The Duran Podcast - Oreshnik and US escalation w/ Brian Berletic (Live)

Episode Date: November 25, 2024

Oreshnik and US escalation w/ Brian Berletic (Live)

Okay, we are live with Alexander Mercuris and joining us today on the show is our good friend and one of everyone's favorite guests on the Duran, Mr. Brian, Berletic. Brian, how you doing? I'm doing well. Thank you so much for having me back. It's always an honor and a pleasure. Brian, where can people find you and follow your work? Just type in the new Atlas into YouTube and in the video description under each video are all kinds of places you can find and follow my work on Rumble, X, Telegram.

These are the main places that I post my work. I have those links in the description box down below. And when the stream is over, I will add them as a pinned comment. So you can follow all of Brian's work. and let's say a quick hello to everyone that's watching us on Rockfin, on Odyssey. Hello to everyone on Rumble and YouTube and our community on locals. The durand.com. Please join our locals community.

It is a fantastic community and a big shout out to everyone on locals. And also a hello to our moderators. A thank you and a hello to our moderators for this live stream. Let's see who is with us today. I believe I saw Zareel and Peter somewhere in the chat, but everyone helping us moderate. Thank you very much, Alexander, Brian. Let's get started because we have a lot of news to cover.

A lot going on in Project Ukraine and in Europe, as well as the United States with the Biden administration and the incoming Trump administration. Alexander, Brian, let's begin. Let's indeed begin, and I'm better to discuss these momentous weeks than Brian, because these last three weeks have been absolutely extraordinary and they're becoming extremely frightening. I mean, this is a very dangerous time. So three weeks ago, there was an election of the United States, as everybody knows. Donald Trump won, but he is not yet president. There are attempts he's trying to set up create an administration. It's proving a difficult operation as far as I can see. But anyway, that's what he's trying to do. He is recruiting all sorts of very interesting people that we will no doubt be discussing later in this program to that administration. But in the meantime, a kind of fever has broken out in Europe, within the administration, the current existing

administration itself, and it is a fever about Ukraine. And I'm going to suggest that the major driver of this fever is, yes, partly Donald Trump's election to the presidency and the uncertainties that exist about what that means. Trump himself is saying very little. The main driver, in my opinion, comes from a different place completely. A couple of days ago, the BBC published an article entitled, that there are, well, saying that there are now concerns in London that the front lines in Ukraine are going to collapse at some point

in the next few weeks and months. Now, on my return to London, I got all kinds of people writing to me about that article, one in particular, whom I'm absolutely not going to name, but who I find that person's insights very interesting and who certainly has information, accesses to information that I can't match. But anyway, this article,

goes directly to the point of the current crisis. Everything has been tried up to this time to win the war in Ukraine. And when I say win the war to defeat Russia, to provoke a regime change in Moscow, to force the Russians to change their strategic orientation from China to the West, to open up their economy to Western investment, a wonderful euphemism for returning in effect to the economic policies of the 1990s and the plunder and acid stripping and all of that which took place then and resource stripping as well. So everything

has been thrown at this and nothing has worked and they're now getting increasingly desperate because they can see that the writing is well and truly on the wall. So they're not able or willing at the moment to change their policies. The Europeans in particular, I get the sense, feel especially exposed because, of course, Russia is close to them. That's one thing. But they have relied,

they've gambled very heavily on gaining access to Russian resources. So for them, this is an existential issue. They sense the gravity, the crisis of their economies. And you have to live in Europe, especially Western Europe, to understand how grave the crisis is. So they see the great gamble, the great plan is now falling apart,

and they're doing everything they possibly can to try to save the situation, to try to turn it around, to try to push the Russians in some kind of way that will either drag the Americans in or provoke a crisis in Moscow. And so far, they're not, they haven't succeeded. But we can see the risks are growing. We've had the attacks on Russia itself using missiles, which the British and the French governments lobbied for. We see the attempts in Germany to get the German government

to provide similar missiles to Ukraine as well. Again, the assumption being that these missiles somehow are going to change the strategic calculus. never understood how. There's also a kind of fevered atmosphere which is now leading, who apparently, and according to Le Mans, discussions between Britain and France, again, about sending troops to Ukraine. This is the British Army shrinks, and France is on the brink of a renewed political crisis. And we see increasingly dangerous steps towards escalation. With the administration in Washington,

the Biden administration, fully up for this as the president himself and his officials and the people around them seem to be absolutely committed to try to make this war continue for as long as possible, to continue beyond Donald Trump's inauguration, perhaps locking Trump himself in. So incredibly dangerous games of escalation being played, even as the Russians continue to advance,

and even as the Russians now start taking countermeasures. And we saw that with the Orschenik strike on the factory in NEPRO, the former Neapro-Petrovsk, a factory, by the way, that I remember reading all sorts of frightening things about the cult war, but never mind. forget to that in the meantime. And I don't think myself we have ever been in a more dangerous situation at any time in my lifetime than we are now. I was alive at the time of the Cuban missile crisis, but I was very little then, and I don't remember anything about it. So in my

adult lifetime, I've never known a dangerous time, a time as dangerous as this. Well, that's my overall summary, Brian. I don't know whether you want to, where you can add your own thoughts. Perhaps you want to push back on some of the things I've been saying. But anyway, I've never known the sense of fever and anger and fear, because anger and fear are always interconnected, that there exists, at least in Europe today. Well, actually, I agree with everything you're saying. I would say the clock that is ticking first and foremost for the US and its European proxies, NATO, is the situation on the battlefield in Ukraine. Not so much this transition in administration, but the situation on the ground. And we saw this panic setting in slowly but surely

as Ukraine's military capabilities deteriorated. We saw this main, now it's manifesting itself in a very over way. But we have all been following this very closely all along. The mania has always been there and it has always been growing. And now we're at a very critical time where there's obviously a tipping point. Perhaps a tipping point has already been reached. And this is what we're seeing on the battlefield. But the lines are crumbling. Now this point of using these missiles inside Russia, I heard, I think it was that same BBC article,

they were saying, this is to help Ukraine, hold on to the territory. that they've seized in Kursk. But they've been already using these missiles and it hasn't helped them hold on to their actual territory in Ukraine. So how is this going to help them hold on to territory in Russia? It makes no sense at all.

None of this is rational. I agree with you that this is the most dangerous time, I think, in recent history because the irreversible decline of the West is at an unprecedented state right now. And just the whole premise of Western primacy around the globe, over Russia, over China, over Africa, Latin America, it is irrational, does not make sense.

It is impossible to implement. And so if you start, if that is your starting point, everything you build up on top of that will be irrational. And the measures that you need to try to use, to pursue this become more dangerous because they are more desperate. And I would say delusional. We were just talking before we went live

about how many, I think, politicians in the West are deluding themselves. They go to Kiev and they see a sense of normality. And they pick to look at that and ignore all the other signs that say it's not normal. And they convince themselves that, no, everything is still fine. The West is still secure.

This is still possible. This is doable. We just have to push a little bit harder. And now we're seeing intermediate range ballistic missiles being used that have never been used before because these were the missiles of choice during the Cold War to launch nuclear weapons over both sides of the divide in Europe. So yes, it is unprecedented. It is extremely dangerous. And I think it's only going to get worse. So two things to say. The person who told us this, this is not, I think, any kind of secret. The person who told Alex myself and various other people, we were there, we were part of a group of people from the media world in London. About the normalcy in Kiev was the deputy foreign minister of Hungary.

And he visits, has visited Ukraine several times. and he spoke about how Kiev itself gives every appearance of normality. You know, the restaurants are working, the nightclubs are working. Everything seems completely normal. But when you leave the city, you find that the villages are completely empty of people. You can drive for 30 minutes through the Ukrainian countryside and you won't see anyone. So there are these small clusters in Ukraine where life appears to continue in a normal way, but it's not reflective of the overall reality in the country.

And the question was asked of this person, does this perhaps create a potential sense of dissociation that Western officials who go to Kiev and Ukrainian officials, themselves who work in Kiev don't have an understanding of how disastrous the situation overall in the country is. And this person, the Deputy Foreign Minister, seemed up to a point at least, a very fair point to agree. I mean, he thought that this could be the case. So there we are. This artificial normalcy in Kiev, by the way, I mean, he didn't say this, but it has clearly been fostered and created by the Ukrainian government itself.

They've created this bubble of normalcy around themselves in Kiev, which is what they function inside. And that, I think, has caused them to lose contact with what's going on in the rest of the country. Now, about the missile strike, which you just mentioned, Ryan, And I don't know whether you've been listening and following what Professor Theodore Postel has been saying. I may not be up to date with his very latest thinking. But yesterday, he was talking about this being a hypersonic glide vehicle. The missile that had been launched had then launched a hypersonic glide vehicle,

which launched separate missiles of its own onto the target. In other words, an incredibly advanced technology of which there is no analog in the West. And I also heard this morning, I think both Alex and I received this. And an email, again, we can't say from whom, but it was somebody who's very well connected in the Washington world,

who says that the military are concerned, confirming that the target that was attacked has suffered significant, indeed enormous damage, and that this is creating shockwaves within the military establishment. So you mentioned the decline of the West. We've just seen a demonstration that the other side has capabilities that we don't have and cannot even imagine. Absolutely. And this isn't the first time this has actually happened this whole.

conflict in Ukraine has been a wake-up call for the West, but no one that needs to hear this message is actually hearing it. The whole issue of military industrial capacity has been completely ignored and neglected across the entire West. I was listening to one of your recent programs talking about, and Alex as well, talking about how, Now, Russia is producing several times more in just three months than all of Europe combined, I think, in a year, something like that. And these capabilities, this missile, yes, definitely. In terms of air defense, yes, definitely.

In terms of electronic warfare, yes. So there's all of these capabilities, a growing list of capabilities that Russia, but also China, are developing and advancing at a pace that the collective West simply cannot keep up with. And it's not because of an incapability of Western people to grasp these concepts. It is systemic. It is the for-profit, just as I've talked about many times before, a for-profit system that puts profit ahead of all other purposes. The purpose of a defense industry is to defend your country, to produce these weapons. produce them in quantities necessary for defending your country or whatever it is you're trying to do.

The Collective West has not done that. So they have these global ambitions, but because it's predicated on greed and expansion, the industry itself has also reflected this and it has worked against them. And there's no way for them to fix this. The Russians, the Chinese, they are accelerating, and the collective West hasn't even been able to catch up. And so this is just going to get worse and worse and worse. Now, the missile is scary. I heard you talking, Alexander, about China also having a similar capability, although this was an intercontinental ballistic missile.

This is a missile that can hit any target anywhere on Earth. The missile Russia used was a missile that could have. hit anywhere in Europe. It cannot reach the continental U.S. And there has been a lot of talk of both Russia and China developing intercontinental ballistic missiles with conventional warheads

to use as a deterrent against the collective West in this decade-spanning campaign to encircle and contain both Russia and China. One more thing that I want to say is that this conflict in Russia is directly connected to China.

and China is directly connected to Russia. And I think there's a misconception among many people in the West that Russia and China have been pushed together in some sort of unnatural alliance of convenience. But in actuality, they are natural allies. They have been all throughout history. The Sino-Soviet split was an anomaly.

And they would have been allies, close allies anyway. This is just supercharging it and accelerating it and allowing them to do things that they normally probably, wouldn't be able to justify politically, but they can. So the harder the West continues pushing in this irrational direction, the worst it will become for them. The worst the situation around the globe will become

because the rest of the world is reacting to this now. I want to just touch on the point about China, Russia, being natural friends, because there is a huge amount of misunderstanding about this and is based on a false reading of history. It focuses on one specific period in Chinese-Russian relations, which is the period of the 1960s, when there was the Sino-Soviet split,

which was driven to a very great extent by ideological conflicts, which of course have no relevance today. Chinese-Russian relations were first established in the late 17th century during the reign of people, Peter the Great and the Kangxi Emperor of China. I know all about this history. I've researched it. I've even written articles about it, by the way.

