The Duran Podcast - Biden's new Ukraine strategy, failure not defeat. Order Zelensky to freeze conflict

Episode Date: December 12, 2023

Biden's new Ukraine strategy, failure not defeat. Order Zelensky to freeze conflict

All right, Alexander, let's start things off with Elensky's trip to the U.S., and he was in the U.S. on Monday. Actually, he was in Argentina for the inauguration of Malay. I don't know if you want to comment about that very quickly. And then he flew to the United States, and today he's meeting with Biden. And there are reports that he's going to meet with various senators as well as with the Speaker of the House, Johnson. And I think that's probably the big meeting to try and get Johnson to approve the $61 billion. But there's really not much information as to the reason for Zelensky's trip to the United States. I think the trip to Argentina was a cover. I think the Biden White House told Malay,

invite him to Buenos Aires, and that'll give us an excuse to invite him to the United States instead of telling Zelensky from Kiev, come to the U.S. now, we want to talk to you. It provides a little bit of a cover and doesn't make it look like the Biden White House is in such panic mode. That's just my thoughts about the trip to Argentina. Anyway, your thoughts about Argentina very quickly and then the meetings that are going to take place in D.C. today. Yeah, well, the first thing to say is, I think you're absolutely correct. the Millay trip, the trip to Buenos Aires by Zelensky.

It has all the looks of diplomatic cover, a providing cover, not to Zelensky, but to the White House. They know that for many people in Washington, he is a deeply unpopular person, and that the White House, that the president, has suffered political damage by the closeness of his apparent association with Zelensky. So this way, the White House is able to say, well, you know, he was conveniently in the Americas to meet with Millay. So what more natural thing to do than to invite him to come to Washington and have our discussion there?

So just to say this, I think you're absolutely right. And it's the first time I've heard anybody mentioned that. But it makes complete sense. and if you follow this story as closely as we have done, you can see why your assessment of this is completely 100% correct. Now, that already tells us a few things about this visit, which is that the first thing to say is that this visit bears the hallmarks of the kind of move that people make when we are starting to enter an end game.

And I think the more people have been following events in it around Ukraine, the more clear that it is an end game that we're looking into. So, you know, you have these strange meetings hurriedly set up in this odd kind of way. Get Zelensky to Buenos Aires. He runs into Orban, by the way. And the videos of that are just hilarious. I mean, I find them hilarious. I mean, you could see that the two men to test each other.

You can see that Orban was trying to explain things to Zelensky, and you can see the look of thunder on Zelensky's face when he had to meet Orban. So I'm really sure that was not what he wanted. But anyway, he's now in Washington. And the reports I heard this morning is that obviously he's going to meet Biden himself. He's also going to meet with some senators. apparently it's been arranged jointly by Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell. Mitch McConnell, always an enthusiast for support for Ukraine.

But very importantly, he is being kept away from members of the House of Representatives. The administration knows perfectly well that if you met the members of the House of Representatives, well, they didn't like him before. They'll like them even less this time. So they're keeping him away from meeting them. So the only person from the House of Representatives that he is actually going to meet is Mike Johnson. Now, Mike Johnson is starting to impress me as a rather shrewd operator. I mean, I might be wrong.

but he knows that there is an increasing backlash amongst Republicans in Congress against further aid to Ukraine. He goes and says all the time that, you know, we do understand that this is important and it's a priority, but we can't authorise funding unless two conditions are met. the Biden administration must provide us with a plan. They must tell us what it is exactly that they're hoping to achieve in Ukraine

because we don't know. They've never explained it. And of course that's already deadly because the Biden administration doesn't have a plan. I think that's become absolutely clear over the last few weeks. They do have a plan about how they want to handle the debacle in Ukraine. We'll come to that in a moment,

but they don't have a plan for winning the war in Ukraine. That is the fundamental difference. And Johnson has honed in all that. And he also very cunningly, in my opinion, exploited the fact that when the administration put together, it was a $106 billion package, aid to Israel, aid to Taiwan, aid to Ukraine.

