, yeah, I agree with everything you just said that that is, you know, it's known as a kind of backward area of, you know, of very poor people, you know, and yeah, mostly young people have already left, you know, and so. So what do they get for all this effort? I mean, it is questionable, I think. I mean, you know, well, I expect, you know, Putin will say he got the water and, you know, that is the canal that gets water to Crimea. I've always flagged the water issue as very important. I think people don't realize how important it is.

And, you know, makes, again, makes me wonder, what if, what if Zelensky had, you know, a year ago said, okay we'll give you your water please don't invade us you know one of those you know i guess that's a just a how to put it a history we'll never know but i um so the water i you know the land bridge across of course from from you know crimea to the rest of russia i think but you know i agree that they're going to put way more resources into it than they're going to get out so as an economic like prize no and especially you know when you weigh in the sanctions into it that it's uh you know it's hard to see how this uh could end up ending ending well for russia i mean it and and of course it could be much worse i mean you know i do think you know following the russian press as i do

you know i'm definitely you know i think press freedoms there have pretty much gone out the window and and the kind of you know i'm watching continue to watch russian tv and so forth and it's just you know, the kind of vitriolic anti-Western tirades there are, you know, it's, I guess it's back to the 1950s or something, you know, really dark. So yeah, I mean, this is going to be something that I think haunts us across generations, you know, Scott, it's horrible. It's really just a terrible thing for the entire world. And I do, you know, I maintain it could have been prevented, but certainly we've got to blame, you know, Putin made the decision ultimately, and I think it is a very poor decision.

Hang on just one second. Hey, guys, I had some wasps in my house. So I shot them to death with my trusty bug assault 3.0 model with the improved salt reservoir and bar safety. I don't have a deal with them, but the show does earn a kickback every time you get a bug assault or anything else you buy from Amazon.com. by way of the link in the right-hand margin on the front page at scothorton dot org so keep that in mind

and don't worry about the mess your wife will clean it up green mill supercritical is the award-winning leader in cannabis oil extraction their machines are absolute top of the line they simply work better and accomplish more for less than any competitor in the world we're talking anywhere from a couple hundred thousand dollars for the base model and up so this is for serious business people here But the price, as they say, will be worth it. Green Mill Supercritical customers' investments pay for themselves oftentimes in just weeks. Simple enough for almost any operator, deep enough for master technicians, their new novel techniques for in-line real-time winterization,

or leaving their competitors in the key. That's greenmill supercritical.com. Man, I wish I was in school so I could drop out and sign up for Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom instead. Tom has done such a great job on putting together a classical curriculum for everyone from junior high schoolers on up through the postgraduate level. And it's all very reasonably priced. Just make sure you click through from the link in the right margin at Scott Horton.org.

Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom, real history, real economics, real education. So to zoom out a little bit and to look at the shape of the new world, order to come here. Is it right to say, in my simpleton terms, Russia has now been kicked right out of Europe. And it's going to be really hard to call him Hitler enough times. We can't deal with him now or else we're never chamberlain. We can't be in Neville Chamberlain.

So now he's got no choice but to just buddy, buddy up to India as best he can, to China's best he can, and just, you know, Indonesia, whatever non-aligned countries he can. how bad does that hurt us, our economy, Europe's economy, the whole world. How difficult is it to adjust from that? They're talking about get ready because people are going to be starving to death next year when we can't ship grain around because the Russians and the Ukrainians haven't grown any and this kind of deal.

You know, I don't know. Is it, and just how many times can he call the guy Hitler before? it's absolutely impossible to bring him back to the table and shake hands with him and pretend like that never happened well i mean i i you know i i i condemn put his decision for war you know i i think it's you know probably wrecked his whole historical legacy in one uh fell swoop but but i also i don't agree with the hitler analogy i just think it's completely off base And, you know, I was at a conference recently where this came up a few times and I had to object. I just think it's, you know, to me, this is kind of a kind of war fever, war hysteria where, you know, everybody's a Nazi and, you know, and by the way, the Russians themselves have succumbed to this kind of war hysteria too.