And the point is that throughout the late 17th, 18th and early 19th century, China and Russia had very, very friendly relations. The Russians had embassies in Beijing long before any other European country, apart from the Vatican. And they had very good diplomatic relations, and Chinese ambassadors came to St. Petersburg on a regular basis, and the Russian ambassadors went to Beijing on a regular basis. And then there was a brief period of tension in the 1890s and early 1900s, and then after the emperor abdicated in China in 2011, there was again a very, very long period

of very friendly and good relations between China and Russia. Sunyat-sen and Vladimir Lenin established a close relationship. They never met, but there was a lot of friendship at that time. And the Russians supported the Chinese against the Japanese. And this then deepened after the Communist Party came to power in China. And there was this relatively beef period, as I said, at the Sino-Soviet split. It didn't last very long, and we've had steady improvement in relations ever since. This idea that these countries are natural enemies has no historical basis.

It's on the contrary, the period of tension between them. That is the historical anomaly. And I think I just want to make this point, because I've had to argue this and explain this many, many times. but people in the West always focus on this one single period when there existed tensions, disregarding the remaining 200 plus, 250 plus years of generally good relations and in many cases very deep and close friendship. Just to make that specific point. Now, moving on to other things, what are we going to do in the West? Because you talk about the fact that people don't recognize the fact that there are limitations

and they won't deal with the structural problems of Western economies, which make it impossible for them to compete in this area. There is, as it happens, an article in The Guardian today, which is exactly reflected of the thinking that you've said. It's by a gentleman who is Mr. James Nixie. And if you want to track it down, is who is really escalating the war in Ukraine. It certainly isn't the West.

And he does exactly what people like him invariably do. He reduces everything to a question of will. completely ignore the state of our arms factories, the state of our science and technologies, the state of our depleting arsenals. We've now had the American Admiral who is in charge of the fleet in the Indo-Pacific saying that American arsenals are becoming depleted. We don't have enough missiles for this and that. He ignores all of this.

He says that the reason Ukraine is losing is because, we drip feed Ukraine with insufficient weapons in order to win, in order to enable Ukraine to win. And that this is somehow a product of some kind of strange political choice, which we are making because we are scared by Mr. Putin's bluffs. It is very strange reading these articles. I'm sure you've read many. articles like this. I've read myriads of them. But it is very extraordinary that these people

who write these articles and who think in this way never seem to grapple with the problems, the actual underlying problems that explain why these over, over ambitious, grandiose, and also, by the way, immoral policies that they're embracing ultimately always fail. Absolutely. And if you look at what you could consider the ruling elite across the collective West, look at their backgrounds. Study their backgrounds and you will see that these are people who have lived their entire life in political science, the legal field, and politics. And there's nothing wrong with that. But if that is all your ruling class, if that is their background, and there is nobody who, any sort of practical connection to industry, infrastructure, real practical matters that you need to understand to build a nation state and to interact with other nation states, then you are going to, as you said before, what they were doing in Kiev, you will begin to create a bubble. And they talk about willpower because they don't understand what you actually need to do

to win a war like the one taking place in Ukraine. They don't even understand why they shouldn't be fighting this in the first place, how little sense it makes. This drip-feeding excuse that they're making, there is literally no possible way for even the equipment, the arms, the ammunition and equipment the collective west still has. There is literally no way to channel it into Ukraine at full capacity because it simply just takes time to absorb it, to train soldiers on how to use it.

There just physically was no way this was going to happen. This is why Russia launched a special military operation in the first place to prevent that amount of time from happening. And Ukraine being able to find the time to absorb large amounts of Western weapons and ammunition, It was a preemptive operation to cut that off. So not to jump the gun and begin talking about the incoming Trump administration. It was during his first administration that he began arming Ukraine. That was almost certainly the red line that was crossed that convinced Russia. We need to do something about this.

This is only going to get worse over time. Every year that we await, it will become more difficult to stop this. They knew it was a dagger pointed at their heart just like, Georgia from 2003 to 2008 was, but just a much larger and more dangerous dagger. So this is, this was their thinking. And I just saw Sebastian Gorka. Actually, this was Alex's recent video, this clip where he's talking about how if Putin doesn't do what we tell him, we're just going to flood.

The aid that we're sending Ukraine now is going to look like a little drop of water, something like that compared to the flood. What else do you have to send to Ukraine? What could you effectively send Ukraine in addition to everything that has been sent to Ukraine so far? This idea of British and French soldiers going into Ukraine with what artillery, with what air defense systems. And again, we have to see the conflict in Ukraine in the whole global big picture. If they commit troops to Ukraine, they will have to commit air power. If they commit air power, they will have to commit air-to-ground munitions that they are all stockpiling for this war they want to provoke with China.

So they have already painted themselves into a corner. And I don't know. This is just a theory, perhaps, that I have. They are so desperate to deal a death blow to Russia because there's no way for them to go from this to that. China, if they fail in Ukraine, I think you alluded to it, they need the resources from Russia to confront China. But also, if they fail in Ukraine, maybe the administration in Taipei is brainwashed and bought off and they won't do anything. But maybe the army, the military in Taipei, in Taiwan, maybe they will say, we don't want to become another Ukraine. and we're not going to become another Ukraine.

And they might intervene and do something to stop this from repeating itself. So they have painted themselves into a corner so elaborately. I cannot see any way of them getting out. I completely agree. I would add that there is a psychological dimension to this. It's never omitted. But if the West cannot defeat Russia, they know they cannot defeat China, which is a much, much more.

powerful country, certainly in industrial and manufacturing terms, and at least the equal of the United States in technology issues as well. And I think that is becoming more clear, literally by the day. So there is this factor. If you fail in Ukraine, then you have nowhere to hide anymore. you no longer can continue to pretend to yourself that you possess primacy, that you are the masters of the universe and all of that. Now, this is where the Gorker comment comes, that, you know, at saying that you're admitting to yourself that you can't push Putin around, which you can't.

I mean, you know, the idea that there is more that can be done that hasn't yet been done is to anybody who's followed. what the current administration has been doing is ridiculous. But to admit to yourself that you can't actually push the Russians of power, that you can't force them into capitulation, that you might have to agree to their terms if you want to de-escalate, or it's just something which psychologically is unbearable to these people. It's like an article I was reading today,

somewhere, which continue to insist that the US economy is much bigger than the Chinese. China's economy is only 65% the size of the US economy, which anybody who knows the relative balance of manufacturing power knows cannot be true, and which even, you know, the World Bank and the IMF are acknowledging. Anyway, let's actually turn to the question of the administrations, because we see the same hysteria in Washington that we see in Europe, certainly within this administration, the existing one that we have at the moment. Biden is authorizing missile strikes against Russia.

I have to say, I mean, your point, by the way, about the fact that these weapons have been used all over the place. It's been made by a Russian official as well. There's nothing new about the attackers, all the storm shadows, all the scalps in terms of this war. they've been used in many places in all sorts of ways and they have not achieved the outcome that the proponents of supplying to them to Ukraine said they would. I remember how, you know, people like Ben Hodges would say, said that it would isolate Crimea. You did a wonderful piece,

I remember on your, on the U-Atlas, actually explaining how, you know, the fact that they had, you know, use all of different missiles and do all this kind of thing just to destroy one ferry or something like that proved that it wouldn't work like that but anyway they haven't been able to achieve anything there they're not going to achieve anything against this colossal huge country with its enormous industrial capacity but nonetheless they have crossed an actual Russian red line it has caused the Russians it is provoked the Russians into demonstrating a tremendous capability of which at the present time the West does not have an analogue but they're not calming down or cooling down they're looking for more escalations they are talking about land where they're going to supply ukraine with landmines

Ukraine had fast stockpiles of landmines at the start of the war you know anything about the front lines, as I know you do, you will know that the front lines were covered with landmines. But anyway, we're going to send more of the same. They're going to supply Ukraine with even more money, or at least more weapons, emptying further the stockpiles, the Admiral Paparo, they're giving his name as worried about. And, well, despite this demonstration of Russian military power. Would you strike on Nyepro? They're apparently going to launch more missile strikes on other parts of Russia. The French defence minister says, you know, we're absolutely going to go full steam ahead with all of this. And now the French and the British are talking about sending

ground troops, none of which could happen were it not for agreement and indeed encouragement from people in Washington. I mean, if you know anything about the setup of things, you know that it is impossible for things to happen in Europe unless Washington not only green lights it, but actually wants it to happen. So what is what are they trying to achieve? I mean, what is this administration actually trying to achieve? Are they trying to spoil Trump's opening? I mean, he's new time as president, catapult him into a war? Or do they really think that all of this is going to change the situation in Ukraine? The article in the New York Times, there was an article in the New York Times that said that they'd even discussed sending nuclear weapons to Ukraine,

which, I mean, I found staggering, but apparently those discussions have taken place. But it also said that the intelligence community is now. advising the administration that whatever arms you sent to Ukraine short of nuclear weapons cannot affect the outcome of the fighting. What you have been saying, we have been saying, for a long time. So what do they think they're doing? And also, if they do send nuclear weapons to Ukraine, there's no amount of nuclear weapons they can send and Ukraine can deploy that Russia I cannot outmatch utterly and just erase Ukraine from existence. So that would be completely insane.

But that's where they are right now. This is a continuity of foreign policy that spans decades, generations even, people who are utterly convinced to the core of their being that they are superior and that they are entitled to the entire planet. And nations just defending their sovereignty, this is an affront to them, that they become angry and they respond with aggression. And we see how that has played out in Ukraine

and the whole encirclement and containment of Russia. So unfortunately, I think that this, and we have all been talking about this, if there are things that they can do, they will eventually do it. As the situation continues to deteriorate, they will get increasingly desperate, and then they will explore these options until they physically cannot do anything else, until it is impossible for them to do anything else. I think Russia understands this.

And between Gorka and Mike Waltz, both incoming Trump administration appointments, to national security positions, they don't really seem to demonstrate an understanding of the real cause of this conflict, and they are simply prescribing a continuation of what the U.S. has been doing all along. I heard Mike Waltz on Fox News talking about restoring deterrence,

restoring deterrence against what? This whole conflict is, is an American proxy war. First and foremost, it is not Europe's war. It is not Europe's responsibility. Europe is politically captured by the United States, and they have played their role as, as you mentioned, as dictated by Washington. And so to act as if this is, we're just going to wash our hands. I don't even know why we got involved in Ukraine in the first place. And now Europe should handle this. that is a complete detachment from the reality of how this whole conflict came into being in the first place. If we cannot talk about why this conflict is actually being caught, how can we talk about resolving it in a rational, practical, meaningful way?

So this is what I'm worried about. I'm worried that the Trump administration, whatever President-elect Donald Trump himself has said, whatever a lot, there's a lot, because we have to be clear that his administration is not a homogeneous administration. There are many different factions within it, but unfortunately, the faction that represents or reflects the establishment has a death worth on the admit. They did last time, and they're already poised to this time. But I worry that they're just going to continue. They're not going to address the core problem here, is that America, pursuing primacy, whether under Biden, under Trump's previous administration, Obama, Bush,

Jr., Clinton, senior, all the way back. This has been America's obsession, primacy. And until that is addressed, no other problems can be solved. And another thing that we had said before we went live is that the hope is that, you know, the establishment doesn't know what to do and they just try to buy themselves time. But if they buy themselves time, without doing something rash, rash or I guess we could say, time is working in favor of the rest of the world. And so that would be a benefit to this entire situation and whether Americans realize it or not for them as well.

