The Duran Podcast - Collective west refuses to admit Ukraine offensive has failed

Episode Date: September 15, 2023

Collective west refuses to admit Ukraine offensive has failed

All right, Alexander, let's talk about what is going on in Ukraine. And we can talk about what's going on on the front lines, though. I have a feeling that you're not going to have that much to report about on the front lines because it does look like things are starting to diminish for the Ukraine's big counteroffensive. It's definitely ebbing away. And they've liberated Rabatina now 20 times. I don't even know how many more headlines they can get out of it at this point in time. But I think there's some interesting stuff that we could talk about from a geo-politics angle.

And maybe we can expand on the video that we did with Lincoln's trip to Kiev. Lincoln was in Kiev, then Boris Johnson was in Kiev, and Annalina Berbach was in Kiev. And I think they were all delivering the same message to Zelensky. And we had an interesting interview from Blinken to ABC News. I believe it. Yeah, ABC News. And we had a couple of interesting interviews from Zelensky to CNN, Farid Zakaria, and a big one from the economist.

So it wasn't a dedicated interview. It seems like the economists, they grabbed Blinken outside of a conference and they had a chat with him. But, you know, he said some very interesting things. And I think that the video that we did on Blinken going to Kiev is pretty much spot on as to what is happening now, given the statements that have followed up from that meeting, that two-day trip to Kiev. So where do you want to begin? Do you want to tackle the geopolitics first or do you just want to wrap up the front lines? Let's wrap up the front lines.

and the short answer is, the offensive is, as you correctly said, ebbing away. Now, it's ebbing away. They're fighting over the same places, the same ground, the same places that we've been hearing about now for weeks. Rabotino, Verbovoje, Kleshevka, all of these places. They're fighting at the same places. Mahmouds. All of these places, exactly.

It's always the same places, and it's the same fields and the same forest plantations, but they're making no progress. at all. A few weeks ago we were hearing about the breakthrough. I don't think many people want to really talk about the breakthrough. Nobody actually says where this breakthrough has happened. But in fact, if you go back and listen and read where the reports about where the fighting is happening, it's a complete standstill. It's the same places all the time. And they have to make up stories to give us, you know, sense of drama that something is happening,

You know, with Ukraine, it's always theater. So they send some people to some oil rigs, some deserted oil rigs at the Black Sea, and they raise the flag. And apparently they run away. They move away very fast. But, you know, it's provided some headlines for the Western media to work on. So, you know, you have the photo of the photo of the Ukrainian soldiers on the deserted gas rigs in the Black Sea. And that's it.

And the reality is that the offensive, I'm not going to say it's stuck, it's failed. They're not going to break through to Topmac. They're not going to break through to Milo Topol. They're not going to reach the sea of Azov. Millie has come out and said they've got 30 to 45 days in which to achieve something. they're not going to achieve in 30 to 45 days what they haven't been able to achieve in three and a half months. In fact, it's inconceivable that they have.

The one thing I will say, and this is, I think, the sad part of all of this, is that they can't just announce that the offensive has failed. They can't just call it off. They can't say that we're on the defensive because doing that would contradict the narrative so much and would shape morale and shake confidence. So they have to pretend that the offensive is still happening.

And unfortunately, the burden of that is being paid by the soldiers on the front lines. They are having to launch these constant assaults on fortified Russian positions. There's reports that Ukrainian ammunition. Their stock of ammunition is now all but exhausted. So some say they're firing 1 to 2,000 rounds of shells a day. Others put it slightly higher, up to 3,000 shells a day. That is nowhere near enough. Their husbanding what's left of their armoured forces.

So you have lightly armed infantry trying to walk across minefields, trying to approach heavy Russian fortified positions and they've been killed in their hundreds and it's happening every day and if anything even this offensive itself is ebbing I get the sense that

Ukrainian losses are actually rising and it's only happening because no one can come out and say straightforwardly the offensive has failed and needs to be called off and it's a tragedy, it's a human tragedy, but that is where we are. Can I correct you there on that point? Shoygu and Putin have said it failed. Yeah, it's true.

