The Duran Podcast - Putin's terms; UN trusteeship, elections, military victory

Episode Date: March 28, 2025

Putin's terms; UN trusteeship, elections, military victory

All right, Alexander, let's talk about the recent statements from Russian President Vladimir Putin as he was at the Arctic summit. And then he went to inspect a nuclear submarine, a submarine with hypersonic missiles, by the way. And he made some very interesting statements, perhaps the most interesting statements to date from the Russian president. He talked about the government in Kiev, the illegitimate government of Kiev. He talked about some sort of UN governance of Ukraine because the current government is illegitimate. So Putin mentioned that perhaps the UN can step in as a solution to govern Ukraine until elections take place. And then he said that the Russian military is in a position to finish off the Ukraine military. He did acknowledge that the operation has been going slowly or slower than people had expected.

But he does appear confident that the Russian military is now moving towards a victory, that's the size of victory. And he did use the words, finish off. That is the quote from the Russian president. And it seemed to me as if this was not only a glimpse into perhaps how Putin is seeing the final outcome in Ukraine, but it also could serve as a warning, a final warning, to Ukraine, perhaps to the Trump administration, to get a deal in place along the June 2024-plus lines, or else Russia is going to advance towards a military solution,

a military victory, and then things will change. And that's where the UN comes in. Anyway, your thoughts on the statements from the Russian presidents. Absolutely. And I'm going to point out something else. He said virtually nothing about the ongoing. diplomacy, the negotiations with the United States. I don't think he believes they're going to go anywhere. That was my strong sense of this. And one can see why, because we've had negotiations

about two ceasefires, the 30-day ceasefire on energy systems. The Russians say the Ukrainians are not complying with them, with it. And the Black Sea Initiative, look, looks like it's dead even before it got off the ground, because the European Union is now adamantly refusing to lift any of the sanctions that the Russians say must be lifted in order to bring the Black Sea initiative back into place. So I don't think he at the moment seriously believes that this negotiation process is going to go very far. And he also made further comments saying that the Russians had been tricked multiple times

in the past and that they were not going to be tricked again. Now, he focused on the Europeans because he didn't want to criticize the Americans. But he said all of that as well. But Boris Johnson, he was focused on the UK, but he also mentioned Malcolm Hollande. He brought up the issue of the Minsk Agreement. I don't think he believes that there can ever be a diplomatic settlement to the conflict. So I think he's now, if you like, just lifted slightly the curtain on how he expects this war to end. He expects it to end in a military victory. He believes the Russian army will defeat Ukraine. I think he believes that it will do it quite soon. He talked about how the Russians hold the initiative right across the contact line.

He spoke about how most of the four regions is already controlled by Russia. He clearly wants regime change in Kiev. So I think what he wants is a complete military defeat of Ukraine. At some point, maybe this year, there's talk that the Russians are preparing a big offensive for the spring in summer, which I think is quite plausibly true, after that defeat, which realistically will have to take in the Black Sea, I mean, the Black Sea coast, because I can't imagine what Putin is talking about next can happen unless, you know, Ukraine loses its access to the sea, so that Putin is in a position to dominate the situation. And also, I think he expects the Russian army to take control of Sumi and Kharkov regions as well. Anyway, at that point,

he wants UN trusteeship over Ukraine, what's left of Ukraine pending new elections. This has happened before, by the way, there's been, I don't know specifically with the UN, but there have been periods of time when the UN has, when, you know, before the League of Nations, and then the UN has exercised some kind of trusteeship. But that's basically to my mind what, where he's thinking. So Russia, Russian army advances, defeats the Ukrainian army. The Russian army has been reinforcing steadily throughout the winter. The Ukrainians are defeated militarily.

Maybe Kiev itself is either put under enormous pressure or whatever. Zelensky is forced to step down. The country is put under UN trusteeship, and then there are elections. And he also made it again clear, by the way, that he doesn't consider Zelensky legitimate and doesn't believe that Zelensky can assign any peace to, any peace agreement. It's not only that Zohelensky. Zolensky's not legitimate, because Zelensky's illegitimate, everyone under him is illegitimate. The whole apparatus is illegitimate.

What do they call that in legal terms? The fruit on the tree or the... That's right. The fruit of the poisoned tree. Something like that. That's how I'm picturing it in my head. But basically you have an illegitimate guy and everything that he does, everything that he signs, that he signs, everyone that he's appointed.

It's just all. It's all illegitimate. So you have to just replace the entire apparatus. And there is precedent. I'm just looking at it right now, Alexander, East Timor, Papua New Guinea, as well as parts of former Yugoslavia, this UN governance or temporary UN administration has been employed. Why the UN? Do you trust the UN?