I have to say deployment or attempts to send nuclear weapons to Ukraine would be an astonishing escalation. A number of things on that. Putin has already discussed, this, he said that the Russians would detect it immediately and would react at once, if anything like that happened. And I've no doubt that they would. I mean, absolutely, no doubt at all that they would. Secondly, doing a thing like that would be the final end of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which has been extremely helpful to the United States,

most of all. The United States, with its bar-flung, you know, garrisons all over the world and its bullying of countries, the very last thing it should want, logically, is for more and more countries around the world to decide to acquire nuclear weapons. I mean, that really will limit its own ability to, you know, control events. But, of course, it would be an absolute disaster at the same time, because the more countries of nuclear weapons, the more countries are in conflict with each other with nuclear weapons,

the more likely sooner or later it is that a nuclear weapon is going to be used, and at that point the taboo will be gone, and then more nuclear weapons will be used, and we will get into a situation where use of nuclear weapons, with all that that implies, will become a part of conventional war fighting. And that is a terrifying thing. Anybody who knows anything about these weapons ought to realize and understand that. Now, that brings me to Mike Wills because I found his comments absolutely all over the place.

He talks about restoring deterrence, which, by the way, could be seen as some kind of mechanism. Going along with this idea of sending nuclear weapons to Ukraine. I hope that's not what he meant, but it wouldn't be inconsistent. with that. But at the same time, he was talking about the need for de-escalation and about this being President-elect Trump's priority. And I should say that back in the summer, Alex and I got a private email from somebody who gives the impression of being close to Trump. Husa said, this is before the election, well before the election, that in fact the president does indeed, President-elect Trump, his priority on election will be to seek de-escalation, that he was already then in the summer, very concerned about the way in which the situation was evolving. That again takes the question. I mean, how do you reconcile these two things?

the Terrence with de-escalation. What exactly is the plan? Is there, in fact, a plan? And I think, this is my own view, and I appreciate there are other views. I think that Trump does want de-escalation. I think he senses that his electoral support will melt away if tensions continue to rise.

and perhaps as somebody who's lived through the Cold War, he understands how incredibly dangerous the whole situation is. I think at the same time, he has to make the various deals that every president has to make in order to form an administration. He's looking for all sorts of people who he thinks can be loyal to himself. They are people, however, who may be loyal, but who also have the conventional views that everyone else in Washington, of importance has about relations with Russia, relations with China, relations with Iran especially,

and that it is going to be very difficult for Trump, even if he really does think the things that I suspect he does about needing de-escalation and the calming attentions, that it's going to be very, very difficult for him to keep these people under control, especially as whatever administration he creates is another layer of government on top of what you might call the permanent government of the United States, which is always there and which is itself fragmented into factions. But all of those factions generally tend to coalesce on a few single issues, one of which is the need to maintain US primacy. So I think he's going to have a very, very hard time. And I think, I personally think, this is my own view, that that is why he is not speaking out.

And I think he is right not to. I think if he did speak out, his policy of trying to create an administration would become incredibly difficult. He would find opposition crystallizing against him right across the entire political space. within the government, he probably could, he might start to find that there are people that he wants to pick who might not be so keen to join his administration if, you know, they knew what he's thinking was on this issue. And I think the other thing that he must be concerned about is that if he were to speak out in the way that I think he probably sent once, you know, that we need to calm things down. The result is, the result is,

that it would simply reopen the whole debate about the fact that he's too close to Putin, that he wants to cozy up to the Russians or things of that kind. But to repeat again, and I think this is a point that we've expressed clearly on the Duran, and we just don't think that the situation is going to simply become, you know, that we're going to move from one universe, the one that we're in today, into a completely different universe after the 20th of January. Whatever Trump's intentions are, a lot of the same people who are powerful in Washington today

will still be powerful in Washington after the 20th of January. Absolutely, and I think that is the problem, even if President-elect Trump wanted to do all of these things, there aren't the networks. There isn't the leverage, the leverage in power necessary to do it. Now, worrying about his support base turning on him, I mean, I would think I would have had hoped that that would have been a fear that would compel the previous Trump administration to make good on all of its campaign promises.

But they didn't. And were there consequences? No, people still voted for him again. this time because look at the alternative. There is no alternative. So people that this is this is the cycle that American voters are stuck in. They have no alternative. It was either Trump or Kamala Harris from their point of view. That is not a choice. So they just voted for Trump or they didn't vote at all, unfortunately. And so my fear is that he has surrounded himself with mostly establishments. their entire career, they have dedicated to pursuing American primacy, including against Russia,

and they will just continue doing this. Now, he does have people close to the administration or in the administration, a minority. I think it's a good sign that Americans voted for him because they don't want war, and they want him to make good on these campaign problems. Whether he does or doesn't, that is a good sign, that there are so many, I would say, people of, fairly high stature that also agree with that agenda, even if they don't have the ability to direct the administration in that direction. That is a good sign also. Those people need to start thinking about how they can grow their leverage. I've talked about the think tanks, and this

is where foreign policy comes from. And if you look at think tanks connected to President elect Donald Trump, the America First Policy Institute, for example, it's verbatim, everything on that website is verbatim taken from his national security strategy, which is verbatim the Biden administration's national security strategy. It is the establishment. That is what they, why is there not a genuine think tank or network of think tanks that represent this growing circle of emerging interests that want to pursue multi-party? polarism, want America to contribute and collaborate with the world rather than continue pursuing primacy over it. They need to start doing that. They need to start thinking about how to

build up their leverage in terms of industry, displacing the monopolies with purpose-driven industry. Now, I have mixed feelings about, say, Elon Musk. I think SpaceX, Tesla, in terms of these companies, it's visionary. He has completely transformed America's aerospace industry and automobile industry. So two huge, deeply entrenched monopolies. And I would argue that he has done more for America doing that than he will ever do in politics,

in some sort of post in a presidential administration. administration. And that is what other people like him, people that have gravitated towards the Trump administration, that is the type of thing I think they need to invest in and build out because that is the base of real power. Money and force of all kinds, not just military force, but legal force through the media. One point I definitely wanted to make was that all other issues aside, in fact, there's aside. One thing the Trump, movement as a whole could have done more of is just simply challenged the establishment narrative about Russia, about China, about Iran. But for the most part, they haven't, or at least a large segment of the Trump movement, whatever that actually is. They have been completely in line with the establishment with what we call neo-conservatives and warhawks. So this is a very unfortunate problem. And again, there is a section of the Trump movement that clearly sees that as a problem. That's where the battle lines need to be drawn.

And that's what, I mean, that's what we do. We are trying to convince people that these countries are not enemies. They are not threats. America should be working with all of them. There's no reason to be at war with any of them. And so anyone who's trying to suggest otherwise, no matter how they couch it, they're part of the problem. I want to tell you a couple of things and a few more things that we learned when we were in Hungary.

Now, this time I'm not going to identify the person who's told us this, because one ever knows quite how, you know, one doesn't want to have a sort of come back against this person. Suffice to say that we met people who were ministers and state secretaries. State secretaries are the second in line within a ministry. So we met some very, very important people. And they were talking about how decision-making in the European Union is made and how legislation takes place. All right, they were talking about Brussels, not Washington,

but I think is very similar. And they said that legislation and a lot of regulations and decisions are drafted by NGOs and think that. In fact, they basically, it's NGOs and think things. tanks that run things in Brussels. And I am sure that it is not that different in Washington. That is what is so difficult about the situation that we have today. So when one reads all of these weird and wonderful think tanks and their websites spend all the time with them that we all do, we're actually looking at the people who actually make policy. You will get more information

from reading these things about where policy is going to go, then you will, you know, by listening to what the politicians say, all the debates of the Congress or things of that kind. Now, that I think is where Elon Musk may play a role because he has been talking about cutting back funding to these agencies, and they do ultimately depend on taxpayer funding, but he is going to have a titanic battle on these hands in order to do that.

But there is a next point that I want to make, and I'm afraid it is an ominous one, but I've no doubt about this, this is a true one, which is this, that a lot of these people who support Trump and who are loyal to him, they may have soft views about Russia for all sorts of reasons that we can't talk about

or discuss in these. programs. But there doesn't doesn't mean that they're moderates on foreign policy. On the Middle East, they're not moderates at all. On China, they are not moderates at all. It's just that they want to prioritize one adversary over another adversary. A president, a political movement in the United States that actually wants to pursue a general stabilizer. and peace does not exist at the present time. Unfortunately. I mean, that is the problem.

One other thing I just want to point out is that, let's just say Elon Musk in his department of government efficiency, they were able to outright eliminate the National Amendment for democracy and all of these other organizations, other U.S. government-funded think tanks. the problem is the most prominent think tanks are funded by the largest corporations and financial institutions. So that is actually where all of this power stems from. It stems from these corporations, these monopolies, which goes back to my point about Elon Musk transforming aerospace,

introducing purpose over profit there and in the automotive industry. And if people like Kim did more of that and then took their money, created alternatives to these think tanks controlled by these entrenched monopolies who put profit over purpose at all costs, including at the cost of the sustainability of their entire political order. That is going to make a much bigger difference in the short and long term than I would say this upcoming administration will. I just don't see any way possible. Even if President Elect Trump wanted to,

I just don't see how he would be able to. Plus, the people he surrounded himself with are diehard American supremacists. They want primacy over the globe. And just as you said, Alexander, their target is China. But if they're targeting China, ultimately, they're targeting Russia and the vast majority of the planet

whose future depends on peace, stability, and prosperity working together with nations like Russia and China. So this is a huge mess. And, you know, the thing that I worry about the most, a lot of people in my comment section when I was talking about the incoming Trump administration, for some reason they thought I had some sort of, we were having some kind of fight, Alexander and myself. But actually, the people I'm talking about are people who voted for Trump because they want to see the war's end. But then when the Trump administration goes ahead and pursues war with Iran, with China, does not actually end the war in Ukraine, they will start, instead of just saying, look, that's not what I voted for. I don't accept this. They start repeating the neo-conservative Warhawk propaganda.

They start saying, well, maybe we do need to. to go to war with China. I've actually debated with people who have tried to make that argument. Maybe Iran and China and all these countries, the neo-conservatives that I voted for Trump to face off against, maybe we need to go to war with all of them because they don't want to admit that they were betrayed. They did nothing wrong. Actually, wanting to vote for someone to end these wars was the right thing to do. They did nothing wrong by being betrayed. But then if you start to you know, put your pride over the principles that you voted for in the first place. That's where it becomes a problem.

These were the people that I was talking about and hopefully trying to wake up. Absolutely. You have to be honest and realistic with yourself. You have a choice between somebody who clearly has no compunction about enlarging and expanding the wars and again with and and set that against another person who says yes i do want to reduce the wars i do want to pursue de-escalation then obviously you must vote for the person who wants to achieve who says that they want to achieve de-escalation if that is what you yourself want now it may be that the person you're voting for isn't going to do that but that doesn't

invalidate your vote if you don't vote at all or you vote with the other person, then you're only going to get more war anyway. So at least, at least put your vote with the person who says they're not going to do something and hope that they do and argue and press for that policy. Now, I'm going to finish on one optimistic thing, which is, of course, the very fact that there are people within the administration, the new administration, and in Washington itself, and people like, well, maybe Elon Musk, I tend to believe Elon Musk on this, who do seem to want to steer a change, of course, or at least talk about priorities, tells us, in my opinion, one important thing, which is that time is not working in favour of the neocons.

The very fact that they have to choose priorities, that they want to decide. whom they're going to fight, means that there are some of them who understand that they can't fight everybody at the same time. And that is an advance over the situation we had until very recently.

And the fact that there's even some pushback and people within the world of power are now saying, well, you know, maybe, maybe we need to rethink things a little bit more completely. That is a product again of the general

change in the world, the shifts that we see in the world, the fact that power is shifting away, and the changes that is causing within American and Western society as well. And, you know, if we get through the next period, which I think may be difficult, I mean, you know, we're going to look at a, we're going to have, we're going to live in very interesting times over the next a few weeks and months and perhaps longer. If we get through all of that, then I don't want to talk about sunny art plans or anything like that.