They also lumped it together with funding for the border. And of course, what Johnson has done is he said, well, you know, the border is an absolutely priority issue. We must not just commit more funds to it. We must also commit more action. Do things with respect to the border that we are sure will actually happen. So we want a restructuring of policy on the border. And of course, for Biden, I suspect that that is a red line. I think that he knows that if he starts acceding to Republican requests on the border,

on the border issues, really does impose really tough immigration controls and that kind of thing, then it will collapse support for him on the left and within the DNC and the Democratic Party's base. So I don't see why Johnson would want to do. change his position. Now, in politics, anything can happen, especially American politics, there's probably going to be lots of money sloshing around in the black ground. Representatives being told, look, if we approve this package, we'll make sure that weapons that go for Ukraine are manufactured in your state, and that will provide jobs for your people there. And of course, we all know that that's coming.

for the fact that you get hefty, you know, supports from your military-industrial donors, that kind of thing. So, you know, one must never, ever assume that Johnson is going to stick to his position. Perhaps he will bend. But up to this point, he is showing no sign of doing so. and I don't see how in electoral and political terms, simple electoral and political terms, it would make any sense for him to change his position. So that's what I think, that's what I would say about this. I think for the moment he's more likely to stick to his guns. And he's done something else which rather confirms that in my,

opinion, because on the 13th, on tomorrow in other words, he's going to move forward with an impeachment vote in the House, get the House to vote for an impeachment inquiry on the President of the United States. And Mike Johnson must know and must be calculating that once the impeachment proceedings get underway, they will become the dominant issue in the House of Representatives. They will suck all political oxygen out of everything else. And it's not impossible, of course, that if and when we ever see articles of impeachment drawn up, they will include issues about Ukraine. So everything for the moment points for me towards. Johnson not wanting to move ahead with this.

Wait, I have not thought about that. It would be pretty strange to approve money to Ukraine if you're Johnson, whatever amount, while at the same time going after the Biden White House, including all of the Ukraine Burisma prosecutor, one billion Poroshenko stuff. that would that would put the the the republicans in the house in a very awkward and strange position absolutely now of course it may be that this impeachment vote is that the whole impeachment process isn't going to be taken seriously as it's been gone american politics is so complicated that you know i can only i can only look at the surface i'm there's no way that one can you know

take off the you know the lid off the box and know all that's happening but that's how it looks to me, all of these moves point strongly to me if you take them up face value, which it's all we can do to the fact that the House the Congress will rise on Friday

and there will be no vote for Ukrainian aid. Yeah, well, I mean, you know, Mr. Speaker of the House, you gave $61 billion to Ukraine and at the same time, you're upset with Hunter Biden working at Burisma for an energy company in Ukraine, it's going to look terrible for the Republicans. But who knows?

Yeah, you're right. They may agree to it and they may spin it in some strange and odd way. But I think for the American people, they'll look at a move like that and they'll be like, well, what is going on here? They have until the 15th, I believe, to wrap this up. And then it goes to the next year. Exactly. My understanding is it has to be sorted out by Friday.

Again, there is the option of continuing next week. You know, if Johnson decides to extend the term, that is always, I can tell you for a fact, deeply unpopular with MPs, representatives in any country. I mean, it's not the kind of thing they would want to do. They'll all have their holiday and Christmas plans now and their meetings with people that they want to see in their home states, wherever. So I'm not saying it's impossible.

but there would have to be a very, very big deal done. And of course, Johnson, who as I said is a canny operator, knows he sees the opinion polls. He sees that now a convincing and large plurality of Americans oppose further aid to Ukraine. And he also knows that if he does move forward with a vote for aid to Ukraine, that is going to be very unpopular with some people,

in the Republican Party in the House, and he knows what happened to Kevin McCarthy, and I don't think he wants what happened to Kevin McCarthy to happen to him. So I think he's navigating all of these things with great skill. Now, with a caveat that there's always the possibility that something might change, you know, politics being a strange thing,

especially in America, it doesn't seem to me as if we're likely to see that change. And I can't help but think that the administration itself knows this, which then begs the question of why have they invited Zelensky to Washington? And I suspect that the reason they've invited him to Washington is partly because they do want him to lobby for aid, but just like the trip to Buenos Aires was covered for bringing him to Washington. So I think this device of getting him to lobby for aid to Ukraine could be Kava to get him to understand, Zelensky to understand, that the reality is that aid to Ukraine is now all but spent.