Why the UN, especially when the UN has also crossed, double-crossed Russia during the grain deal? I remember when Goodendez was working with the Biden administration against Russia. And that's the UN, the Secretary General, and Lavrov called out the UN for what they did during that 2002-2020 deal. So why trust the UN? How can you trust the Security Council? Yes, Russia and China are on the Security Council, but you know, you have the United States on the Security Council. You have the UK there.

Why the UN? Why go through the UN? Well, because it is the one international body which the Russians have some say over. I mean, they are a permanent member of the Security Council. So anything that goes through the Security Council must be agreed by the. them, they have power of veto over it. And beyond that, they have friends in the UN, which they don't basically in any other major international institution. By the way, speaking of friends, the Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi is coming to Moscow and they're going to talk about

all of this. Shoygu, who was Putin's national security advisor, has also recently been speaking to the Chinese, there's actually been a lot of intense diplomatic interaction with China, between China and Russia, principally, I'm sure, about Ukraine, because we're all focused on what the Trump administration has been doing. All of that's been going on under the radar. But I think that this is probably the Chinese and the Russians coordinating positions. about how to take the question of Ukraine forward. And I would not be surprised if the Chinese quietly told the Russians, look, we're not saying anything publicly, but we are aware of all these plans that you have.

And if you want us to help you when the moment to put it to the UN comes, we will be there with you. Well, he did mention in his statements that that he would look at some sort of a monitoring group or some sort of a coalition to help implement this idea or at least take this forward in Ukraine. But it would not consist of France and the UK. It would not be a Macron and Stomber initiative. Though he did say that he's not closing the door on the European Union, even though the EU

and Europe remains hostile to Russia, Putin, being the statesman and the diplomat that he is, he didn't shut the door on working with Europe in the future. Obviously, he didn't shut the door on the U.S., but he did say that Russia is ready to work with partners, including the U.S., but also China, India, Brazil, South Africa, BRICS countries, even said on North Korea, which I find interesting because you have Stammer and Macron and they're having this summit in Paris where they're talking about. to the coalition of the willing, which has now been rebranded to the reassurance force. And they're talking about the UK and France entering Ukraine if there is some sort of a ceasefire deal.

And here you have Putin coming along, inspecting a nuclear sub with hypersonic missiles, of which Europe does not have, of which the United States does not have. And he's talking about perhaps some sort of a coalition, but this coalition would consist of bricks and possibly even North Korea and even the United States. There's no Europe in this coalition. He doesn't shut the door to Europe. No. But in this coalition that Putin envisages, there's no Europe, European role to be played.

Absolutely. I mean, to be frank, yes, he said, you know, the door is always open to you. Europe, we can speak with them in the future, but, I mean, basically, he doesn't trust them. And that came over very clearly in what he said. I don't think he expects the Europeans to play much or indeed any role. But he did talk quite a lot about the bricks. And I mean, he brought in the bricks. And clearly they are now the major, you know, the people he's talking about most. I'm pretty sure that he's already talked about some of these ideas, at least with the Chinese, maybe not so far with the Indians and the Brazilians, because, I mean, perhaps he worries.

He's going to India. He's going to India, exactly. He's going to India very soon. But he's probably worried, especially he talks to the Brazilians, that a lot of that will then lead back to Washington. So at the moment, I suspect, he's careful about what he says. But he is indeed going to India very soon. and he will be meeting Modi, and I suspect that Indians will be open to this too. I think that there is a basic misunderstanding here.

I think last year, India and Brazil were trying very hard to get a ceasefire. The Russians, if you remember, basically talk them out of demands for a ceasefire. I think we've moved on quite a long way from that point now. And I think the Indians and the Brazilians have been brought by the Russians on side. I think people who expect India and Brazil and China to weigh in on America's and Ukraine's behalf to get the Russians to accept a ceasefire on basically American terms are mistaken now. I think that was a possibility a year ago. I don't think it's a possibility anymore.

So what does the Trump administration do? How do they react to these statements from Putin? Peskov said in a statement that Russia will comply with the ceasefire agreements, the energy infrastructure ceasefire. And the black ceasefire, though, that one seems like it's not even going to get up off the ground unless the Europeans decide to start lifting some of the sanctions and reinstate the Russian Agricultural Bank and Russian institutions into various payment systems and Swift and stuff like that.