You know, the calling Ukrainians Nazis, I think generally is wrong as well. I mean, there are some Nazis there, but there are also Nazis in the United States and elsewhere. So, but, but I mean, my point is, yeah, I don't, that I don't agree with that. I don't, you don't either. I know, but it's, I mean, as far as the economic ramifications, I think you call it right, Scott. I do, you know, I think we'll see Russia, you know, hugging that Chinese dragon and the Indian elephant ever, ever closer. You know, I do think they're encouraged more or less by what they've seen from Beijing and New Delhi. And, you know, of course, I mean, it's been widely observed that really the only areas of the world that are putting sanctions on to Russia are Europe and North America. But, you know, in Latin America, Africa and most of Asia, accepting Japan and Korea, there really hasn't been any move to sanction Russia.

So, I mean, you know, this will do a lot of damage to the Russian economy, for sure, but it will also, you know, I do think they will adapt. And I have to believe that they thought about this in some respect. And, you know, there are even some Russians, I think, who will say, you know, this is what we had to do anyway. I had to wean ourselves off Europe. And it's, you know, they wanted a separation maybe from European culture anyway. and they see themselves as more Asian and want to orient, you know, Russia actually, really, for the last decade, has, in theory, been on a kind of pivot to Asia anyway, right? Which explains partly why Putin has a good relationship with both Modi and Shia as well.

So, I mean, you could argue this has been a process underway for some time, but now it will be, you know, fully accelerated as the ties with Europe. are just in, you know, total freefall. But, I mean, there will be a huge cost, undoubtedly. And as for us, you know, I think, I mean, as Americans have to wonder about that. I mean, I do, you know, some people are benefiting, right? I think in, you're in Texas, right? I think in Texas, they probably like these high energy prices and, or to some degree, anyone.

I know some Texans do. And then, you know, grain prices also, you know. know some Americans will benefit. Although as a whole, yeah, we're all, I think I think the shocks the world economy are are severe. And I think we'll be lucky if we escape from this without a major recession. That may definitely be in the cards. I mean, I'll be interested to see how the, you know, what happens to German economy. And, you know, is the Russian economy just completely going to collapse? The question's out there. I haven't seen much sign of it so far. You know, I've been I've been on the lookout. I'm reading the Russian press carefully. I don't see much sign of that

yet. You know, Russia is a robust country that, you know, obviously can feed itself, but also has, you know, every resource that there is. So, you know, including especially energy. So at some level, Russia, and I'm sure Putin calculated this, that, you know, ultimately Russia can do without international trade. But how does it do? And does it continue to fall behind? the world, you know, in so many respects if it's more isolated. I mean, you know, it's kind of a cliche now to say China benefits the most and not completely on that train, but, but you could see some ways in which China could benefit, though, from this. Yeah. Well, I'll get to that in one second, because I did want to ask you that, but I wanted to remark here that it was really something to

hear this gruffel army colonel on this show just a little while ago talking about we've got to get those seeds planted. It's the early spring right now. We have to have a ceasefire so the farmers can farm. Our people are going to starve. It's not just about whether Ukraine can feed themselves or Russia can feed themselves, but it's whether they can feed a third of the world. Yeah, he's spot on there. He's exactly right. I don't think we've begun to grapple with that question of, you know, now the U.S. and Canada are big grain producers as well, so I hope we can step up. But I mean, you're right. I just don't think we can close to meet the kind of demand. And yeah, I mean, this has overthrown governments in the Middle East and Africa and so forth, too, if the price of

in recent memory. Yeah. Yeah, very, very recently, right. So, so yeah, I could create horrible suffering across the whole world. I totally agree with that. And I'm also, you know, I don't know if want to go there, but I certainly agree that it sounds like with, with McGregor, you know, we need to pursue an immediate ceasefire. And I'm kind of shocked and dismayed that the Biden administration doesn't seem to be at all interested in that. Well, this gets into the one major issue I wanted to discuss with you before we switch to the Chinese aspect here. Sure. So if you want to, you can consider everything I'm about to say a bunch of cookie stuff. And I'm just asking you to sign on to it and you can decline to, no problem. But I read in the New York

times. Admiral Stredvredis, who would have been the Secretary of Defense under Hillary Clinton, saying in December that, oh yeah, trust me, plan A is we're trying to get Putin to not invade. And by that, he did not mean we're engaging in honest diplomacy. What he meant was Biden was willing to threaten Putin that you better not do it. But as we know, he wasn't really willing to engage in honest diplomacy to try to prevent the war very hard. But they assure the New York Times, all the different sources, and including Admiral Stravrides, that, yeah, yeah, yeah. You know, plan A is we want Putin to not invade. But if he does, boy, we got this brilliant genius plan.