History will continue and great power conflict will continue. But we might start getting out of this particularly dangerous period that we are in today because the power to pursue these dangerous policies simply won't be there anymore. I mean, we've seen that in Ukraine. That's the lesson, perhaps,

that the Ukraine war should impart to us. That is, perhaps, another point about the Orishnik, that it shows the technological, military technological primacy, as well as industrial primacy, has gone. And eventually, all of that

if given time will bear its fruit. So I'm going to just finish there, Brian, and I'm going to just leave it open to you to make a few comments. And then I'm going to pass it over to Alex, who I'm sure has a mass of questions that he wants to put to you. I'll just say that I believe that you, the direction of the United States, in terms of how it interacts with the rest of the world,

I have very little faith that this will change internally. I believe it will be just like the situation in Ukraine is going to be determined by what Russia does on the battlefield. America's role in the world, it's imposition upon the rest of the world. This is going to be determined by the rise of the multipolar world. They are going to create the conditions that constrain the U.S. It's interference, it's meddling, it's encirclement, it's containment, it's agitation, it's subversion, it's proxy wars, it's actual wars that will constrain all of this.

And eventually they will have no options left except to interact with the rest of the world, either isolate themselves or interact with the rest of the world on equal terms as peers, rather than, again, imposing itself on everyone else. So I always encourage people to look into multipolarism, invest into multipolarism, even as just individuals, we can pick and choose where we spend their money. Are you spending your money on products, goods and services that feed into the unipolar, the corporations that make up the unipolar order or the multipolar order? These are things that we can do.

But even inside the United States itself, Americans can choose to spend their money locally and create alternative centers of power or companies, that are connected to interests that are working with the rest of the world, and not these corporations that are funding these think tanks and driving U.S. foreign policy, no matter who is elected. That is something that they can do. I would like to see in the near future a growing circle of interest inside the U.S., meeting the multipolar world halfway,

and hobbling this utopolar order that is, has brought nothing but death and destruction and has stunted human progress for decades now. You're muted, Alexander. Just to also say brought economic crisis to Europe, economic stagnation to the United States. I've been reading recent articles about how real wages have barely increased in the United States since the early 70s. As economists of a certain kind, the good economists always say everything is connected. And those things are connected to the things that Brian was talking about. So this is where I have no more questions to ask Brian.

I'm going to hand over to Alex. Guys want to answer some questions? We got a lot. Sure. A lot of great questions. Let's start off with our friend Nikos, who has a six-part. Six-part question. Wow.

Read my chat for you and Brian in six parts as one. All right, Nikos. Here we go. Duran and Brian, have you seen the show fallout? In it, the oligarch elites cause nuclear war in order to reset the world and remake it in their image. We are seeing this in real life. Some of these people, as insane as it is, want nuclear war with interviews pointing to this desire of a reset. Brian, you and many believe that Trump won't bring change because of his support for Israel.

Okay, first of Trump won't go to war with China. Second, you and Aaron Mate need to tone down the activism and think pragmatically over this. I'll say something callous for some, but it is factual. Don't care if a war starts between nations in the Middle East that in the 21st century can't put their obsessive religion behind will still exist. We are on the brink of a Russia-USA nuclear war. I'm a physicist. I know what that means. It's a choice between the world and an unending religious war.

Those are the six parts. Brian, Alexander, do you guys want to jump in on? Well, I'm going to just make two very quick observations before handing over to Brian. Firstly, if there's any people crazy enough there to think that they can, you know, create a nuclear war and remake humanity. in a better image, well, I think that they are living in a dangerous fantasy land, and I think that if there are such people,

I mean, that's insane. That is insane thinking. And I hope that that kind of thinking doesn't gain traction. And I have to say, I've met all kinds of people, including people you might call oligarchs. And I've never met anybody that I thought really did think in that sort of way.

just saying. Now that's the first thing. The second is about the Middle East. I think that you greatly underestimate the dangers of an uncontrolled escalation of events there. The Middle East, it's like the Balkans in the early 20th century. People could all again say, little countries fighting with each other. It's not going to be particularly dangerous, except, of course, it was because the world crisis that overwhelmed the 20th century and led to the two world wars began in the Balkans. If you want to pursue a policy of peace, you have to understand that peace has to be indivisible and it must be pursued everywhere. You must seek peace and stabilization everywhere. And that must also mean seeking just long-term and sustainable outcomes

to resolve conflicts. That's my own view. I will build that Matt because I agree with that. One, I will say that the United States really does believe that if it were to wage some kind of war with China, it would not be to militarily defeat it. It would be to create so much damage, even if the U.S. suffers damage as well. They imagine somehow they will come out with an advantage in terms of rebuilding. They will be able to rebuild faster and better than China will, which they wouldn't be able to. But that's what they think. And this is actually in their policy papers. And I do believe that could include a nuclear component. That is what's so scary. So on that, I might agree a little bit with this question. Now, the Middle East,

Just as you said, Alexander, these are small countries fighting, but they're not small countries fighting. They are part of a proxy war between great powers. This has nothing at all whatsoever to do with religion. Iran, I don't know if people know this or not, but Iran hosts the largest population of Jews in the region outside of Israel. They have a large Jewish community there, has been there for a long time, even though it's not large enough to under the Iranian constitution to warrant representation in their government, they're given a sea of representation anyway, because that's how important this community is to the current ruling circles of Iran. So it's nothing to do with the religion. Jews, Christians, Muslims have lived for generations in the Middle East side by side together.

This is purely geopolitics. This was the U.S. creating a forward, operate while the British Empire and then the U. US inheriting a forward operating base in the region, in the form of Israel, and using that, instead of letting it develop as a functioning nation state, they have turned it into a proxy. This is the dream scenario for Ukraine is to turn it into another Israel. They have even literally said this in Washington, that they would like to turn Ukraine into another Israel. So that's why there's this conflict fighting, being fought in the Middle East. So as Alexander says, if you're talking about ending America's toxic imposition upon the rest of the planet in terms of all of these wars that it's waging to encircle and contain these nations, it should actually be working together with, it has to do it everywhere.

I can't just pick up just Russia because we like Russians, maybe not so much the Chinese definitely not those people in the Middle East. It is all part of the same problem. These are not separate conflicts. This is all part of one single policy that stretches all the way back to the underworld war, too. So I think that is really important for people to understand. And then the one point in the question was that about Trump and his support for Israel, I'm not talking about his support for Israel. I'm talking about the fact that during his first administration,

he advanced every single war that he inherited. People say, well, at least he didn't start any new wars, but he campaigned on the platform of ending the multiple illegal wars he inherited from the Obama administration didn't end any of them. And is it true that he didn't start any new wars? He began arming Ukraine. That was almost certainly the last red line cross before Russia decided to launch its special military operation.

They didn't lodge it during the Trump administration. That was just a matter of practicality and strategy and the need to prepare properly for it. If Trump was reelected, the special military. operation would have taken place during his second administration. I could almost guarantee that it would have. So people need to look clearly at the actual policies, filter through the political rhetoric and look at what was actually happening.

And the continuity of agenda cannot be ignored. And just like Alexander said, we cannot pick and choose where we stop America's interference around the globe. It needs to stop everywhere. All right, from Raphael, now the U.S. is asking China to cut ties with Russia, and they are asking Russia to cut ties with China. Can you guys give me the rationality behind that? I believe this is from the, this is originating from a Guardian article, which claims that one of the plans that Trump is going to give to Putin is you cut ties with China and then we'll give you whatever you want in Ukraine. That's, that's originating from the Guardian, I believe. Your thoughts? It does. And can I just say that was exactly what the Biden administration apparently tried to do. They told Putin, they had this meeting with Putin in Geneva, and they said, you know, we want you to cut your relations with China. And if you do that,

we can move forward and improve relations. And if you don't, well, there'll be all kinds of problems. And, well, the problems eventually ended up with a war in Ukraine that we have now. The Russians are never going to to this. This is absolutely nonsensical. Now, Glenn Deeson and myself did on the Duran a recent interview with a very well-

connected Russian journalist called Fyodor Lukianov. And he said, what he said very straightforwardly is Russia is, China is our biggest neighbor to destroy our relationship, are successful

and a profitable relationship with our biggest neighbour to create a whole crisis on the longest stretch of our border in return for ephemeral promises of better relations from a United States that has been consistently adversarial to us is stupid and that nobody who knows Mr Putin well. Believe you're stupid. So I mean, you know, this is a first. It is a fantasy that needs to die.

I think Americans, all sorts of people in the United States, constantly come up with it. They think that the Americans can somehow persuade the Russians to detach themselves from the Chinese. It's not going to happen. You would need a political revolution in Moscow, a regime change there to achieve it. And that kind of regime change, by the way, would run into an enormous. enormous resistance and opposition almost right away. Absolutely. It's basically asking Russia, please cut yourself off from China so we can get rid of China and then we can just completely bulldoze over you because you have no one to help you then. That's basically what and vice versa with China. That's what Washington is saying for both Russia and China.

And to Alexander's point, yes, that's why they're pursuing regime change against both of these countries because they know it's ridiculous. It's no one will ever agree to that. Yeah. Matthew says, Brian, the EU cannot deploy any meaningful ground force. Neither can the USA, unless it wholly abandons bases in the rest of the world. So is this all just theater? Nobody will go nuclear in the end. I wouldn't want to bet on that. And I think that they're trying to, again, they've painted themselves into a corner and they're trying to think of a way to get out.

And so they're thinking, if we send troops in and we fully commit and we call Russia's bluff, they think it's a bluff, and they think they can get Russia to back down, and then they think they can pivot to China. But I just don't see how it's possible. And from Russia's point of view, and I don't know how they don't understand this in the collective West, they're fighting for their existence. Russia is fighting for their existence. They have no doubt that this is all about encircling, containing,

and then overturning the political order inside Russia. And just as Alexander said at the beginning of the show, pillaging the country like they did after the fall of the Soviet Union. So they know what this is all about. And so it's very dangerous. I hope that there aren't nuclear weapons used, but it's getting extremely dangerous. One side is being rational and restraining themselves.

The other side is completely unhinged and getting worse, almost by the day now. Yeah. Latimer Rose says, Hello, gentlemen. Nice seeing Brian back on the Duran. Trump's picks for his cabinet put me in the mood as I knew it. He didn't learn anything. Thank you. I have to push about, can I just push back a little bit on that?

I mean, what he went for in his first, well-established establishment figures picked for him by the leadership of the Republican Party. So you went with people like Mattis and Alpherson. ultimately Pompeo and Bolton, all people who you could describe was neocon royalty. What he's gone for this time is a motley assortment of people from much, much lower down, the political system. Mike Wals, who was a representative, but hardly a major figure in US politics. I mean, he's not considered somebody. I think that anybody imagined would one day become president or saw as having cabinet rank.

or anything like that. He's gone also for people like Pete Hegseth, the Defence Secretary. He's trying all sorts of people for the Attorney General Office. He's proposing Tulsi Gabbard for the post of DNI, Radcliffe for CIA Director. These are people who come down lower on the command chain. And the reason I think he's picking them is because he believes that because they're lower on the command chain. And because they have been more supportive of him in the past, they will be loyal to him. But they do not differ fundamentally from the rest of the political class in their overall political thinking on foreign policy. So these are choices made, essentially, I think, to try to protect Trump,

try to form a Praetorian guard around Trump in light of what happened to him in his first term. But it doesn't mean that these people have broken with the orthodoxes of American foreign policy. Such people do exist in the United States, but they are in the political class, but they are very few and far between. And they wouldn't really be enough of them, I think,

or at least Trump feels they're not enough of them to make up an administration. And I think that these people that he has picked don't know how to do anything else but pursue primacy. That is the big problem. Even if they would be loyal to him and he told them to do something else, they wouldn't know how to, even if they wanted to. But I don't think that they want to. They are problematic picks for many reasons. and it may not work, even in terms of what he wants, even in terms of loyalty. I mean, he's already failed to get one of them, Gats, as Attorney General.

So it may not work out. But I think if you were to get Trump aside, this is probably how he would explain what he's doing. Bear in mind, I have worked in government in a kind of a way. I know all about bureaucratic battles. And I can see, I think I can see what he's trying to do. He has lost a certain amount of support, I suspect, within the sort of higher levels of the Republican Party by trying to do what he is doing.