The Europeans in their conference that they had in Paris, they said no way. They said, no way are we going to lift any sanctions against Russia. They basically rejected Trump's Black Sea, ceasefire. proposal. So what does the U.S. do? They see that Europe wants to continue the conflict. They see that Europe wants to escalate. UK and France, they have zero chance to accomplish anything in Ukraine without the U.S. backing. Stamri Macron all but admitted as much. They talk about sending troops, but they came out with statements basically saying without the United States, we really can't do anything, so we need a U.S. backstop. They're also warning the Trump administration that Putin

is trying to trick them, is trying to trick the Trump administration, and for the Trump administration to side with the Europeans and to continue the escalation. The United States cannot escalate with Russia, though. I don't think the U.S. has the means, the desire, the means, the weapons. I don't think they can escalate militarily. I don't think they can escalate economically either, to be quite honest. But perhaps the Trump administration may look at the statements from Putin and say, well, it looks like our negotiations are not going to go anywhere. So what do we do? Do we continue to normalize with Russia without some sort of a Ukraine deal?

Do we play along with the ceasefire? Maybe just drag this out and pretend that we're achieving various goals when it comes to our ceasefire objective. a hundred days, Trump has said, he has 100 days to get the ceasefire. Do we just kind of play this theater along with the Russians? And eventually there will be a military solution that helps us kind of get rid of Project Ukraine in a way. Or do they side with the Europeans? Does the Trump administration have a change of heart and say, you know what, Macon, I get along with you. I like you. So Trump could say, I don't particularly like Stomber, but I can get along with you, Macaron and, okay, we'll send some money to Ukraine or we'll propose to Congress another bill

to send money to Ukraine and we'll try to keep this war going as long as we can. It's a loser. It's a loser. The American people are going to be upset. But, you know, the neocon faction of the Trump White House wins out. I mean, what's, how does how does all of this play out now? Perhaps Putin is speaking with Trump about this stuff. Maybe the U.S. and Russia are coordinating in a way or maybe they were giving a heads up about this UN plan. What are your thoughts? Well, these are excellent questions because it seems to me that we now find ourselves in a position where it is the United States that has to make some very, very important decisions over the next few weeks. Now, first of all, they basically pushed Ukraine to commit

to an unconditional ceasefire. Ukraine did that after the talks in Jeddah. But in fact, people don't seem to notice is that as soon as those talks in Jeddah ended, as soon as Yarmak and the others came back to Kiev, as soon as the talk about the unconditional ceasefire was agreed, the Ukrainians basically walked it all back. They continued to say that all the territories must be returned to them. They continue to insist that NATO membership is Ukraine's sovereign right.

They really say one thing to the Americans. And then when the discussions with the Americans have ended, they go back to Kiev and they revert to their original positions. And I don't think that's ever going to change. And I don't think the Ukrainians are ever going to ever really honor. a proper ceasefire in the way that I think the Americans would like them to. The whole thing about getting EU troops into Ukraine is not to end the war. It is to escalate it.

Zelensky has actually, in a sense, given the game away there because he says he doesn't want peacekeepers. he wants warriors. He wants people who are prepared to come and fight. So clearly he envisages the war continuing. He just wants to get the Western powers directly involved in fighting Russia because, as he knows perfectly well, by itself, Ukraine can't win. Now, the Trump administration has found it's got this problem with Ukraine. The Trump administration is finding, and has got problems with the Europeans as well.

I mean, they're persisting with this peacekeeping force idea. The Russians have repeatedly said that they're opposed to it. The Trump administration, if it was really serious about seeking peace with the Russians, would have said straight away, this idea won't fly. It not only does not have the backing of the European, United States. The United States is opposed to it because it stands in the way of negotiations. I've never understood why Trump has never done that. He seems to think that he can just park this issue and that it will never really cause problems in the negotiations. I do think the Russians

think that. Now, he came up with the black idea of reviving the Black Sea initiative. It's difficult to understand actually why he did that, because as many people have pointed out, as we have pointed out, in reality, if it's all about commercial shipping in the Black Sea, the Russians have never interfered with commercial shipping in the Black Sea. The Ukrainian grain ships are able to come and go from Medesa, and the Russians have never attempted. At any point in the whole period of the special military, operation to interfere with them. Now, the Europeans are refusing to lift the sanctions, which the Russians say the need to be lifted in order to make this work. What the Europeans

are not acknowledging, what the media in Europe is not acknowledging, is that the Europeans apparently agreed to lift all these sanctions back in 2022, which is how we got the Black Sea Initiative in the first place. The Black Sea Initiative failed because the Europeans didn't do what they promised then, and it doesn't look as if they're prepared to do it now. So the Black Sea Initiative is dead in the water. So what does the administration do? Well, I think we have a clue. And this is in this revised mineral rights extraction agreement, which we haven't yet seen the papers, the document itself, but apparently it has been massively expanded and enormously toughened.