You're completely right. You're completely correct. But no one, that's criminal propaganda. Exactly, exactly, exactly. That's my point is, yeah. Exactly, exactly. You're absolutely right. The Russians say it's failed.

Ukraine has to pretend that it's still continuing. People in the West have to pretend. pretend it's still continuing. Even merely has to pretend that it's continuing. If you listen carefully to what he's saying, you can see he doesn't really believe it's going to achieve anything now. So everybody in the West and in Ukraine has to pretend that the offensive is still ongoing and that it's going to continue after the autumn and it's going to continue into the winter and even the spring. But I don't think anybody takes that seriously. And in the meantime, more and more people have to die in order to keep this narrative

alive. Yeah. The people that really care about Ukrainian lives are going to be the people that say the truth and say this offensive has failed. Exactly. Failed miserably. And we need to stop this. Yes. Ukraine hasn't broken through. They cannot win. This has to end. This is a good segue now to the geopolitics of what's going on because we did a video a few days ago. I think it caught, it got quite a lot of attention because we, you, you specifically, we made an interesting speculation, maybe I could say, I don't want to say prediction, a speculation, which was that given the duration of Blinkin's trip to Kiev and everything that that was going on with the counteroffensive and a lot of the rhetoric that was coming out of the Biden White House,

that Blinken delivered some bad news for the Olensky regime about the plan going forward, which is a type of Korea-style Germany type of armistice slash freeze of the conflict. Not a new idea. This is an idea that has been flown. around six months ago about freezing the conflict in one form or another, especially along a German, East-West Germany type of framework. Now it's a Korea type of armistice. So we made that video. We talked about this possible plan that Blinken brought to Olenski.

and since that blinking trip, we've had some more high-profile visits to Kiev. And just the other day, it was Annalina Berbach. The way I look at it, the U.S., they brought the plan to Olensky. They said this was going to happen. The U.K. sent their representative. Who better than Alensky's best friend, his mentor, Boris Johnson, the guy that kind of got him in this mess, I guess we could say. and then in came the German EU representative in Annalina Berbach.

So what do you think? I think that the more we see, the more clear it's become that our speculation of the other day. And it was a speculation at the time, and we said as much, but it's increasingly looking like it's true. We've had all of this procession of people coming to Kiev, notice that they're all coming empty-handed. none of them is actually coming with anything substantial. I mean, even Blinken when he was there, he talked about, you know, we're going to supply you with more weapons, but in fact he didn't actually supply Ukraine with any more weapons.

There's been talk about these attack missiles being provided, but that was since Lincoln was there. But whilst he was there, there was nothing actually new. Beirbok didn't come up with anything new, and there was a rather, you know, sharp exchange, about these tourist missiles, you know, the Ukrainians, Calabor, saying, you know, we're going to get them anyway. Well, you know, you're going to give them to us.

And she clearly wasn't prepared to commit to that publicly. But everybody's come empty-handed. Everybody comes with words about, you know, we're going to support Ukraine. And Ukraine's fighting heroically for its, you know, existence and its represent our values. and all of these things, and the West is united behind Ukraine. And then directly after Blinken's visit,

we start getting these interviews from both Blinken and Zelensky himself. And they tell us a fascinating story. I mean, first of all, Zelensky has this meeting with the economist. I think in some ways that's the more interesting one, because it's not a prepared one, not fully prepared. but he is clearly in a furious mood. The economist says that he's somber. And they also say that he's calm.

Why would they say that he was calm? He really was. I mean, you know, it's the sort of thing. Why talk about the fact that he was calm? In fact, he was clearly very, very angry. And he says under no circumstances, will he, you know, negotiate with Putin. Negotiations with Putin are absolutely unacceptable.

But he admits that when people come to see him, and who's just been to see him, Blinken has just been to see him, and tell him that, you know, we're all 100% behind Ukraine. He says, I look into their eyes, and I know that they're not telling me the truth anymore. So that already tells you, it gives it away that, in fact,

the meeting with Blinken didn't go well. and that in fact Blinken didn't come with the kind of things that Zelensky wanted to hear. And Zelensky says, you know, if people cut us off, so it turns out that there is clear signs that Ukraine is not going to get the cornucopia of weapons that he got last year or this year, there will be far fewer weapons and other things supplied to Ukraine next year.