And you can already cease the opposition in the Senate room. But anyway, we're not here to discuss the domestic issues and intrigues and policies in Washington, which I think we can spend a lot of time about, But anyway, just to set out my views. Marcelo says, Brian, I would love to host you at my podcast, IDDEM underscore TV. That's from Marcelo. Thank you, Marcelo, for that.

I'll post that up there. You can see it. And let's see, Radovage said the enlightened leaders of eutopia. are like Little Sun Kings. They are not satellites. They are stars revolving around a black hole. Their trajectory will be timeless, frozen on the event horizon of history to be studied for generations to come. Thank you right for that. Fantastic super chat. Matliss X says, if there is a silver lining we can take away from the hazel, could this mean that Russians can effectively respond without having to use nuclear weapons? Good question.

I think that they have many options available to them. This was a very dramatic demonstration, and it was meant to show how serious Russia is. But as I have said, as Alexander, Alex, you have both said many times on your own programs, Russia can just send anti-shipping missiles to say Ansarala in Yemen and start sinking U.S. naval vessels. The U.S. has no ability to replace these vessels, and they have absolutely no way to replace. any trans manpower that they lose. This would be a complete disaster. Alexander just recently pointed out that Russia would hesitate,

possibly because they have a relationship with Saudi Arabia, and they might not be so happy about these missiles. But I think they could probably arrange something. So the West is playing a losing game, and Russia is trying to put off for as long as possible, some sort of crossing a point of no return. they have many options available to them short of nuclear weapons. So I think I agree with that sentiment.

From Klaus Vatne, how do you explain the terrible strategy presented by Gorka when Trump would threaten Putin with more weapons to Ukraine if Putin doesn't agree? I think we've kind of talked about that. Yeah, we've kind of. I don't know if you guys want it's. Yeah, there are no more weapons. Yes. Thank you for that.

Super chat. Sir Mug's game, unfortunately off topic. What are the chances Trump's DOJ will investigate the torture and murder of innocent Gonzalo? I think Zilch looking at the stable of broken ponies he's assembling. Well, I'm not going to even speculate about that one, actually. I mean, I would like him. I would love to think that he would. There might be some political gains to it, but it would be a lot of...

adversaries. Let me ask, let me ask both of you, maybe Alexander, you may know better, but I don't know, Brian, wouldn't this fall under the State Department, something like that? I mean, does that fall under the DOJ or? I would have thought the DOJ could actually exercise a role if there was some sense that some American laws had been broken. Bear in mind, the DOJ can always pick and choose its laws. So I would have thought that they could investigate. But the question is whether there is the police. political will to do it. And to be honest, I think that Donald Trump has lots of things to think about now. And I'm sorry to say this because I think it is an important business. And we all know and remember Gonzalo very well. I don't think this is going to be one of Donald Trump's priorities. All right. Oscar N. says, did Trump, did not Trump escalate with the exit of the missile treaty and escalate the arming of Ukraine? So what will he do?

Yeah, the intermediate. Brian, intermediate missile. This is the point that I tried to make is that there is continuity of agenda that does not matter who is in the White House or who controls Congress. This was something that the U.S. had been pursuing for decades. The Bush Jr. administration was working in this direction. They attempted to overthrow the government of Ukraine. It finally happened under the Obama administration, under the Trump administration. the treaty was withdrawn from, but there would be no possible way to make any use of that

until subsequent administrations because they would have to develop the missiles that would otherwise have violated the treaty. So it was always done, knowing that whoever won the election, they would continue this. And it did continue under Biden. It was like the quarterback handing the football off to the running back. And that's what Biden did. And then all of this board will be set for the next administration to just continue onward. Just want to add to that, though. Think how counterproductive this has proved to be, because as Putin has pointed out,

it's precisely because they withdrew from the INF Treaty that the Russians went ahead and developed the Iranian missile that they now have, giving themselves a capability that at the present time, the United States does not have. So it's, it's the INF treaty worked to the advantage of the United States. It worked to everybody's advantage, but it also works to America's advantage. These things ultimately have proved consistently counterproductive. And that's the point that needs to be made. Oscar N says, can Trump on his first day say Biden did wrong, NATO did wrong, and we lost this.

The U.S. is out. Let us reset and start to repair. One can hope so. He can. Nothing prevents him. Of course, I make a lot of people in Washington very angry if he does. But in theory, he can say it. Whether he will do so, we remain to be seen.

Tabernak says, please define deterrence and hegemony. Hedgeman is a Greek word. It means when someone assumes leadership over others. And of course, in the ancient Greek world where these expressions first came from, a hegemon could eventually become an oppressor and even a tyrant. So Athens, to give an example, which is supposedly a democracy, was the head of the so-called Deelian League, which was an alliance of states. And then that Deelian League eventually became a kind of trap because any country, any Greek city state that tried to leave it would be immediately attacked by Athens. And eventually Athens came to be called in Greece, the tyrant city. So that's a hegemony.

It's the, it's, it's, it's, it comes from, it comes from ancient Greek. But as I said, it means ultimately the leader, the leader of the alliance. But you can see how leadership can involve into all kinds of, rather, rather frightening and sinister things. Deterrence, you really going back now to the Cold War, which, and the whole concept of mutual assured destruction. The idea being that each side is so heavily armed and has the capability to destroy the other, that that creates a climate of mutual deterrence whereby neither side will take action to threaten or make insecure the other in order to avoid its own destruction. So that is Cold War concept of deterrence. The way it's being.

used by some people in the West today, however, is that we deter others from doing what we want them, want to prevent them doing, whilst giving ourselves a free scope to do anything we like. And that, of course, is completely different from the Cold War concept of deterrence entirely. Lada Morrow says agree with Brian. Trump unfortunately picked up neocons for his foreign affairs team. What a shame. Thank you for that. Lada Morrow.

From Australian in Minsk Belarus, from the other side and Australian in Mitz Belarus. Hi, Alex, Alexander, and Brian from Belarus. Hello. Savario, Faloni, says, Brian, how long can the U.S. sustain these policies? how longer can they keep printing money before it all goes tits up? It already is. It already is. There were things in regards to the rise of bricks and multipolarism

that I thought would take another 10 to 20 years that we see unfolding rate now. And so not only is it happening quickly, but I believe that it is accelerating and it will continue to accelerate. So it's not the U.S. isn't going down like this. It's kind of almost like a curve, an exponential curve. And it will only get worse until people start to realize that the very core of their foreign policy is the problem. And until they understand that, they won't understand anything else. Harry Smith says one important difference this time is that Trump's daughter, Tiffany, is married to a Lebanese guy.

I think she's pregnant who has family in Beirut. I didn't know that. I didn't know that one. We'd like to think it will make a difference, whether it will. Elza says, great shirts, gentlemen. Thank you for your work. Thank you, Elsa, for that. Mariputra says, I couldn't have made heads or tails of the Ukraine war without the three of you.

Thanks. Thank you for that. Joe says, Brian, what's going on in the Philippines? To make a long story short, it used to be a U.S. colony. It never really gained independence following World War II. is currently under particularly strict political capture by the United States. The current president of the Philippines just does whatever Washington tells him. He canceled a bunch of desperately needed infrastructure projects.

China was building cooperation with the Philippines, transportation, things that would have helped the economy. And now they are diverting that money into missiles that they're pointing at China, their largest, most important and irreplaceable trade partner. and they're expanding the U.S. military footprint on the Philippines. So it is essentially the Southeast Asian Ukraine in the making. And this is a long-term problem, and this is the danger of a nation being politically captured

and being incapable of escaping out from under it. I saw another question related to this about, so why do nations in the region say China is aggressive? It will be a nation like the Philippines. It's a sophisticated caveman. Brian, can you explain why countries bordering China describe it as aggressive? Where is this narrative coming from and is it true? So all of the countries describing China as aggressive are politically captured and militarily occupied by the U.S.

And they're just saying this because this is what Washington wants them to say. There are obviously maritime disputes in the South China Sea. The thing that people following the Western media don't realize is that all of these countries have the same exact disputes with all of the other countries, not just with China. And maritime disputes, even getting very heated, is actually common all around the globe. It is usually solved bilaterally, and it usually does not come at the cost of otherwise very strong relations. All of these countries, including the Philippines, counts China as their largest, most important

trade partner. And so it is a very bizarre situation where they completely, depend on China economically. They would not be advancing the way they are prospering the way they are now, but because they've been politically captured. That is why they are hostile towards China. It's completely irrational. It's exactly why the government in Kiev was hostile toward Russia, not because there was any reason to, but because they were politically captured and stalled into power by the U.S. Now, there are a lot of other countries that don't say that about China. I live in Thailand. Thailand does not say that China is aggressive.

Again, one of their closest, most important allies across the board. Even in terms of military cooperation, many people still think that they're a U.S. ally, but they're actually much closer to China now than the U.S., and that is the trend across the entire region. We were in Malaysia quite recently, and we have got the same impression. There are Malaysia's heading towards the bricks. Thailand is heading towards the bricks. Vietnam and Indonesia are doing the same.

They clearly don't fit on. Yes. Tool Faith says, keep up a good work, Alex, Alexander, and Brian. And also says, sorry for nagging, but I think this is important. Discuss why Russia vetoed the Sudan cease fire in the UN Security Council. We need to understand the situation down there, especially since it has been way down on the list of priorities all over the news, both mainstream and alternative independent news sites. Are either you guys familiar with the U and V in Sudan? I saw that it happened, but I'm going to be absolutely blunt.

There are only so many hours of the day. We were in Hungary. We were doing all kinds of busy things there. And before, I'm not up to date with this story. So I'm afraid I just can't answer it. I mean, I agree with you, by the way, it is important. The war in Sudan is a terrible business. I'm sure there is an explanation or a reason for it,

and it might be a good reason or a bad reason, but I don't know why the Russia did what it did. I was waiting for Alexander to do a video about it. All right. We'll do a couple of more, Brian. Is that all right? I'm fine. I can keep going.

Great, great. Feral American says, thank you for all you do. I'd love to grab a pint with you guys. Thank you for that. Our pleasure. And hello there, says, hi, Alex, Alexander and Brian. How strong will Russia be after Putin?

Will it go back to the Yeltsin era? No, I don't think any conceivable way it will. Having said that, they will have a complex, you know, a complex issue, because Putin has been there for so long, the political system has to a great extent. being fashioned around him. I mean, they will have a challenge to find someone who can fill his place. But they don't have to do it.

Whoever it is, won't have to fill Putin's place in every respect. But certainly they're not going back to the Yeltsin era. That is the nightmare everybody in Russia wants to avoid. From Matt Ward, why Poland and Romania won't do what Hungary did demonstrate sovereignty by closing their borders with Ukraine to all NATO weapons? World War III issue solved. Fellow polls grow balls and stand up to your new occupiers. Brian Alexander, they don't close the borders.

Well, Romania has just had presidential elections. The man who opposed Romania's involvement in the Ukraine war top the poll completely unexpectedly. It's created shockwaves here in London. So, you know, the feeling amongst the wider population of Romania may be different from that of the political class. I don't expect this person, by the way, in the end, to win the election. But clearly there is criticism of the policy in Romania.

What it will eventually come to, we will just have to see. Poland again, I think, I know lots of people from Poland. There's a large Polish community in London. I'm friendly with many people to hear. Many of them have a very nuanced and very sophisticated understanding of the war. and I get the sense this is actually true in Poland as well. The political class, again, is very committed to the war because as in Romania they feel that their interests are bound up with it.

So that's what I can say. This goes back to the US, and I would say it's unanswered super weapon, which is its ability to politically capture and exercise unoriented influence over other countries, through the National Endowment for Democracy adjacent government and private organizations like Open Society. They have such a vast network around the globe. It's almost impossible to wrap your mind around.

But if you do the digging, it is there. And nations need to get serious about defending their information space. First and foremost, it is a domain of national security. But so many nations don't treat it that way. And that allows the U.S. to get inside their country. capture the political system, but also poison the people against their own best interests. That is what they have done in Ukraine. That is what they're busy doing in the Philippines.