So it apparently now says that all resources, basically all of Ukraine's resources will now belong to this corporate entity that is being set up to run them. And that corporate entity will be controlled by the United States. Apparently that is clear now from the agreement. There'll be a board of five, three will be Americans. And they will have veto power over anything that this particular board decides to do. It is indefinite, this right to extract. Ukraine's resources is indefinite. It is in perpetuity. We pointed out, by the way, that the deal

that Zelensky was supposed to sign back in February when he went to the Oval Office, there also was a deal in perpetuity. But this time, apparently, that has been made clear. There is no security guarantee for Ukraine attached to this deal. But most important of all, apparently this time, It is made absolutely explicit that this mineral rights extraction deal is intended to pay the United States back for weapons, the cost of the weapons and the money the United States has already supplied to Ukraine. In other words, the period up to the point when Donald Trump became president. It's not forward, you know, for things... It's backwards. It's backwards.

Exactly. It's backwards. Now, that the terms of the deal look so harsh that I think it could almost be said to be calculated for the Ukrainians to reject it. The Americans will then say, well, Ukraine is not prepared to pay us back for what we have given. The negotiations have become stuck. They're not moving forward. Trump has given it the best he can. So when it becomes clear that this isn't moving forward,

and Zelensky for the moment says he's not going to Washington, he's not going to go to Washington to sign it. Well, that gives the Americans perhaps the opening they need to do that, which I think they should have done long ago, which is walk away. And I think that is where we are. I mean, bear in mind, we've also had two. reports now from the U.S. military, from the U.S. intelligence community. That said they can't win.

Well, they can't win, exactly. They said they can't win. And the assessment, the long, annual intelligence review, not only said they can't win in military terms, it also acknowledged that sanctions, further sanctions. are not going to change the situation. Yeah, that's what I said. They can't win on military terms and they can't win with the sanctions, the United States.

The statement from Putin is, I go back to it because Putin said, we will work with any partners when he's talking about the UN and the UN governance and everything going forward with Ukraine, this idea that he has. We will work with any partners, the U.S., the U.S.

China, India, Brazil, South Africa, BRICS countries, and for example, North Korea. That's a direct quote. Yes. I mean, he throws the US in there with countries that under Biden, the US would never be. I mean, this is Biden's axis of evil as he defied it, right? North Korea, China, India, right? I mean, it's an incredible quote from Putin, but he puts the US in there. is now working with the U.S. and the United Nations in the U.N.

They work together on, I believe, a resolution for Syria. And they also worked together on a couple of other resolutions. They voted together on a couple of resolutions, something that I can't remember the last time the U.S. and Russia voted together in alignment on various resolutions in the security Council, while the UK and France, while they did not vote against it, they upstate from these resolutions that were proposed by the U.S. and Russia. So perhaps there is some dialogue about the UN with China, Russia, and the United States taking the lead in these types of initiatives.

We do know that the Trump administration also wants Zelensky-Gan. So they have that in common. Russia wants Zelensky gone. The United States wants Zelensky gone. No one has quite figured out how to do it. Perhaps this is the way that they do it. What are your thoughts on that? Yeah, and there's also been one other very intriguing piece of news, which one doesn't quite know what to make about it. But it is interesting, and that is that Elise Stefanik, who was Trump's proposed ambassador for the UN, that nomination has now been pulled. She's no longer been proposed for the UN ambassadorship. She's going to remain in the House of Representatives. Now, the reason that's been

given is that she is needed in the House of Representatives because the Republican majority there is so narrow. And they can't risk, you know, out of time. term elections, all of that. The problem with that is that Stefanik's seat, apparently, is solidly Republican. So more likely than not, especially with the Democrats, very unpopular at the moment, whoever was the Republican candidate, would win. So I wonder whether the reason that they've pulled Stefanik's nomination is because she is a person who takes... very hard line, I would say near-con views on foreign policy. And there's now a sense that maybe she's not the best person to work with the Russians going forward.

This is a pure guess. I mean, I don't know, but I wonder whether this is another tell-tale sign of the things to come. We'll just have to see. We'll have to wait and see who is nominated in her place. But it's not impossible that the United States might go along with the UN trusteeship plan. I don't see why they wouldn't. It would be a way of getting the United States basically to give its support to this. The Russians need the Americans on side if there is going to be a UN,

trusteeship plan because obviously the United States has veto power in the Security Council just as Russia does. And the question then is, will the United States exert its influence? It's enormous potential influence over the Europeans, Britain and France, to see that this thing is piloted through. I think they will, by the way. I think that this is perhaps where we are going. And I think quite plausibly the Americans could be involved and maybe Putin will tell Trump, look, when this is over, when we got all this sorted out, we can dust out your mineral rights extraction deal. We can come up with something along the lines of that and you can go in and you can extract these minerals to your heart's content and to the extent that there are any.