The US anyway doesn't have shells to send to Ukraine, and it's shells that Ukraine needs, and that negotiations, a freeze of the conflict. is now essential. Now, a couple of days ago, a very interesting and very curious article appeared in The Guardian, and it was written by, this is in the British newspaper, it was written by a person I've never come across before, Emma Ashford, but she is apparently based in Washington, and she's clearly in some way connected with the neocons, with the administration, and all of the rest. And it was absolutely startling in its admission.

It said things which I suspect you could probably still not say in the American media. And she said that we need to change the narrative, the narrative about Ukraine. Because Ukraine is clearly losing the war. So let's no longer talk about victory. Let's no longer talk about a regime change in Moscow, any of those things. Let's start talking instead about Ukraine. being successfully defended from this imperialist Russian aggressor. And that way, by changing the narrative,

that will make it easier for the president, Joe Biden, to win re-election in November. It's the first straightforward, open, honest admission. And I think this has to have been done with, you know, some degree of understanding of its implications. Remember, the Guardian, the online Guardian, is widely read in the United States, including by the political class. It's the first recognition that the priority of the administration now

is to try to find some means to close this issue down in advance of the election in November. And that's why they're going to put pressure on Zelensky to try to get him to open these discussions. with the Russians to try to get him to agree to bring the conflict to an end in terms of the fighting and to freeze the conflict on the existing front lines. And there was another long piece in the Financial Times, also a newspaper widely read in the United States, the website widely read in the United States, also a newspaper very, very close to the administration. And that article again said all this propaganda of success that Zelensky

has been plugging over the last year and a half, more than a year and a half now, all this propaganda of success has completely backfired. It's disillusioning everybody. Nobody really believes it anymore. So Ukraine needs to start, you know, fessing up. to what's really happening. Zelensky in particular needs to start fessing up to what is really happening. He needs to acknowledge that Ukraine is now on the defensive,

on the back foot, and of course if he does that, the implication is he should start negotiations with the Russians. So, it is not for me a coincidence that these two articles have appeared just on the eve

of this summons to Zelensky to come to Washington. And a third article, the New York Times article that dropped a couple of days ago, which talks about a plan that the Biden White House and the Pentagon is putting together, a new strategy that they're putting together in order to cover the failed counteroffensive. That's what the New York Times actually calls the counteroffensive. They say in the title of the article, failed counteroffensive. U.S. and Ukraine search for a new strategy after failed counteroffensive. And this article basically says that there is no pathway to win. I mean, it's an admission of defeat.

It says we're not winning this thing. So what is the strategy now that they're trying to put together? Quote, a hold and build strategy. Dig in, hold the Russians back, build up defenses, build up weapons production. and get the Russians to the negotiating table, whether it's the Russians coming to us or whether we get someone Zelensky, maybe someone else, to contact the Russians. Try to create in the next few months or the next year, try to create the conditions where either leadership in Kiev will approach the Russians to negotiate or even better for the Biden White House, where Russia says, okay, let's sit down at the

table and negotiate so that the Biden White House saves face. I think that's that's a great concern to the Biden White House. We cannot have another Afghanistan debacle. Let's make it so that we save face. The war wasn't a failure. It was even. That's what they want to say. It was even. Yes. All this goal is good now. Incredible articles that have come out over the past couple of days. Absolutely correct. And can I just say you're absolutely right. And you're right also to use the word defeat because note how they are avoiding it. Ukraine launched this great counter-offensive with the backing of the West. It failed. In war, if you try and do something and it fails, you suffer a defeat. Either you win, in which case it's a

victory, or you don't win and you lose, and you lose hundreds of thousands of men and machines and all of that, and you're being pushed back, in which case it is a defeat. But avoid the word defeat whenever you can. Talk about the failure of the offensive. Don't talk about the fact that Ukraine was defeated. Talk about a stalemate. Don't acknowledge the possibility that there might be a defeat. Avoid that word at all costs. By the way, the plan, and you're absolutely right, the New York Times article, I should have mentioned that as well, because again, that tells you what this whole thing is now all about. Try to freeze the conflict in some ways, create a North Korea, South Korea, West Germany, East Germany, type of scenario along the current line of control,

and then build up, tell the Ukrainians, you're going to build them up, you're going to get them all the factories and all the arms production and all of that sort of thing. And of course, again, going back to what Eve Smith said, you know, all those months ago, nobody is asking the Russians whether they would what they think about all of this, in spite of the fact that the Russians themselves are, of course, making it absolutely clear. They did so again yesterday. There was a whole series of statements by Russian officials, including the intelligence chief, Sergei Naryshkin.