They have done that around across many countries and across Europe, too. So this is a huge problem, and that is how they do it. And that's why these countries do irrational things, not serving their own best interests. They're serving Washington's at their own expense. All right. Final question to Brian. Jeffrey Rook, it feels like Western leaders can only see. the path they've been walking, that being towards global hegemony, do you think they don't want

to give up on it? Or do they not know how to give up on it? That's kind of what I was saying before. They don't know what else to do. They, to the core of their being, they believe they are superior, that this is almost destiny. They are inherently superior to everyone else, and it is their right and their entitlement to do it. One thing that I find interesting is that Elon Musk, when he is approaching an engineering problem, he talks about first principles where he strips away everything he thinks he knows about it, gets a fresh piece of paper out, and start building up a fact-based understanding of it. But when it comes to politics, he doesn't really do that. He'll come around on some issues, but on other issues, he doesn't,

specifically because he will not do this in regards to politics. And because I think politics is so deeply connected with emotions and ego, it makes it very difficult for even logical, rational people to apply logic and reason to it and look at it objectively. And so I think this is a huge, huge, huge problem. And people have to understand, these people in power are like us. Some of them are definitely not smarter than we are. I'm talking about all of us as average people.

some of them might be a bit smarter or more talented, but not that much. So we shouldn't imagine that there's some huge difference between them and us. They think just like us and the people we know in our everyday life. That's completely true, by the way. Adadula says this is just a token of how much we value the efforts you three exert to keep us informed and balanced. Thank you all. This war is an almost unbelievable exercise in perception management. and shaping. People are acting like it's a rocky movie. Thank you for that. And one more,

one more to Brian and Alexander, a quick one from Zaryl before we let Brian go. Can Putin become a hero of Russia? If so, how? I don't think he can because, well, I remember maybe he can, but he would have to award it to himself. That's not his, that's not his style. Stalin did, of course, and Brezhnev did. They always award themselves decorations. And in Brezhnev's case, it provoked lots of mockery. So I think he's, he's got that memory that is there, and I don't think he would want to go there. So no, I think that legally he could do, but I don't think he will. Like he never wears uniform for, like he never wears military uniform, if you notice, which Brezhnev did from time to time. I agree. All right. On that note,

the excellent, always informative, Brian Burletic of the new Atlas. Thank you very much for joining us on the Duran. Once again, Brian, where can people follow your work? Just type in the new Atlas on YouTube and then look in the video description under each video. You can find all the other places to find and follow my work. If you don't want to watch me on YouTube, I'm on Rumble, and I upload all my videos on Telegram. I just want to say thank you again for having me on. I always love these conversations.

get so much out of it. And I just want to thank everyone who tuned in and listened. And can I just say also that we love our conversations with you, Brian. And it is an indispensable tool. If you really want to understand what's going on in the world, go to the new Atlas, absolutely. You will learn so much going there. I go there every time Brian puts out a new video, sometimes a bit late, but always I watch and listen to everything he says. And I have those links to the new Atlas in the description box, and I will add them as a pin comment as well when the stream is over. Brian, thank you so much.

Take care. Thank you. Take care. Bye. All right, Alexander, you still got some energy? Absolutely. Are you ready to tap out now? No, no, no, no.

I always enjoy these programs. That was a fantastic program, yeah. It was a fantastic program altogether. Absolutely. Let's knock out the rest of these questions. We still got a lot of good questions and comments to get through. Give me one second, Alexander, to get all of these in order. From Rafael, Putin said earlier in a speech, you do not know what a nuclear war is.

The West needs to contact him and ask. The war will be fighting over USA. This is completely true. One of the most frightening things that we have seen happen over the last 30 years is that amongst Western policymakers, the fear of nuclear war has just gone. It finished the day the Soviet Union ended. And it's one of the most dangerous and frightening things

because it's the fact that they've lost that fear, of nuclear war has made them, made it possible for them to become addicted to ever greater risk. And I don't know what has to happen to bring them to their senses. Perhaps nothing will. Yeah. Nikos says, Duran, I ranted a lot today, but I wanted to thank you. Despite my depression, you gave me hope and strength. I am glad to support you, my fellow Greeks.

We are always grateful to your country for your country. contributions, Nikos, and you did not round. You asked a long and interesting question, which we sought to answer. Nasekala, Niko. Let's see. Rafael says, you have to watch Russian TV to understand how much Russians want a full-out war. Putin is risking to be overthrown by this population. They want war.

Well, I don't think they want war. they certainly do not want defeat. They want Russia to achieve its objectives. I think Putin is perfectly in line with Russian public opinion, by the way. I think one of his tremendous skills as a political leader is that he always knows, he always senses where Russia is going. The British, where the British would put it is that his heart beats with Russia's. Yeah. Tool,

Tulfate H says, with regards to Sudan, I think the reason is good and look forward to an episode on this chance. Yes. Thank you for that. Matthew says the EU cannot display any meaningful, cannot deploy any meaningful ground force. Neither can the USA.

So, oh, we answered that. So is it all just theater? Well, yeah, can I just quickly add to that? Yeah, you want to add to that, yeah. I just want to say this. I mean, the British apparently are, are advocating military intervention in Ukraine and they're talking to the French about it. Today, I am reading about further cuts in the British armed forces. They've just had to lay

up more ships and things of this guy. Intervene with what? We've had a hysterical piece from the British Defence Minister. I talked about it yesterday in my programme, though I think today we understand better why it is. The that the Russians have a crap army. They didn't manage to convert fully to a wonderful, all-shiny, British-style, professional army. I mean, that's like trying

to tell people in Britain that intervening in Ukraine is going to be risk-free because our army is so much better than their army. I just do not believe that there's anybody

in the military, in London who seriously thinks that. Unfortunately, I wonder whether the politicians do. Go ahead, send the troops. We've been doing this now for one year. For one year, they've been talking about this. Go ahead. Get the permission from Biden.

Biden will give you the permission. Send the troops. They're not going to do it. They can't do it. They don't have the ability to do it. No. Stammer is on the way out. if things continue in this trajectory.

Two million people, Alexander, have more than two million. What is it at now? 2.3, 2.4 million people. I voted online, have put a vote on this petition. They want a general election. One day.

Yeah, they want Stommer gone. This is all distraction from Stammer and Macron because everyone at home hates them. They hate Macon, they hate Stammer. So now they're talking about sending British troops to your group. What troops? What? Can I just say something? How? Can I just

how exactly? Can I just also say something because of course I go to the various Russian telegram channels. I also go to the websites of the Russian military themselves of group of forces north. All of the various Russian militaries have their units have their own websites now. It's quite extraordinary. And the sentiment amongst Russian soldiers is bring it on. bring it on Marlon love it come and get it

come and get it exactly yeah they can't do it they won't do it but everyone despises Stamber and he is looking

for distractions wherever he can get I don't know you know better than I do that's my sense of it they're looking for distractions wherever they can get looking for disson

well also I think he thinks that if you know he pulls something off like this he'll come out a great war leader and New Churchill and all of that I mean, I mean, anybody

who thinks that in Britain today is a fool and he is none of this is going to have there's going to be no boots on the ground especially not without the United States. Absolutely. Absolutely.

And yeah. And not even Biden is that, is that insane. The Biden administration is that insane. I agree. I agree. And I'm going to say something else. I think Donald Trump will, that is absolutely something he will oppose.

I think he knows perfectly well that he'd get protests and his party in the House especially would rebel and I don't think he's going to go down that way. Ricardo says, will Trump cancel hypersonic missiles deployed in Germany in 2006? What does he do when Putin demands this and demands Russia's money back? Well, these are good questions. don't think he's going to come in on the 20th of January and on the 21st of January cancel those hypersonic missile deployments. I don't think that this is he style. If he does get into a negotiation with the Russians, he does what I've always said he should do, which is part

Ukraine to one side, which I still think probably is his instinct, by the way, just leave the Europeans to take care of Ukraine. If you listen to Mike Walter's comments, again, he was almost suggesting that. Then a couple of months, years down the line when the final agreements between the Russians and the Americans are reached, maybe at that point these very dangerous missile deployments will be cancelled. But I can't see it happening without a long negotiation process. Lada Moro says, listen to a Russian podcaster today and he correct.

and he correctly pointed out that most european countries were fighting against the soviet union in world war two on germany's side same situation is today nothing changed well i know yeah it's true i mean a lot of european countries did fight alongside germany in the second world war and just for the record the german leader i'm not going to mention his name i never do uh the german leader had made speech after speech after speech after speech after speech throughout the second world war saying from the Russians. And it was the one thing he always said that did actually carry traction.

So something's changed. Some things remain the same. Warlock Langer, thank you for that super sticker. Tabernac says, calm. Give them time and space to devolve to be blameless. Claudia Spencer says, what a Monday morning treat coffee and interesting conversation.

Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. Sir Mug's game says, as to Ukraine negotiations, get real, Putin will crap all over Grinnell and wipe himself with Gorka. I still think, to be honest, I think Grinnell is an interesting choice. I mean, Gorka must remember that Gorka isn't going to be dealing with Ukraine issues. I think that's one thing I would say. Grinnell is a much more sophisticated and I think well-informed official. I mean, he was ambassador to Germany, for example.

So, well, we'll see. And he was Director of National Intelligence, I seem to remember for a while. And the Europeans hate him. And the Europeans hate him, exactly. It's tough. But it was, absolutely. Matlisak says, if there is a silver lining, we could take away from the hazel. Could this mean that Russia?

Okay, we answered that. Can effectively respond without your weapons? Yes. Yeah, but, but I would actually, I would just actually add to what Ryan. said there because I think that in fact your point is a good one we've had all of this speculation for years now that Putin was sort of you know straining at the leash to use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine we just see he doesn't need to because he has a conventional weapon that achieves the same effect the actual same military effect without the problems of fallouts and uncontrolled

escalation into nuclear war, that he would risk with nuclear weapons themselves. So this has been an important demonstration of the range of capabilities that the Russians have, and why Putin is so confident about the underlying strength of his position. Sir Muggeem says, does Zelensky actually own a private residence in Ukraine, or is he just squatting in the government-supplied housing? I'm sure he has a private residence, but I don't pretend to know all about the details of what he has and what he does. Ant Bear 63.

Thank you for that. Superchat. Jamila says, warmongers always destroying the world around the world, now the West. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.

Thank you for that. Jamila. Yeah? You want to touch? No, no, no. No, no. Just, no. No.

Eric Kay says, thank you for voices of truth and reason. Robin R, thank you for that super chat. Joseph, thank you for that. Thank you for joining the direct community. Jeffrey Rook, we answered that. D.F, Trump's latest leak plan, the China concession. We answered that. Oh, no, wait.

Oh, no, there's a new one. There's no one. D.F says Trump's latest league plan full concessions to Russia's demand if they end their military alliance with China. We talked about that, but if you want to add something there, what are your thoughts? And how could your Jesku win impact the Ukraine war?

Well, he hasn't won. He's only top the poll in the first round, but he got 23% of the votes. So I mean, you know, he still have a long way to go, and he's got a liberal challenger who got, I think, 19%. And it's likely that a lot of support is going to coalesce around her. So I don't think that this is a done thing. And I mean, I don't, I'm not familiar very much with Romanian politics,

but given the pattern across Europe, I would not be surprised if we ended up with the Liberal instead, not with him. I would expect it. I would expect that to be the outcome. Now, so let's delay debate about what the impact in Europe will be until after we know the final results of the elections. In Romania, this is a very interesting result

in that it does give us an insight into Romanian opinion, which is clearly a lot more nuanced than people realize. And we did that program a couple of weeks ago. I can't remember the name, one of our friends. I can't remember his name. I'm sorry, it's just gone from me. But from Romania, in which he actually talked about the fact that in Romania itself,

there are many more currents of opinion than the media would like one to believe. Now, about China and Russia and Trump, I think I've already answered this question fairly adequately. If the Americans believe, some people in the Trump administration, Trump himself believes that the Americans can offer the Russians some sort of deal,

which will get the Russian, to distance themselves from the Chinese. That is a hopeless idea. And the sooner one, the Americans put that to one side, the better for them it will be. You mean the show we did with the meal? Yeah, the mill.