And we're prepared to play ball with you on this. And, you know, something the other plans you know, reviving Nord Stream, giving the Americans a cart in it, that kind of thing. That might also come in to, I mean, it is not impossible. There's a lot of business. There's a lot of business. The Russians will no doubt also go on telling the Americans, look, we have an absolutely critical relationship. It is similarly important for the future of our two countries and for the stability of the

world, we can't afford not to talk to each other because the Europeans don't want us to, isn't a reason for not doing so. So I think that we will probably continue to see contacts between the United States and Russia continue. And it could be that, as I said, if and when, well, I would say when the Russians achieved this military victory that Putin is now expecting, that it could all crystallize. And we could finally get, you know, movement together, the Americans and the Russians sorting things out in Ukraine as they move forward with their relationship. I've always myself felt that it was a mistake for the Trump administration to plunge into Ukrainian settlement negotiations directly after Trump was elected. And I've

always myself felt, or that to the extent that there has been diplomatic interaction between the Americans and the Russians over Ukraine, it has been premature. It's taken place at a time when Ukraine is still there in the game, and where the Europeans have been able to make use of that, the Russians have to win a clearer military victory for us to reach. that point where it becomes in the interests of both the Russians and the Americans to come to a final settlement agreement, the Russians to secure their Western borders, and the Americans to stabilize the situation in Europe. The realities on the ground don't bring us to that point yet. Well, the statement from Putin is in a way also of a

final warning to the collective west, to Ukraine. And he says it for Ukraine, that it's a type of, this is your last chance kind of offer. It's either Istanbul Plus, take it now, or we're going to continue to push further west. Yes. And I mean, he was very clear about that. At least that's how I read his statement. The question is, the Trump administration is, I believe they're absolutely ready to sign off on Istanbul Plus on June 2024. I think they have no problem with the 4-0 blasts in their entirety going to Russia. I think that if they could get Zelensky and the Europeans to play ball, then it would be wrapped up this deal. But that, that's That's where you have the problem is you have Zelensky as president and the United States still hasn't figured out how to deal with Zelensky, which is kind of interesting.

Perhaps this is because the UK and the French are absolutely protecting Zelensky for what I understand the French and the UK. They've created a firewall around Zelensky. but the United States and the negotiations with the ceasefire, whether it was the energy infrastructure ceasefire, or the blacks or the Black C C's fire, they gave everything to Russia. I mean, whatever Russia wanted, whatever they asked for, Russia got in those negotiations. And it's the Europeans that are coming along and they're saying, no, with the Black Sea. We reject it. We're not going to lift any sanctions. So this is the opportunity, another opportunity for the Trump administration to say, okay, if the Europeans, we'll pressure the Europeans.

Maybe we'll pressure them. Maybe we won't. But whatever the outcome, if the Europeans dig in and they say no to lifting sanctions, then obviously the Black Cs-FIRE deal can't go anywhere. And then we have to move onwards to option B or option C, wherever we are, which is, in my opinion, you have to deal with Zelensky. Yes. Because the plan that Mike Waltz and Rubio laid out was we start with an energy infrastructure

ceasefire. Then we get to the Black C C's fire. Then we get to an overall ceasefire. And then we talked territory. That was how they laid it out. That was the step process that they were talking about. It doesn't look like you're going to get past the Black CCC's fire. Maybe the Europeans change their mind.

I don't know. But right now it doesn't look like that's going to happen. Or if it does happen, it's going to take some time to change the minds of the Europeans. So if you're the Trump administration, I think they do, as you say, as we've been telling them to do for six months, which is you figure out a way to walk away from this. You have another chance to walk away from this. And you can package it in a way that the American people, will understand.

It makes sense. Yes. Will they do it? That's the question. Will they do it? The next step seems very clear, and I think Putin is signaling it, which is we have to deal with Zelensky. I mean, that's what the UN idea is all about. Ultimately, yes.

We have to deal with Zelensky. So America, what do you say? Is it time for us to deal with Zelensky in a way that's... That will be accepted by the international community that will be deemed as legal, which will hold elections, which will lead to elections, and which will ultimately lead to some sort of entity, a person, a government, whatever it is, that will be internationally recognized as signing a negotiated settlement in Ukraine. Whatever capitulation is signed, it will be legal. It will be recognized by the international community if you go this U.N. route. It's important to point out that Putin said that this is just one idea. There could be many different options available going forward as to how to deal with Ukraine and with the Zeletsky regime.

Well, when he says that, when he says that there's many different options, you have to be very careful. because what he's basically saying, he doesn't want to be imposing something, but this is clearly what I think he thinks is the only really effective way forward. That was clearly my view, reading what he said. Now, I think there's an important point to make here, which is that over the last couple of weeks, basically since this process of American-Russian rapprochmo began, ever since the Americans started talking about a ceasefire and an end to the war. There's been lots of speculation. Will Putin compromise?