He says, if they do that, if they do that to us, Then we will mobilise completely. Every single man and woman will be sent to fight, and we will militarise our economy totally, entirely absurd things, by the way. And then he made a really ugly, horrible threat, which is directed at the Europeans themselves. And he said, well, you know, you've got all of these millions of refugees in your country from Ukraine. They will feel really angry and betrayed if you let us down.

and there's no knowing of how they might respond. And this, of course, from the leader of a country, which as the economist, has also discussed, has had an assassination program ongoing in Russia and in Dombas, going all the way back to 2014. Interesting admission. That was an interesting admission in itself, by the way. So a really ugly, nasty threat there,

which I notice no one outside of independent media you don't see anywhere in the mainstream media, anyone picking up on that. And that he has another interview, much more formal interview with our old friend, Farid Zachariah, Niacon in chief, more controlled and more measured. But if you really look behind it, he's essentially saying the same thing. So he's very angry. He's very upset with the message that Blinken gave to him. and it's clear that what Blinken came along and said is,

look, Volodymy, we've done all we can, we can't give you much more. The time has come to talk. The only thing that's different is that I thought that the Americans would be doing the talking, but what Blinken wants is for the Ukrainians to do the talking. And that's where Blinken's ABC interview comes in. Because Blinkett basically is inviting the Russians, the Russians, to come along and make an offer of negotiations to Ukraine. And he's saying to the Russians, say, look, if you do that, I am sure the Ukrainians will come and sit down and have a meaningful discussion with you. This is at the same time as Zelensky himself is saying, we can't negotiate with the Russians under any.

circumstances whatsoever. Putin is, you know, the mustachian man from Munich. This would be Munich, 1938, all over again. We're not going to talk to the Russians. Well, Blinket says, on the contrary, the Ukrainians are very willing to talk, provided, of course, you in Russia are prepared to talk to them. So he's inviting the Russians to talk. He's telling the Ukrainians that you must talk to the Russians. The Ukrainians are not happy about attack at all. And it's clear what the negotiations that Blinken envisages are. And it's exactly what we said. The Korea, West Germany, solution.

You partition Ukraine. You don't recognize the occupied territories, as they called, as actually part of Russia. You claim that they're still part of Ukraine, but you freeze the conflict. The West gives security guarantees to Ukraine. And of course, the West is the United States is slow walking that. They don't want to give the security guarantees while the war is ongoing because that might involve them in a conflict with Russia.

But they say, you know, to the Ukrainians, freeze the conflict. We'll give you these security guarantees. And maybe one day soon you'll be able to join them. NATO and the EU as well. And Zelensky is furious about it. He doesn't want to go there. He knows that if he does that, he is basically finished politically in Ukraine itself. He also knows that there will be a massive reaction against the war and against everything

by the Ukrainian people. And he doesn't want to face that. But that's what the United States is doing. That is what it is trying to do. Prime Minister of Denmark was there. the former Prime Minister of Britain is there. The German foreign minister has just gone there as well. They're all telling Zelensky the same thing.

Yeah, in that interview with the economist, Zelensky gives it away. He says the Russian president has a habit of creating frozen conflicts on Russia's border. I mean, the projection, he's giving it away. He's basically saying to the economist, Blinken wants me to. freeze this conflict. He's coming out and he's and he's saying it. And in your video that you did on the Blinken interview with ABC News, it's Blinken talks about, you know, the, the agreement, which Ukraine will agree to negotiate and will support them because that's, that's the position that Blinken is saying, Ukraine will negotiate. And if they decide to negotiate, we'll absolutely