Anyway, even though the Russians themselves are clearly signaling that they are not interested in this idea, this type of peace, and for the record, by the way, Naryshkin also suggested that the Americans are probably looking

are going to find a way sooner or later to get rid of Zelensky because he's become impossible and he just won't follow orders. But I think that is the primary reason why Zelensky has been invited to Washington. He's going to be taken aside, told a few home truths, confronted with the political realities in Washington itself. They hope he'll be, the how those explained to him,

not just by the administration, but by people like Johnson and Schumer and conceivably even McConnell, and hope that he'll finally go back to Kiev and declare some kind of ceasefire. and contact the Russians and start to negotiate with them. And that is the plan. And it's not in order to enable Ukraine to win. It's not about Ukraine anymore. As Emma Ashman said in that article in The Guardian, it is about changing the narrative in order to get Joe over the line in November.

Yep. The New York Times article even admits to steep losses in the Ukraine military. Ukrainian hospitals are already filled with injured soldiers. Ambulances moved back and forth from the front throughout this year's counteroffensive. Ukraine has not released official numbers of its war dead, but the losses officials concede have been steep. You know, I think they're going to give Zelensky the message. it's either you negotiating with the Russians or it's somebody else, but we're going to wind this thing down. Yes, that's exactly right. The Russians, for their part, just to say, have made it absolutely clear that they're not going to negotiate with the Ukrainians.

There's a new ambassador at large, a man called Miroshenik, who's all over the place now in the Russian media. He's a Russian diplomat, and he's, I suspect, being positioned to head any negotiating team. that has been set up. He said yesterday, or the day before yesterday, that the negotiations will be between the Americans and the Russians. And he also said he followed where Putin had led. And by the way, Naryshkin also said this too, that Ukrainians, Belarusians and Russians are all one people,

the Russian people. And he said yesterday that the objective now, in Ukraine is to liberate the Russian people from this illegitimate and oppressive regime there. That's the Smiroshnik's language and that what is being fought today in Ukraine is a war of national liberation. A Russian war of national liberation. Now, you know, it couldn't be said more clearly than that and it's pretty strong. that is incredibly strong and of course this kind of language

this kind of rhetoric leaves no scope at all, no room at all for the kind of freeze that the Americans are trying to achieve in Ukraine but you're absolutely correct the New York Times article is absolutely a part of this sequence

and in fact you can see you've also had that huge Washington Post article about why the counter-offensive failed the one that was in two parts which basically blames the Ukrainians for everything. Well, we had the U.S. made a few mistakes, but ultimately it was because the Ukrainians didn't follow

wonderful and great advice and didn't fight the war, the offensive, and the way that we'd wanted. So you said you did your best, everything that you could, you now freeze the conflict, and then you move on, and you talk about how this isn't a defeat,

it's a victory, or at least a stalemate, and then you close the topic of Ukraine down until November. And that's the plan, even though, as we said, the Russians have rejected it. Yeah, so, I mean, I imagine their greatest fear, if they're even aware of this, because they never take the Russian side into consideration.

But the people that are aware of the dynamics of the conflict, I imagine their biggest worry right now is if the entire front line collapses, the Zelensky government collapses and then the Russians just move forward. I think from now until the elections, that is, you know, like what happened in a way in Afghanistan? They don't want a repeat of that. So they're trying, I guess they're trying to figure out how do we contain this throughout the next year in 2024. So this doesn't just blow up in our face. I imagine that's their overriding concern right now.

That is absolutely their overriding concern. I mean, there was another article. I mean, we were talking about lots of articles in the Western media. But by the way, I should say that the reason we talk about these articles in the Western media is not because they are factual reporting of what is actually going on on the ground in Ukraine. It's because they tell us about the political shifts amongst Western governments and specifically the American and British and to some extent, the German government. So that's why we deal with this.