Will he move on his June 2024 positions? Will he agree to the Ukrainians retaining part of the four regions that they still control? And I think a lot of people, people who want the war to end as soon as possible, who want the, you know, dying in the West, a lot of people in the West of that kind have been anxious that Putin should do that. And I'm going to say this, an awful lot of people in Russia have been worried that he might do this. different perspectives. What we have seen is that Putin is not prepared to do that. I mean, he is not prepared to compromise on his June 2024 positions. I think when you pass his comments in Murmansk carefully, you can see this. He talks about the fact that, you know, that we control nearly all of Lugans, 99% of Lugansk, 70% of the other three regions. He's talking about

It's quite clear to me that he expects that the Russian army is going to capture all of the territory in the three regions. He says it. He says it. He says it. It doesn't seem to me as if on this he's prepared to give an inch. So that is the reality of the position from Putin's side. And the American intelligence says there's nothing the US can do to prevent. this, military support for Ukraine isn't going to be successful. Further economic sanctions on Russia

aren't going to be successful. Now, if you'd been listening to us and people like us, Trump would have recognized that, I think, from the first day. The problem has been that within his administration, he's got people with different views. And I think for a time he went on, when along with Kellogg and Rubio and Waltz, who have, shall we say, the more conventional ideas about how the United States should conduct his foreign policy. They don't like Russia very much. They still think that Russia is a weaker party, much weaker than the United States. They still believe that if the United States puts pressure on Russia, it can

force the Russians to come round. And that's why we had this process of negotiations and discussions that has taken place over the last few weeks, where the Americans trying to get the Russians to agree to a ceasefire, and the Americans tried to get the Russians to agree to all sorts of things, and the Americans found that the Russians raised objections. And also, there has been And I get to say straightforward, a deliberate sabotage, even of this process, from the Ukrainians themselves, from Zelensky, who is not prepared to accept anything except victory, and from the Europeans as well, who also are not prepared to accept anything except victory. I mean, when they said yesterday that sanctions will only be lifted when every single Russian soldier leaves pre-2014 Ukraine, the Europeans are still talking about victory. They're about to work on their 17th sanctions package.

So those are the realities that Trump and Rubio Waltz and Kellogg, certainly Rubio, Wolts and Kellogg, refused to acknowledge. So we are at that fork in the road. Now, if the Trump administration, if Trump himself decides to go continue with this Walsh, Rubio Kellogg process, takes that fork in the road, then I suspect that the negotiations, which already look bogged down, are not going to go anywhere further. They will drag on probably for the rest of the year. The Russians will continue their advances. And eventually everything will end with a situation where the Trump administration goes back to Congress, asks for more money. It will be a return to the Biden approach all over again.

A lot of people in the Republican Party, the Marjorie Tola Green type people will be furious and they'll be very, very angry. And it will also be an admission on Trump's part that all of this has failed. So the only real option, as far as I can see, is to do what we've said, to accept that this process isn't moving forward. forward, maybe too much has been invested politically in it now to simply abandon it. So maybe we will have continued sporadic discussions with the Russians and the Ukrainians. But I personally think that is a bad idea. And I suspect, I strongly suspect, that for the Trump people, the Mineral Rights Extraction deal is that, or is they hope is their get out of jail card.

It's what they hope will manage finally to escape. What if he signs it? Yeah. What if he signs it? He's done then. I mean, Zelensky is done. Exactly. Exactly.

What if he says, okay, I'll give you guys everything. I'll give you guys. Well, I mean, exactly. And then of course, he doesn't just have to sign it. The Rada, the Ukrainian parliament was ratified. And apparently there's doubts about whether that will happen. So it looks to me that it's been pitched at that. that level where this really can't be accepted and it won't work.

And perhaps at that point, the Americans will say to themselves, the Trump people will say to themselves, well, Trump will start listening more to people like Vance and Musk and other people who I think their instinct has been much closer to the one that we've been setting out in the Duran than maybe the Waltz Rubio, Kellogg Axis, has been. been, which is that this is a losing proposition for the United States. Far too much time has been invested in it, diplomatic time. The president has been distracted from other things, and the time has come to start walking away. Yeah, well, Musk still believes that there's a stalemate. So I was listening to his interview the other day with Brett Barron. He still thinks there's a

stalemate and there's no movement on the front line. So Musk doesn't quite really know what the situation. No, this is true. I mean, he's, yeah, he's a, he's way off. To be quite honest, I know he is. He wants peace. Yes. I give him that. He wants peace. He wants a negotiation. So there he's right. He's absolutely right. But he doesn't have an understanding as to what is going on in Ukraine. He has very little understanding about what's happening on the ground. I agree. But I think the difference between Musk and say someone like Walsz is that Walsk still wants to negotiate a settlement that is tilted in America's and Ukraine's favor, whereas Musk doesn't care. As far as he's concerned, he doesn't really care.