We're going to arm up an insurgency and bleed them and bog them down and try to replicate what we did in Afghanistan and in Syria. To think that they'd brag about what they did in Afghanistan and Syria with those dirty wars. In the 80s, they're talking about Afghanistan. never you mind the last 30 years over there or any of that part of the story. And the same thing for Syria. Never mind what happened with their intervention in Syria and the caliphate and the rest of that. But just he says in there, and they keep saying this, it keeps coming up. We don't know anything about defeating insurgencies.

We admit that. But we sure know how to back them. And this is what we want to do. And there's, you know, Joe Loria at Consortium News had this article. full of quotes of these guys saying the purpose of the sanctions, the purpose of the war is to prolong the war, to bleed Russia, to weaken Putin and bring down his regime. So the only crazy part, all that's on the record.

Hell, the Prime Minister of Britain said the same thing about the sanctions there. Seems like the only question is, well, I'll add this. The Times said, well, see, they're carefully calibrating, the amount of weapons that they're pouring into Ukraine. This is December 21. They're carefully calibrating the amount of weapons that they're pouring in to deter Russia without provoking them into going ahead and invading. So, obviously, the innocent answer is,

hey, Plan A was Don't Invade. And they were carefully calibrating the weapons to deter Russia. But then, unfortunately, that sadly failed, so they had to turn to plan. be. A slightly more cynical take would be that they wanted this war to happen. And think about what you just described about the new shape of the world economy and the liberal rules-based world order and all these things. The Nord Stream pipeline is canceled. And Germany's budding relationship with Russia is canceled. And if we can't split China and Russia against

each other, well, we can isolate them from Europe and from the rest of our friends in Asia or tried to, and these kinds of things, and we can replicate Afghanistan and bleed the Russians. And, you know, Hillary Clinton also, Stravrides's student on this, clearly, went on MSNBC and blabbed and blab, just like I sound right now, talking about this is what we're going to do,

and it's going to work so great. And so I wonder whether you think that maybe actually plan A or maybe just plan A and a half rather than plan B, was to provoke this war. I mean, they, after the buildup started at the beginning of November, then they announced this new strategic partnership document agreement where they reaffirmed support for Kiev's sovereignty over Crimea and 100 other things. And again, refused to put in writing that we won't bring Ukraine into NATO

and all these easy answers that they could have solved. As you were saying, you didn't say in particular, we could have negotiated our way out of this before it happened maybe they very clearly and deliberately did not negotiate their way out of this for a reason so what do you think about that well there's a lot there um and uh you know at some level i guess it's just water into the bridge and i i mean this is one reason i can't sleep because i i know that this tragedy didn't have to happen you know if you know the details i mean i i put out there in in generating I published a peace proposal for Donbass and I said, you know, I said in that piece,

I said the future of Europe hangs in the balance, you know, are we going to, are we just going to let this evolve into a catastrophic war? Are we going to try to make peace? And, you know, and this was after the first Zelenskyy Putin face-to-face meeting in the Normandy format and everybody was very disillusioned. And I said, don't be disillusioned. Get them, get back together and get at it and make peace. You know, we can do this, you know. Zelensky was elected on a peace platform with the overwhelming support. So may, you know, just help it happen.

So anyway, I... Is it just that you don't want to call me crazy or you don't want to admit how crazy it all is? It's definitely crazy. But I will say, though, I don't, I just don't think that I don't, you know, first of all, And I'll say it again, you know, Putin is the most culpable here. No question about that. No question about that. And I don't, even if they're jerking his chain, that doesn't forgive his behavior.

I'm not saying that. Right. Okay. I know you're not. And nobody really could. So, so the U.S., you know, what the U.S., I don't think American leaders wanted this war. I just don't. Maybe I'm too, you know, I'm naive or something.