But there's a long article in the London government. times. The stalwart reporter in Ukraine, Maxim Tucker, he went to the front lines near Avdevka. He met the troops there. He basically admitted that the Russians have them largely surrounded in Avdeyevka that the Ukrainians are catastrophically outgunned. All of that, all of that we already hear. But again, he floated that precise scenario that you said, Dabdewka falls, the entire Ukrainian front line collapses, the Russians reach the NEPA, they're able to advance north, cutting off the Ukrainians, along the left bank of the NEPA, they cut off the Ukrainian army in the Dombas, what's left of it, and Kiev itself is on the

Dnieper, so as they push north, they eventually arrive at the gates of Kiev itself. So, you know, that's there in here. article. It's there. Now, I don't know whether that that's the Russian plan, but you can see that someone somewhere in Britain, in the United States, is aware of all of these dangers and possibilities. The big question, which of course they don't ask themselves, is that if the Russians are winning the war and are winning it in this big way, why would the Russians want to agree to a freeze? They don't seem to want to address that question. And I suspect the reason why they won't address that question

is because they still think that they still take a completely cynical view of Russian politics and have convinced themselves that if they can buy the Russians around by trading sanctions relief in return for a freeze in the conflict. And I suspect that's ultimately what this is all about. This is what, you know, the genius is in the White House, Sullivan, Lincoln, Newland. Michael McCall, it turns out, the former Obama's ambassador to Washington, who's clearly played an enormous role in all of this.

That's what probably they all imagine. All right, let's wrap up the video with the panic at the EU. Just a quick comment about how all of this is freaking out the European Union. they're going after the Russian assets. You mentioned Orban, Zelensky confronting Arban. They have a whole bunch of meetings this week as well to try and figure out a way to prop up Ukraine. I think it's safe to say that the EU leaders understand that sooner or later the U.S. is going to pull the plug on all of this. And they are freaking out.

They are absolutely freaking out. and they do understand that the US is pulling the plug. I mean, I mean, the absolute nightmare, of course, as we discussed in certain recent programs, is that Donald Trump is elected president in November and does a big deal with the Russians. And that's becoming an increasingly likely possibility. And that absolutely terrifies them.

But even that which the Biden administration is now talking about, and we must assume the European League, leaders are fairly well informed about it. Even that will make them extremely unhappy because it's quite obvious what the administration wants to do. They want to walk away from Ukraine. It's a debacle. They want to freeze everything so that they can walk away

and get on with winning the election. The cost thereafter of supporting what is left of Ukraine is expected to land on the Europeans. That's what the Americans are now telling the Europeans. And the Europeans are now facing an economic crisis. They have invested politically to an extraordinary extent in Ukraine. And they are horrified by this scenario because what they feel is that the Americans are passing to them

are poisoned cup, which is that, you know, They have to continue to support Ukraine, even as Ukraine continues to go down. So, you know, they're busy talking about seizing Russian assets. What they're now talking about is taking the interest from the assets that were frozen, the interest that it's produced, at least sending that to Ukraine, even if they can't yet, they haven't yet found a way, a legal way to touch the capital. That is already, by the way, illegal.

I mean, you know, it's like, say, you know, go into somebody's, bank account, you take the interest out of it and leave the capital alone. That isn't theft. That's the kind of mindset that these people now have. But anyway, that is what they're now proposing to do. And they're also supposed to have this big aid package for Ukraine, 50 billion euros, which is again what the US is telling them. But of course, they're running up against opposition, because Orban and Fizzo are coming along. And they're saying to them, look, you must be joking. This thing is a shambles.

Ukraine is going down. The cost of this is off the scale. And the Americans are walking away. And you're asking us to cough up another 50 billion euros, to help you cough up another 50 billion euros, and impose even more sanctions on the Russians than the ones we have. imposed before, which manifestly haven't worked.

And the Europeans, of course, heavily invested in Ukraine. The government in Germany, its entire credibility now, is tied to Ukraine. They are now trying to find ways of circumventing the likely veto from Hungary and Slovakia by trying to get all the various countries, the big countries, which means Germany and France, basically, to cough up the month. between them by themselves, which will not be popular with the voters in those countries. But the Europeans are absolutely freaking out over this, as you correctly said. And deep down, they know perfectly well that they cannot support Project Ukraine in any form without the United States.