I mean, he thinks this is taking up too much time, and we need to walk away. Witkoff, of course, has gone much further. He understands that the only way that this can end is by accepting Istanbul Plus. That's best deal on the table right now for Ukraine, for Europe, even for the, you could argue for the United States as well. You could argue that Istanbul Plus is the best deal. Just like Istanbul in March of 2022 was a great deal, just like Minsk 2 was a great deal, just like Minsk 1 was a great deal before that. But each deal is getting worse and worse for Ukraine. It's getting worse and worse for Europe and for the collective West.

So that is why Putin is saying, this is it. You have Istanbul Plus. Whitkoff understands that. Yes. I think, I don't even think. I know Whitkoff, and there's a faction in the Trump administration that is saying, just take Istanbul plus, everybody. Yes.

Take it. We're not going to get a better deal. No. Exactly. But you have this Kellogg hangover, this Kellogg ceasefire. DMZ, April plan that he put out there with Waltz and all of these guys. And this thing is kind of, this has a hangover effect on Trump. And so they're saying, let's negotiate this out.

Let's go through a ceasefire or fight. This is what they chose. Yeah. Well, exactly. I mean, by the way, this is exactly the pattern in previous negotiations to end wars that the United States has been involved in. You find the same pattern with the Vietnam War, all kinds of complicated ideas, which ultimately, in the end, it becomes clear the other side isn't really interested in. And eventually they fall away.

If we talk about negotiations, I mean, people overlook the fact that in terms of the Paris peace talks, the first six months of them, this is the, the problem. negotiations to end the war, the conflict in Vietnam. And the first six months were entirely taken up with protocol issues because those proved so difficult to unravel. Eventually, if you look at the pattern of the Paris peace talks, the Americans come up with all kinds of complicated proposals. In the end, they have to accept every single proposal the North Vietnamese make. Well, these negotiations, just to wrap up the video, these negotiations also had a bit of vatted as well. There was a flavor of protocol in these negotiations as well, in that you have to get the embassies up and running. There were no, there was no staff in either of the embassies for three

years. There was no communication between Russia and the United States for three years. And that's still an ongoing process. So, I mean, I think it's important for everyone to understand that, yes, you have Project Ukraine, which is a huge important topic for the United States and Russia to discuss. But they have all of these other things that they need to go over and to fix from the damage of the Biden administration. We're talking about three, three, four years of just radio silence between the two countries. So they're going to need quite some time to fix all of these things, staffing issues, connecting the banks to the embassies, getting the proper officials in each country.

I mean, there's so much that they have to go over. Biden did a tremendous amount of damage to the bilateral relations between Trump and Russia. So the trajectory seems to be towards either Istanbul Plus or let's talk about. the U.N., and we can deal with our mutual headache, the U.S. and Russia, which is this man in Kiev, who is a pain in the butt for both countries. You know, just the final thought, and we'll wrap up the video. When you take a step back, yes, this is a proxy war. We've been saying it forever. We understand the U.S. is at war with Russia. Ukraine is the proxy. But the reality is that the United States is speaking with Russia.

They're negotiating with Russia. Europe could have done the same. They could have gotten on a plane to Moscow. And they could have also decided to speak to Russia. I don't know who the Europeans would send. I don't know. Do you send Kayakalas? You said, Ursula.

This, I don't know. But the Trump administration, they decided they're going to try to negotiate this. The negotiations will see how they have. It does appear as if we're stuck on this Black Sea Seasfire agreement. But there is an option that Putin has now put on the table, which is this UN governance idea. And if you're the Trump administration, there is a way that you can spin this. Yes. To your favor.

It's not a hard one to spin. No. We are getting close to a deal with Russia, everybody. Yes, we got two ceasefires agreed on. You could say that. We agreed on ceasefires. And now we're looking at the democracy of Ukraine. You could position it in those terms. We're looking at getting democracy back on track in Ukraine. We're looking at elections in Ukraine. Isn't that wonderful? Isn't that great? The UN is going to help us out in this. I mean, there's there's a clear way that you can spin this for the for the, for the, for the, MAGA crowd or the everyday American who hasn't been so plugged into what has been going on in Ukraine as we have or our viewers have, which would lead them to believe that this is a win for Trump. I mean, it can be marketed and packaged as a win. But Trump needs to make the right decision. Because as you said, if he decides to continue to go down this Kellogg-Waltz route,

then once again he's getting ownership of the conflict, a military defeat for Ukraine is going to happen and he's going to be stuck with it. So take this offer that Putin is putting out on the table and push through this could be pushed through what could be a settlement to Ukraine. Absolutely, that's exactly right. I mean, in my opinion, if he continues along the Kellogg, Walt's route, he'll end up being Joe Biden, I mean, which is presumably not what he wants. Much better to come to terms. And the terms on offer are Istanbul plus. Now, that does lead the problem of Zelensky.