support them. Yeah, no problem. You know, he's saying that it has to reflect the, the, the, the sovereign Ukraine and the territorial integrity of Ukraine. It's like the first time you hear Blinken ever, ever talking about Ukraine and not having the words as long as it takes or 1991 borders or anything like that in the message. There was no mention of any of that, no mention of Crimea, none of this stuff. It's Blinkin's way of saying, look, you know, we as the collective West and you as Zelensky, you have to just accept the fact that Russia's going to have this territory. It's going to hold on to this territory. But we'll give you maybe perhaps a little bit of cover. I want to see what you think about this, this theory that I have. Don't worry, Zelensky. We're not going to leave you totally exposed to the Banderites. We'll give you NATO membership. We'll dangle that to the people of Ukraine and to the Banderites in the West. You can go to them and maybe you can say EU membership. I think I Annalina is kind of saying, don't worry, we'll push to get you into the EU. So, you know, they're kind of softening the blow for Zelensky. You know, yes, you're going to have to slowly, slowly come out and admit that you need to negotiate with Russia. But you can go to the people and say NATO is coming, EU membership is coming. I've had assurances from Annalina. So, you know, the year and a half of fighting, the hundreds of thousands of lives.

lost is not for nothing. I think that's kind of what they're trying to get a lot's going to say. But let me just say, what we're thinking? If he doesn't agree, I think they'll replace him. Yes. You know, I think he continues to push back with these threats. I think they'll say, okay, it's not working out with this guy. I absolutely agree with, but all of that, and I would point out also that it's starting to look increasingly, the reason that Reznikov, the defence minister, has been shuffled out, I mean, there's many reasons. The failure of the offensive is one. The fact that he basically sold the West

a false story that, you know, Ukraine, if it was given all these weapons, all these tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, it would be able to roll through the Russian defences. And I think they're angry with him for that reason. But the other reason they want to get rid of him is because he also is ruling out any idea of a frozen conflict. He actually has written a long piece in The Guardian saying as much now that he's ambassador to Britain. So they moved out Reznikov because he's opposed to this sort of deal. And of course, if Zelensky holds out, they'll shovel him out as well.

And notice suddenly, out of nowhere, lots of talk about elections in Ukraine, about presidential elections, parliamentary elections, things we haven't been hearing about for a very long time. There was even a couple of days ago, I didn't understand why it appeared, but it makes sense. There was even an article at the London Times, the London Times, you know, about how authoritarian a place Ukraine has become and about the fact that Zelensky isn't basically allowing political dissent and proper operation of politics anymore. So it looks as if, you know, yesterday's hero is going to become tomorrow's no one. Yeah.

And a lot of corruption. All of a sudden. All of a sudden, the EU has discovered, according to Politico, all of a sudden the EU discovered that Ukraine is corrupt. And, you know, maybe it's not going to be proper to allow the Ukraine into the European Union. And all of a sudden, it's corrupt. And you have a poll, which shows that even Ukraine citizens consider Olensky to be a problem with regards to corruption. So all of this stuff is starting to be filtered out by the collective West media.

So, I mean, let's wrap this video up with, I think, probably the most important question that needs answering. Okay, so Blinken and his team at the State Department, they're going to have to figure out a way to. to either get Zeletsky on board with their plan or if he's not on board with their plan, they're going to have to find a way to shuffle him out. The big problem that the West has is Russia. This plan is all well and good, you know, freeze the conflict, Korea, armistice, you know, security guarantees for Ukraine, NATO, EU. Russia holds on to the territory.

Conflict is frozen and they can go campaign for 2024. The big question, Mark, is, has anyone asked Russia? No, they haven't. What do you do to convince Russia to agree to this? And can Russia be convinced to agree to this? I mean, I think the answer is no. They won't agree. But they've already rejected it.

I mean, that's the bizarre aspect about this. There's a really good article by Eve Smith that's just come out again on naked capitalism. And she makes the same point that she's made previously, that the West spends all its time coming up with these clever, you know, diplomatic things. They don't really talk to the other side. They don't listen to what the other side is saying. So they spend all this time negotiating and talking with each other. And then they come up with these proposals to the Russians.