They know that there is a very serious risk of hyperinflation in Ukraine. if American aid is with health. I discussed that in my program, one of my recent programs. They know that the Russians are getting stronger all the time. And they know something else, which is that if the Americans do walk away in the way that some people in the Biden administration

seem to want, then they could start walking away from Europe on a host of other things also. They might decide that the interests of the United States, United States no longer lie so much in this massive commitment the US is making to Europe. The time has come for the US to start to disengage from Europe increasingly and to focus on more serious map questions like the Asia Pacific region and for some possibly even the Middle East. And that again is for the Europeans the ultimate nightmare. So for all these reasons

the Europeans are freaking out in exactly the way the you said. Yeah. What a debacle. All right. I wonder how Olenski's going to take all of this, you know. It's in their constitution that they can't negotiate with Putin. Is that correct? Yeah, I don't believe so. Yeah. He issued this decree. It's certainly illegal. And I mean, he would have to cancel his own decree, presumably. And if you went back to Kiev and told people in Ukraine that that was what he was going to do, well, I mean, where would that leave him, frankly? They would ask, well, why did you pass this decree in the first place? And why are all of those people that, you know, you sent into the army being, you know, why were they sent there?

And Zelensky's position is looking even ever more precarious by the day. There's now criticism in the Ukrainian media about aspects of the war, which you would never have seen before. There's increasing coverage, for example, in Ukraine, about this bridgehead that the, Ukrainians have in Kinki and people are increasingly asking the question what is that all about? Why are our men being sent to this place so that they can be killed within two hours or whatever it is, dozens and scores of them every day when it's clear that they can't advance. So you're starting to see that's moving, that's started being discussed in the sort of dissident media in Ukraine, like Stranagh, which I believe is largely based abroad.

it's now crept into the Ukrainian telegram channels and it's started to creep from the telegram channels into the mainstream media and there's reports that Zelensky is now becoming increasingly worried about soldiers protesting armed men coming to protest in Mindana Square there's a report about this in one of the telegram channels this morning so for him hearing all of this

hearing from the Americans that their aid is ending, being told to accept a freeze, is a political nightmare. It is just about the worst possible news he could hear. And he will push back to the extent that he can. He'll probably continue to say, well, look, I'm going to continue the war. You led me into this mess in the first place. It's your responsibility. I can't change my policy and my guess is that he will continue to resist

any proposal for negotiations go back to Kiev, tell people this, risk whatever protests about that that there might be and hope that rather than let him completely go down, the Americans and the Europeans will nonetheless come to his rescue. A calculation that others have made before. Al-Garney made it in Afghanistan. President Tew made it in Saigon, in South Vietnam.

They thought that if the things really got back, the Americans would have to come to the rescue. And, of course, in those two cases, it didn't happen, and it won't happen in Ukraine either. Yeah, just one more quick comment. Don't be surprised if at the end of these meetings, the Biden White House comes out and says, we're going to support Ukraine for as long as it takes.

We're united in helping Ukraine. We're going to defeat. Russia, we're going to find a way to give Ukraine money. I expect all those statements to go out to the media. Yeah. These demonstrations have resolved. But, you know, Zelensky himself told Time magazine some weeks ago that, you know, he hears all of these brave and wonderful words and he looks into the eyes of the people, the Western officials, who tell him these things and he knows they're lying to him. So we shouldn't, we shouldn't be fooled either.

Yeah. All right. It takes, it takes one liar to know another. Yep. Zelensky give Putin a call. That's the best advice. If I were to give Zelensky any advice, that would be the advice that I would give him. Yeah, except of course, the Putin is, I mean, the Russians are basically saying that they won't negotiate with him. So he might not pick up the phone. The better thing to do, actually, just just saying this, China, exactly. He should call Xi Jinping and tell Xi Jinping, look, we're prepared to go along with all your plans, just get the Russians to sit down with us. And, you know, the Chinese might in their own interest do that.

But whether Zelensky will do this is another matter. And if, of course, if he does do it in that kind of way, through the Chinese, the Americans will be furious with him. So whatever, whichever way he does it, whichever way he turns, he looks like a loser. What a terrible mess. mess he got himself into he just should have

done the TV shows you know he should have just continued yeah I mean he he's clearly he was clearly disastrously out of his depth as president of Ukraine

I mean one just has to say this and he's no church we'll end it to there yeah he's no churchill that's for sure he should not have listened to Boris Johnson my god my god all right uh the duran dot locals dot com we are on rumble odyssey pitch you telegram rock fin and twitter x and go to the durand shop 20% off use the code the durand 20 take care