But to me, they're just kind of negligent, you know, they, you know, they, when people talked about war, and we did, right? I mean, you and I talked about it in very graphic terms, I think, and others warned, and, you know, the Russians were saying, you know, war is very often a lose, lose proposition, and that's exactly what we've seen here. So, you know, I think it was more American leaders, was just negligent. know, let's face it, the political incentives in a democracy are not to kind of compromise, right? Compromise kind of bad word in Washington and, you know, you can't cave in. And so, you know, so many hawkish voices. And I know well that in government you get promoted if you're if you're hawkish. And that's, you know, we all know the American press like particularly favors hawkish voices. So I mean, you know, all, you know, it was all stand up against Putin and so forth. Well, now we're

paying the consequence. So I mean, I agree that there were so many off-ramps that were so obvious. You know, the neutrality issue is is more than obvious. I can't imagine how it could be any more obvious. You know, I remember I had some arguments with people publicly about, you know, Finlandization and people try to explain to me why that Finland is not a good example. And I shrug my shoulders and said, Finland seems like a really nice place to me, you know, one of the highest standard of living in the world and, you know, the happiest place on earth, I think, are one of them, you know, so what's wrong with that? Let's talk about Finland more, you know, and then I also brought up the water issue a lot. And I was thinking, you know, why shouldn't, you know, why can't

Kiev just open up the taps and allow the water to flow in Crimea? I guess that would be against their pride. But I mean, again, how many more Ukrainians would be alive today if the Russian Army hadn't had to crash across the border to get that water. So, I mean, you know, it's horribly sad. I don't think American leaders are so like, how to put it, they couldn't have figured this out. And somehow it all seems to, as you point out, a lot of it has benefited the United States in terms of, you know, Europe is coming together. There's the end of Nord Stream and, you know, so forth. So a lot, you know, America somehow is, going to benefit, you know, selling a lot of arms, obviously. You know, I think the Germans are now going to buy huge numbers of F-35s and, you know, things that we couldn't have even imagined

two months ago are coming true. And it does, I do think it does somehow benefit the United States in some respects. By the way, there, I think it's worth pointing out, though, there are some major benefits for U.S. national security somehow, you know, despite the human cost. One is we've seen that Russia is is considerably weaker than we thought, right? I mean, it's military, well, they may not be, they're certainly not 10 feet tall and they're not two feet tall, but they're, you know, unquestionably, their power is reduced. And, and I mean, I think this means we, you know, we don't want to overreact to this kind of threat. And the other thing is, you know, I'm happy to see the Europeans are stepping up a bit, and that's probably to the good.

I mean, I think if the Europeans are taking the lead in this Ukraine crisis and in their own security, they would have probably solved this without war. You know, they would have probably made the compromises that were necessary because it's their backyard and they don't want to see it explode. So these are, I think, some kind of positive developments, even in, as we look at a very dark future generally. And by the way, we haven't talked about the nuclear issue,

which is what I wrote that article, but I don't know if you're going to come to that, but I continue to be really. Yeah, I'm very concerned about nuclear escalation. I think I was just listening to Ted Postal, MIT professor. I don't know if you ever talked to him, but he- I know very well.

Go ahead. I know what you're going to say and I want to hear it. Yeah, Postal said that this was more dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis. And that's shocking because I know he knows, He knows all about that. I know about that too, but I mean, in some respects, it is, I have to admit, it is, in some respects, more dangerous because we're talking about the very fabric of the Russian state being threatened, threatened how. Well, if the Russian military suffers a catastrophic loss and it looks like the road is open to Moscow, I have no doubt in my mind that Russia would resort to use of nuclear weapons, a tactical problem.

but, you know, this is extremely troubling and something I certainly, well, actually, you know, there's a report I can send it to you. We actually did talk about this at Naval War College. And I remember, I think it was in 2018 or 2019, unclassified discussions that are public, the results are published online. And we discussed, you know, we said it's very, very, very unlikely that Russia would resort to nuclear weapons unless, and then we put in one caveat, unless the regime was threatened by a defeat on the battlefield. And that may be unfolding. I hope not. I mean, I hope it doesn't, obviously, that that doesn't come to that. But I'm very concerned. You know, in the nuclear era, you cannot hope for the total defeat of your adversary because that circumstance

you see is when you see the mushroom clouds. yeah well you know i think people think there's just this as they call it this taboo but they just think it's magic that it's just never going to happen it hasn't happened in 80 years so it ain't going to happen now so what's your problem yeah and i mean there are voices calling for escalation they say let's call putin's bluff he's not really serious i i disagree with that i think that in the uh worst circumstances if unfolding in ukraine he would resort to you so tactical nuclear weapons and and who knows where that would stop i don't know and look forgive me because this is childish and stupid but this is the way all these things are discussed all the time

everything is hitler everything is munich everything is um you know appeasement or strength and the lesson of world war two is you never appease anybody you always just kill them because there is no appeasement because that's what happened that one time and so When you're talking about give them an easement to Danzig, they're saying you can never give them an easement to Danzig no matter what, you know? Yeah, I just, I mean, one thing I just always try to make clear to people is that, you know, nuclear weapons did not exist in 1938 or, you know, 1941. Had they existed, it would be a very different world, but they didn't exist.