And that the Russians say no. And that's exactly what's going to happen again. Because from a Russian point of view, this doesn't address. the key issue, which is Ukraine's NATO membership. Provided this is left unresolved, and, you know, the door to NATO membership is left ajar, the Russians are not incentivised to end the war. On the contrary, they're incentivised to continue it.

And, of course, if you're talking about pushing, getting Ukraine into NATO eventually, if you're talking about security guarantees to Ukraine, if you're talking about providing more weapons to Ukraine, well, again, the Russians will just carry on, because from their point of view, why shouldn't they? It makes sense of them, because, one, they're winning. I mean, you should remember, you know,

if the Ukrainian counter-offensive has failed, that means that the Russians have won a defensive. success. They've succeeded. They've successfully defeated this offensive. And this has been Ukraine's biggest effort up to now. It's been the West's biggest effort up to now. And of course the Russians, their forces are still building up. Putin is talking about that today. He's talking about how they've got 270,000 men already equipped and we're ready and they're going to get more by the end of the year. So why should the Russians stop? What is in this deal for them?

It might help Joe Biden and the Democrats with some of their political problems of the US. It might get some European politicians off the hook. But it doesn't in any way, conceivable way, address their concerns, Russian concerns. And the other thing is, of course, the Russian sense that globally the wind is behind them. They've just managed to win a diplomatic victory at the G20. The other countries, China, India, the other countries from the global South Mexico, they all back them. This attempt by the Western powers to get critical words into the G20 statement failed. and we now just had reports literally

I was reading that just before this program started that even Vietnam, which President Biden has just visited, is now quietly talking to the Russians about a big arm's deal. So, you know, why should the Russians agree to any of this? I can't see it. They don't trust Biden, they don't like Biden, they've got no reason to trust or like Biden. like near Beirbog or any of these European leaders or Burrell or any of them.

As far as they're concerned, a frozen conflict doesn't work and they've already ruled it out. So my fear on all of this is that, you know, the U.S. is not going to engage a diplomacy with Russia. They're never going to ask the Russians, you know, what's your perspective on this? what would you like to see as far as a deal that needs to be made? And they're just going to, instead of engage with the Russians and talk to the Russians, they're just going to try to threaten the Russians and escalate them into agreeing. Escalate them into agreeing is what I think is going to happen. For example, the attack arms.

I think the attack them's and the terrorists, we shouldn't look at those as wonder weapons or weapons that are actually going to, that the U.S. is going to give to Ukraine in order to change the dynamics of the war. I'm looking at the attack arms or the tourist missiles being given to Ukraine as the U.S. using them as a negotiation tool. That's exactly what I think they are. That's exactly what I think. I think also, by the way, going beyond that, I mean, they're going to be more threats of a, more sanctions, more sanctions on other countries, threats against Russian shipping. It's not impossible now.

All kinds of things like that to try to get the Russians to back down and, agree to negotiate. So yes, I think there will be a major attempt to escalate threats against the Russians, but the Russians have absorbed so many threats by now. Why would they be impressed by this? Yeah, I agree. But I think in the next six months or so, this is going to be what we're going to see. Yes. It's more escalation. Not so much to take us to World War III, though there's a risk of that, but to try and get the Russians to agree to, an armistice. Absolutely. So, I mean, by the way, we're already seeing big NATO exercise.

It's being prepared again. I don't think Russians are going to be intimidated by that at all, but I completely agree. I think that's exactly what they're going to do. And they're going to, you know, pull out every stop that they possibly can to try to find some means to gain leverage over the Russians. I mean, we'll probably discuss this in another program, but we'll, see how the US is trying to insert itself into the southern Caucasus, for example, with joint exercises with Armenia and all that kind of thing. As I said, I think that far from being intimidated

by these threats, what they will actually do is that they will harden Russian resolve. They will make the Russians even more determined to see this thing through. But that, I am sure, is what they're going to try and do. Unfortunately, they just can't simply talk. No. All right. The durand.local.com. We are on Odyssey, Rumble, Bit Shoot, and Telegram, and X, formerly known as Twitter. And go to the Duran shop, 10% off, use the code. Good day.

Take care.