But, you know, if the Americans and the Russians can come to an understanding with each other, well, probably the Huawei's to work that out. And I don't think this is a hard sell in the United States at all. I mean, it's important to remember that Donald Trump won the election in November on the basis that he would not involve, commit the United States to further conflict in Ukraine. The hard sell, the really hard sell with the MAGA people would be if he came back in, say, August and said that, you know, Ukraine, we've run out of funding for Ukraine. we need another $60 billion appropriation. That would be a much harder sell than what you said. I do the Americans care very much about Ukraine, to be honest.

I think they're more concerned with the many, many pressing problems closer to home. Now, as for the Europeans, well, the Europeans are digging themselves into an ever deeper hole of Ukraine. and it is really depressing to watch. One European government is rebelling, and that's Hungary's Peter Seattle. The Hungarian foreign minister is going to Moscow and see what comes of his discussions with the Russians. Now, there is a possibility because sanctions have to be renewed every six months or so that the Hungarians and the Slovrax might start imposing VATs.

Now, the problem with that is I don't think the Europeans will pay much notice. I know people simply don't believe me about this, but even if there is a veto in the European Council about rolling over sanctions, I think the European states, the other ones will simply agree with each other, that they will continue to enforce them anyway. Yeah. No, I think they'll continue with sanctions. They'll continue with trying to escalate. I think even when the conflict is wrapped up, they could still be talking about escalation.

No joke. Because for the Europeans, the way I look at the Europeans at this point in time is that every leader in Europe outside of Hungary and Slovakia, for their own reasons, they like the topic of Ukraine, they like to go to these summits. It acts as a distraction. It acts as a way of not talking about the problems in their own country. For some leaders, it makes them feel very, very large, very important. So they like to go to these events. They like to talk about defeating Russia. They like to all pretend that they're church ill. And I've come to the conclusion that for the Europeans, for the European leaders that we currently have in place,

they have no problem with continuing to deindustrialize Europe and continuing to make it harder for the everyday European citizen, to continue to make them poorer. Because if they can make them poor, then, you know, they make themselves richer. And I look at this as very much a wealth transfer. And they're not concerned about being voted out of office. I mean, Macron and all of these people, I don't think they care about being voted out of office. I think in the UK, whether it's conservative or labor, it doesn't really matter. If they can continue to centralize power using Putin as the excuse, if they can continue to transfer wealth from the everyday people to themselves using Putin as an excuse. And so be it.

I think they have no real incentive to de-escalates or to find a solution to the conflict in Ukraine. And also for political purposes, they don't want to admit that they've lost. So I think they'll just continue to go on with this for the next year, two years, 10 years, 50 years. Really, they'll just continue to go on with this charade that they're fighting Russia, that they're defending Europe. It benefits them. They realize they have no democracy, the people have no recourse. And so why not continue to go along with this? It makes us money.

It benefits us. It benefits our donors. Why deal with dialogue with Russia? Well, they don't want dialogue with Russia. I mean, the latest meeting made that crystal clear. I mean, Macron, Osceola. Stama, obviously, Mauts and Schultz as well, they're not looking for dialogue with Russia. I think that they're absolutely focused on centralising Europe around the European Commission,

the European project, and as you absolutely rightly say, conflict with Russia serves their interests, and if they can prolong a conflict with Russia and get the Americans to stay, so much the better. And I suspect some of them have now drunk the Kool-Aid of remilitarization and all that. And I suspect that they believe it. This is one of the features of European politics. It's money for them. It's money for them. It's money for them.

It's like telling them you don't want to pay yourselves X amount of money. Exactly. Of course they're going to jump at it. We're going to create this big fund where everyone can dip into it, or at least everyone in the club can dip into it, of course they're going to jump on this. As they did with every other fund before, the coup fund, everything, it's the same, it's the same formula over and over again. It's the European people that can't, they can't vote these people out.

No. That's the problem. And they know it. Exactly. Exactly. Anyway, we'll wrap it up at the durand.locals.com. We are on Rumble Odyssey, pitch you, Telegraph, Rockfitted X, go to the Dreadshop, pick up some merch like what we are wearing in this video update the link is in the description box down

below take care