And, you know, I still don't think that you can put. you can equate to Putin and Hitler. Not at all. I mean, there's just very little evidence to suggest that. But I mean, even if you did think that, you still have to reckon with the idea of nuclear deterrence and the fact that we, you know, the idea of trying to reach for kind of regime change or some kind of, you know, destruction of the Russian state as we know it is will absolutely result in the end of the planet. I don't have any doubt in my mind. They really think that they can do some kind of coup in Russia now without H-bombs getting broken out and used. Yeah, I mean, I even, I'm quite fearful of a civil war in Russia. You know, we've, there have been plenty of sort of

civil wars or quasi-ci-ci-civil wars in Russian history. It could well happen again, especially, you know, as has been rumored that the army is somewhat fractured. And, you know, I don't doubt that some elements in the Russian army are very disenchanted, you know, after all the plan has, you know, the war has not gone according to plan, I don't think. And, you know, what does a Russian civil war in 2022 look like? Well, does it involve nuclear weapons? I hope, I sure hope not. It's a very, very frightening proposition. I don't, I don't think we, I don't think that's in the U.S. interest at all. Yeah, got that right. All right, well, listen, I'll let you go and have a good rest of your afternoon.

I sure have had a great time talking to you, as always. I'll appreciate you, Tom. Okay, Scott. Well, we didn't get to chat about China, but we'll put that aside for next time, okay? Yeah, yeah, let's, well, you know what, let me ask you just real quick, because I thought this was funny. I was waiting to be a guest on Fox News, and I saw on the show before that when I was on, the guy says, this whole Russian war in Ukraine is a Chinese plot.

And it was she that put Putin up to this, because this takes American pressure off of him and this and that. Now, obviously, he's kind of projecting his own Republican anti-Chinese priorities there. But at the same time, isn't it true that Putin kind of went and talked with Xi and said, you got my back on this, right, before he launched this attack? Well, you know, Xi and Putin are pros going back a long time. You know, this just didn't start, you know, last year. Right. You know, for, you know, two decades. These, they've roughly been get to know each other and really have been supporting each other. So, I mean, you know, people say, well, well, she has been snookered by Putin.

You know, I don't think that's true at all. I think he, I don't think he saw any war plans, and I don't think they discussed any details. But, I mean, was he roughly aware that there was a decent chance that Putin had lost all patience on Ukraine and was going to strike? Yes, absolutely. And, you know, Putin fully understands that, that, you know, China is also kind of losing patients on Taiwan and might strike at any time. So, I mean, they understand each other.

They have more or less similar goals. They, unfortunately, they share a deep antipathy for the United States, which I think is, you know, is very unfortunate and not necessary and quite avoidable. But that's where we are. And so, no, I mean, I don't think, I don't think it's fair to say this was a Chinese plot. But I also think China has thought about this a lot and will be very deliberate. Of course, in the Chinese way, they will try to maximize benefits and minimize losses. I mean, like any country, but they're pretty good at that. But I will say that my bottom line here is that China will not abandon Russia.

They just have too much at stake. For them, Russia is to the relationship is too important to fail. they can't allow russia to fail uh they need russia in in many respects not just resources but they need russia to have their back like you know if it does come to war over taiwan and so forth so so you know i think in the end they will they will uh sympathize with and uh and even help russia to a considerable degree all right well thank you again lal really appreciate your time on the show man okay scott love what to do keep it up All right, you guys, that is La Goldstein.

He's at Defense Priorities, and now he's a visiting professor at Brown University. So go sign up for that. The Scott Horton Show, Anti-War Radio, can be heard on KPFK, 90.7 FM in L.A. APSRadio.com, anti-war.com, Scotthorton.org, and Libertarian Institute.org.