That was months back, that week. That was months ago, but it was a meal I was thinking about. But if you remember, he discussed, he discussed the internal views. And he based, I get to actually watch that program, again after now that I've heard about this result because I seem to remember that he was basically

steering us towards an outcome the kind of outcome that we just see yeah uh fractured uh zero one thank you for that super chat super sticker uh arcane eclectic says greatest threat to peace is the billionaire class um let's see jamila jamila asphu says thank you so much to Iran, very great information on Russia is, and Russia is love West, but the West leaders don't like them. Russia's loves the West, but the West leaders don't like them, or don't understand them, and this is very sad. We don't know what to do. We are hopeless. Yeah, I agree, and I think this is something that the Russians have finally understood, actually. I hear this from actually Russians now, you know, I don't mean political Russians. I mean people who are not part of the

political world. Russians I meet in London, they tell me the same thing. You know, we come to realize they don't like us. We don't quite understand why, but that's what we see. Klaus says JFK, if the counterpart is losing, then they'll be more likely to use nukes. This is a danger I see with the West that Putin must try to avoid. Well, clearly, yeah. And I think he's, I mean, he is a very careful man. We've seen that he's demonstrated that he has enormous power, immense power, which he can deploy, which is non-nuclear. Rufus says, do you believe Trump can make a peace deal?

Neither side seems willing. Zelensky will never give up land. Putin is winning. What can Trump offer? I think the best thing that Trump can do, and I've said this many, many times, is to keep clear off Ukraine. Walk away.

Leave it to Rick Renel. Renel can come along. Tell the Ukrainians, look, you've got to sit down and talk with the Russians. tell the Europeans, look, if you want to go ahead and go on supporting Ukraine, it's up to you, but we're out. And distance himself and his administration as far as possible from this debacle, which is what this is. Do the same thing you did with Syria and IS, with IS, where you say you defeated IS, just stop the money. it'll resolve and then a year down the line

you can go to rallies and say I brought peace to the conflict in Ukraine exactly exactly just play it like that Sir Muggs game says did the Russians on purpose named the missile hazelnut just to trigger the squirrel-brained collective

West leaders I understand that there is a reason why it might have been called that Some suggest that it's the shape of the warheads, you know, going in. I don't know. The Russians have a habit of giving very inocuous names to some of their systems. So if you look at some of their artillery pieces, for example, they're named afterflowers. So it could be something to do with that.

And any sundry, Mules says I miss Gonzáller, Orygneuxnerner-Ell-Layer, Katkins form. He would have been so interesting and so wonderful to listen to now. Paul Walker says, waiting for the dollar collapse and then the US to scurry away. UK politicians

and the MOD are still selling the Ukraine win. It's quite sad to watch, but necessary to Alka Fools in Stamershire. I don't think anybody in London any longer thinks Ukraine is winning the war. And even the media is talking it that way anymore. If you look at the economist, for example, their coverage in London

has become much, much more pessimistic about Ukraine over the last few months. And to go back to the beginning of our program, that is what is driving the panic. There is universal panic across, certainly Europe and within the Biden administration. The project Ukraine is falling apart. They've been, Nile about it up to now, but now they can see it on the battlefield. And they got Donald Trump to worry about also. Oscar N says, can Trump on his first day say Biden did wrong, NATO did wrong, and we lost this? US is out. Let us reset and start to repair.

Well, I said before, I think he can, whether he will is another matter. My own personal view, by the way, is that he should say as little as possible. talk to Putin, get Rick Grinnell, arrange for Rick Grinnell to go to Moscow. Bear in mind, there's been no American emissary in Moscow since the start of the special military operation. So he should send Rick Grinnell to Moscow. Rick Grinnell can talk to Putin. All kinds of discussions could take place. All things can happen. But keep away from this mess and make sure that the United States is not drawn in

and that in itself will de-escalate things because without the US the Europeans are going nowhere go to Moscow, send them to Moscow and then send them to Budapest Absolutely another very good place

Another very good place to go Absolutely And they'll solve it Clout says the West has become nihilistic, a decadent empire Yeah Vapor Jack Thank you for that super chat

Sylvana, welcome to the grant community. Sir Muggame says, with so many 20, 28 presidential contenders in Trump's administration, it is a recipe for a disaster, me thinks. I'm going to say this. As far as I'm concerned, there's only one person who stands head and shoulders above all the others, and that's the vice president, J.D. Vance, I would have thought all of these other people might want to become presidents themselves, but the reality is that the odds now so overwhelming favor vance that i would have thought that would quiet him down j f thank you for that super

sticker uh tom says the u s's main export is weapons and war it's vital robert salami thank you for that super sticker uh saverio says how long can the u s sustain these policies how longer can they keep printing money before it all goes tits up we answered that yeah we answered that uh harry we answered that with uh with tiffany Trump Gary Wells, welcome to the Dran community. Sir Musgame says,

let's see Russia, zero billionaires in charge. USA billionaires galore in charge. Excellent point. Roebbas, thank you for that. Super sticker. Matri Putra says,

I couldn't have made hedger tales of Ukraine war without the three of you things. Thank you for that. the Philippines Brian answered that Irina thank you for that super sticker The Black Pat says the war rhetoric

in British media is scary Do you think there will be a war after all P.S. Thank you for all your work. God bless there will be peace. The British have no means to wage war against Russia. Full stop. They can only do that

alongside the United States. The French are a little stronger but not much. So the British can work everybody up as much as possible. But fundamentally, they're only a, they're only, how to describe it, a provocateur, if you like,

they can never be the main plan. Yeah, they're just stirring up trouble and distracting away from his horrible policies at home. Amal Haibratha says, as a consequence of the attack, um, and storm shadow strikes on Russian territory, will Russia stop protecting the US-backed YPG, PKK SDF in Syria and stop supporting U.S.-backed General Haftar in Libya.

Well, who knows? I'm not in charge of Russian policy. All I will say is that the Russians will take action in the Middle East if the situation we see now continues. From the other side, an Australian in Minsk Belarus says Belarus has never initiated conflict, and President Lukashenko has often played a role in peace negotiations. However, it faces ongoing threats from Western powers, NATO, the USA and the UK. Some months ago, quite a few months ago now, Glenn Dyson and I did a two-hour conversation with, I think his name is Mirochnik, the Belarus ambassador at large, and all of those points that you've just made were made there.

Sophisticated caveman says, Alexander, according to your experience with the Hungarians, can you tell us how committed they are to European thinking, how much room do they have to push against the EU and NATO? They are fighting the EU all the time. They're committed to the EU. They are committed to the EU. But I mean, the point they always make is, I mean, you know, it's not if they have any real choice because their geography and their location really makes it impossible for them

to do otherwise. But in terms of EU policies, they are in constant opposition. In fact, there was one moment after listening to what they were saying I actually made the point that in Hungary they're the government in Brussels, they are the opposition. Sir Buzzgame says, don't be fooled by

the nice and ice, the van, Helsings still want to drive a stake into Count Adolfa Trumpola. They are so woke they sleep with their eyes open, wide open. You're completely right. I mean, I don't think any sense, any feeling about him has changed at all. I don't think a single member of the political class likes him any more now than they did before the 5th of January. Just go to National Review,

which is the big rhino magazine. And you'll see what they continue to say about him. Matthew says it simply isn't possible to deploy troops to Ukraine. They don't have the troops or equipment. Now the new missile would instantly destroy any buildup on the border. So it comes down to missiles, aren't we? You know, you're absolutely correct. To repeat again the point that we made when Macron first floated the idea of sending French troops to Ukraine, the only purpose of this deployment is to pull the United States in, to get the Russians to attack the troops, and then for the Europeans to come to the Americans and say to the Americans save us. So it's, it's, that is the only objective playing out here.

I think that Biden is unlikely to go along with it. And I think Donald Trump definitely will not. What a bunch of scumbags. Sacrifice their own military, their own soldiers. They could pull in the US. Absolutely. Absolutely. But I mean, that is, again, I'm sorry to go back to that article in the,

in the Guardian by James Nixie. But you have this all the time. These people, there isn't a trace of humanity in what they say. They never seek peace. They never seek a reasonable compromise. For them, ultimately, it is a game of chess that they're playing against the Russians. They're losing. The fate of the pieces on the board doesn't concern them.

Yeah. Swagata, thank you for that super chat. Sir Mug's game says, oh well, Gonzalo is one more thing that Putin will have to resolve. Well, that, Medina. Indeed. I mean, if the Russians stay Karkiv. Yes. I mean, they might find a lot of information there, yeah. Yeah, Mediana, thank you for that super sticker. Let's see. Matthew says there's no way these people want to live in bunkers. There's no sense of power in that.

These are greedy, arrogant Westerners, after all. I agree. I think the fundamental problem is that I don't think they really believe in their inner beings that they will ever come to any real risk or harm. And until that changes, until they taste that kind of fear, and I don't want to wish anything against anybody because that's not the kind of person I am. But until and unless that happens, they will continue being the kind of people they are pursuing the sort of policies they do. Sir Buzzgame says, yes, regarding Gonzalo, Trump has a lot on his plate, four quarter pounders, three big max, two large fries and two Diet Coke's shutter. I'm going to say that. Putting aside the way you've expressed it, I think, it was up to me, I would prioritize. what happened to Gonzalo.

I think that prioritizing what happened to Gonzalo, and by the way, what happened to Michael Flynn and Flosher Stone and all of these other people, is important. I think following it through would lead us to all sorts of people and all sorts of places within the United States bureaucracy and political system, which I think in his own interests, he needs. to get through to. But I don't think he will. I think he will say I've got far too many things to concern myself with today. I've got Ukraine. I've got the economy. I've got potential issues on the

border. I've got my own administration, which is always, always new administrations are always unstable, by the way. So I've got all of these things to worry about. I've got the rhinos and the Senate to think about. I've got Biden's new judicial appointments to think about. I think he's just not going to get around and to think about Gonzalo if he even knows who Gonzalo is. And bear in mind, this has not been widely covered in the United States. I'm not sure that he does know. Swakata says, Yo, Alex and Alexander in 2025, the U.S. versus Ukraine will be replaced by the U.S. versus China. What will be the Duran's position? We'll wait and see when it happens. I mean, I presume you mean the US versus Russian now, the US versus China in the future.

I mean, my own personal view is that there is no threat to the United States from China and that the correct policy is to seek peace with China and that a conflict between the United States and China would be a complete disaster. And I think that's probably the framework we will continue to follow, simply because I don't think that that framework that we have just described will change. I don't think, you know, we're going to see a situation where the Chinese suddenly become dangerous and aggressive in the way that some people in the West think. But we will just have to wait and see how things play out.

And anyway, we will take a conservative objective here. Thomas Hachke, thank you for that super stick. Sir Muggeame says, here's the thought, if the EU is a burden to the U.S. Trump should tear up Germany and Italy's unconditional surrender. I'm sure they'll come up with something left alone. Good point. Zareel says, and also priority on who betrayed Gonzalo. Absolutely. I mean, I, if it were up to me, if I was advising Donald Trump, which of course I'm not, but if I was, I would say, you know, don't ignore these things. Don't ignore what happened. in the past, what was done to you and to the people around you in the past. These things do matter because they don't just explain what happened, which is important from a historical point of view, but because there's a chance that people who did these

terrible things might finally be brought to account, and that could prevent them happening again. But I don't think it will happen for the reasons that I said. Thomas, welcome to the ground community. Flying Boar says Trump should get advice from Orban when it comes to Ukraine. Oh, about that, we completely agree. We've bought it up with the Hungarians. They said we know we're not going to give advice to Donald Trump or the United States. But in practice, if the Americans want to speak to the Hungarians, the Hungarians will have a lot of wise things to say.

Sir Muggeyme says Alex posted Gorka's advice to Trump about dealing with Putin, no bueno. Raphael says, did you guys know that after Russia used the new missile, Secretary of Defense Austin called Russia to negotiate a deal with them? We have two games playing. I didn't know this, so it doesn't surprise me. Austin has been very, very quiet over the last three weeks, notice. And the one thing I do know about him is he also tried to speak to the Chinese at some point. The Chinese didn't respond to his call.

Yeah. Matthew says, Alexander once cited a. Russian intassanato will avoid the ultimate catastrophe as self-preservation will kick in. The Russians no psychology. Yes, I think that's true. Elza says, Peskov was asked how the president after Putin will be. He said the next president will be like Putin. Won't be easy to step up possible.

I think what he meant was that the next president will follow the same political and foreign policy line as Putin is following. And I think that is probably true, because it corresponds with Russian national interests. And that is why Putin is so supported inside Russia. Because he's following a policy with which Russians, both political class Russians and people outside the political class, people in the big housing estates and all of those things, and the factories and the offices they can understand and identify with. Fofaf, thank you for that super sticker. Anna Kay, welcome to the Drank community.

Sir Muzgame says Grinnell is an arsonist dressed as a fireman, see his work in Serbia. Well, I have to look into what he did in Serbia, actually. I don't know. I don't know. Yeah. Thank you for that, Sir Muz game. I'm curious.

Eric Hatchett. thank you for that super chat. Samuel Moroni says, which is the current state of the Belarus Army? Well, I gather it's reasonably, it's fairly small, but apparently it's well trained and well armed and a disciplined and effective force. That's what I've heard.

But of course, the point is that if you take on Belarus, you're not just taking on the Belarus army, you're taking on the Russian army, and the Russian army has a major military presence in Belarus now with nuclear weapons. Boss Chan, thank you for that super sticker. Warlock, Lander says, do you have any idea why Hungary is so pro-Israel, vetoing all UN resolutions?

I suspect that this is connected with various things. Firstly, there is the legacy of the Second World War. there was a very, very big Jewish community in Budapest in Hungary, which is apparently very well integrated. There is still a section of Budapest, which is called the Jewish Quarter. There are vivid memories of what happened at the end of the Second World War when the Hungarian government of Admiral Horsesie tried to slow the process down and got overthrown and there was a crisis.

Well, anyway, it was the whole business. is terrible. And I think that there is still a sense that this is something that Hungary has some accountability for. And I think that does play into it. The second is, I think that there is also a feeling that just like Hungary, Israel, there's a strong country that asserts and defends itself. Either the Hungarians are hugely well informed about the situation of the Middle least, I hope any from Hungarians who hear me will forgive me for saying so. But,

and last, but not least, and beyond all of that, one thing that I did see when I was in Hungary is that Christianity is very much

even, Orban himself is a practicing Calvinist Christian, plays a, major role in the thinking of the government. And I suspect that to some extent also pulls them in the direction of Israel as well, because of course, as we know, Israel plays such an important role in early Christianity too. So, you know, lots of factors and many others, no doubt, but I don't know about. Sparky says the hazel missile gives the ability to go nuclear without going nuclear,

pinpoint devastation without radiation no fallout no long-term mess unlike the west weapons it's truly a game changer well said yes i i agree that is exactly what i agree i i think that is very well said actually sparky says sorry i'm late great work fellas thank you sparky hello there says alex alexander please do another dedicated video on how big the russian economy is what will be the russian response if these attacks continue well right we will do another i mean we all always do regular programs, updates on the Russian economy because frankly so much nonsense is said about it that we feel we have to. What will be the Russian response to further missile attacks? Well, I didn't predict the Orsnik, the hazel. So who knows what else the Russians

have up their sleeve? But we have seen that the Russians do respond. And by the way, it's caused the shock. I mean, there is, there's been a shudder. Going back to that article by Mr. Nixie, James Nixie, it blames the escalation on the Russians, which is obviously setting everything on its head. But the very fact that it does so shows that the West, I mean, they've been taken aback by what has happened. They did not expect that the Russians would respond in the way they have. From the other side, an Australian in Minsk. Our 100th show is coming up, streaming from Minsk Belarus. Would you too like to come on soon? Absolutely. Send us an email. Other side in Minsk. Sparky says,

Hope President Trump knows what he's doing what the swampy cabinet picks. Maybe good, good cop, bad cop meets the big ask. You see, I don't think they're exactly swamp people. This is where I suspect I have some differences for some people, some others. Some of them are.

I mean, you're not right. But I think in general, the point, the reason he has reached out for these people is precisely because he believes that they, are outside the Washington bubble. The trouble is that they accept many of the orthodoxes of the American foreign policy state.

So it's slightly different than calling them part of the swamp. One thing I realized in Budapest, not everybody, but it confirmed a lot of what, what I know from from Greece and Cyprus when you speak to high level officials when you manage to have a conversation with these people there a lot of them are not very very well informed as to what's really going on in in these areas and they get a lot of their news from CNN and the New York Times and the BBC or their staffers their staffers prepare their briefs based on reports from the mainstream media that's absolutely correct. They're just too busy to

yeah to go into any depth of what's really happening and they've got a staff their staff is is combing through the the mainstream media posts politico and and all of these outlets the hill whatever and they put together their briefs and that's where they get their information on what's happening in the conflict in Ukraine and what's happening around the world it's it's just is it's exactly correct even the Hungarians that's true even of the Hungarians as well yeah Harry C. Smith says, what did you actually do in Hungary and who invited you? Well, we went there. We got invitations, actually, from the Hungarian embassy in London.

They were bringing together a group of people, you know, from different media outlets. We were one of them. And we met various ministers and state officials, senior state officials. And we spent a very, very long time going from one meeting to another meeting to another meeting to another meeting. It was a very, very tight schedule indeed. We were going literally from the economics ministry to the finance ministry, to the energy ministry, to things of that kind. And basically we were listening. We were listening to what the Hungarians had to say.

Priyo says the Germans had the V2. Well, they did. They did. Absolutely. Absolutely. Flying Boar says Ukraine conflict started over an EU deal. Merkel is East German and knows Russia won't accept it. She should have vetoed the deal instead of going with it. I do think Merkel knows Russia especially well. She does speak Russian because she had to learn Russian while she was in East Germany. But I don't think, for example, as an East German, she ever visited the Soviet Union. And I never get the sense that she had any very strong friendships with Russians. Maybe I'm wrong completely about this, but that was certainly my impression. So I don't think she knows Russia particularly well. And I say that because apparently back in 2014, when the first sanctions were imposed, she got a report, she did them, she agreed to them

on the basis of a report from the BND, the German Foreign Intelligence Agency. And they told her, don't worry. If we impose these sanctions in a couple of months' time, Putin will either come to heal or the oligarchs will overthrow him. And she believed it. And of course, we know what happened. Nothing of the sort of place. Matthew says, honest thought on how this ends. Well, I don't think there's going to be a deal, actually. I think that Trump, this is my own guess.

I think Trump is going to do exactly what I think he should do. I think the fact that he's not talking, which I think is a wise move, is an indicator that he understands the political risks of doing so. So he'll appoint risk in Rick Rennell. Rick Rennell will go around Kiev, Moscow, Berlin, Brussels, all of these places. He'll tell everybody, you know, negotiate, and this is no longer our problem anymore.

more. And there won't be any negotiations because I don't think Zelensky and the people in Kiev want negotiations. I think the British and the French will be very frustrated. I think there's a good chance that Macron himself might cease to be president of France over the next few months. There is a major political crisis brewing in France. It looks like the national rally, the Rassant-Rémen is going to vote against the current government and the forthcoming vote of confidence, in which case the government falls. And they're saying that there has to, there have to be new presidential elections in that case. So, you know, it's possible we could be in these kinds of scenarios.

But anyway, I think one way or the other, that's probably what's going to happen. And in the meantime, the Russian army is going to go on advancing westwards. There will be a military outcome, in other words. to the wall. They keep on trying to lock up Le Pen. So the pen should collapse the government. Absolutely. Yeah.

Yeah. Exactly. Zaryel says, lock her up, Cookies Newland. She's Aramil for that. Harry Christoph says, how likely is it that the changes in the world initiated by Russia will remain long-term and irreversible? I think we could say definitely that they will be. clearly the crisis since 2022 has acted as a catalyst for these changes

but these changes are happening as part of the general trend in world affairs and that is that is irreversible now I think we saw that in the G20 summit meeting where the Western powers found themselves isolated Rafael says you guys understand the Dow Jones closed at 44,000 now. Half of that is speculation about monies where they were going to make out of Ukraine. Probably. Duodenbarga, thank you for that super chat. Sparky says seems the hazel missile may have awakened some Ukrainians to their true situation.

Perhaps it will stimulate progress to peace from inside Ukraine. I just want to say something about the boom in the American stock market. I suspect a lot of this is driven by funds coming into the US from Europe. Just saying, the situation in Europe is getting worse and worse by the hour. Just to say that. As to whether they... Exactly. As to whether the...

Absolutely. as to whether the or the orashnik, the hazel is going to concentrate minds in Ukraine. I would like to believe so, but I'm far from confident that it will concentrate the right minds in Ukraine. I mean, 80% of the Ukrainian people may long for peace, but it's 20% who perhaps don't, who are in control. Yeah. Black in the Empire says keep up the good work. Thank you for that. Sir Muzgame says, guys, loved seeing you in Budapest, Alexander, in a double-breasted coat walking through the beautiful city with Alex, had a Jean-Lacare vibe to it. Alex, your night videos are too spooky to watch.

The only time I had was in the nighttime, that's it. Yeah, absolutely. By the way, Budapest is extraordinarily beautiful at night. It's a very evocative place. Absolutely. A sophisticated caveman says, could we see Ukraine enter into bricks? or the U.S. after the war is done, assuming the EU and the U.S. betray them and cut them off? Well, no, the current government is never going to do that.

What will happen after the war ends is unknown at this time. Matthew says more attackums reported. Now what? I don't know. Were there more attackums? I don't know. I haven't seen the latest news. been going for a while. I mean, all kinds of things may be going on. I mean, there were reports about attack and strikes on the course nuclear power plant a few days ago, and it turned out not to be. But, you know, I'm not saying that there hasn't been more strikes.

I mean, we've been promised more strikes. Yeah. Sparky says, SOTOS helped the CIA set up NGOs in Eastern Europe during the Cold War to moment discord and helped the CIA ever since. Both foreign and domestic Trump's treasury picks worked for SOTOS. SOTO equals CIA. every we heard so much about Soros in Hungary he came up practically every meeting just saying and all I would say is it was not inconsistent

what we heard with what he just said all right Alexander final thoughts as I give a final check to see that we got it was a tremendous a tremendous live stream altogether both the session with Brian which is always a joy to have Brian on our show but also the comments from people.

And of course we need, I mean, this is to say that this is an important time. I mean, that would be a massive understating. I should say I completely agree with what the person said, that the Oreshnik, it's changed everything. It has changed the nature of war. I think that it's one of those events that I don't think is yet worked, its way through to people's understanding, but I think eventually we will discover that as of now, after the Eresnik, war is different. Yeah, Miklos says, thank you gentlemen. I hope we

will see you again in Budapest, soon. Absolutely. So do we. Absolutely. Yes, Flying Boar says, while Montreal was burning, Justin Trudeau was at a Taylor Swift concert singing and dancing. Yeah, I know. Everybody's talking about this. Awful, awful look, actually. Trudeau. All right. I think that's everything. Actually, it is everything. A fantastic show.

Thank you to everyone that watched us on Rockfin, Odyssey, Rumble, YouTube, and the duran. Dotlocals.com. Thank you to Zareel, to Spartan Warrior Queen for moderating. I think those are everyone that was moderating this stream. Thank you so much to everyone that joined us. And Alexander, let's get some videos uploaded, huh? Absolutely. I've got lots of news to keep up with.

Thank you to Brian Burletic. And Brian's info is in the description box, and I'll add that as a pinned comment as well. All right. Take care.