The Duran Podcast - Rubicon crossed, permanent conflict on Russia. Zelensky targets Belarus next

Episode Date: June 24, 2026

Rubicon crossed, permanent conflict on Russia. Zelensky targets Belarus next

All right, Alexander, let's talk about Project Ukraine. We had storm shadow missiles hitting Varonis yesterday, perhaps a message from the UK establishment to Russia, even though Kirstammer is on his way out. We will continue to hit you with missiles. We have a Russian military advance into Konstantinovgan-Liman, a quick advance. a quick advance. And even the Collective West media is reporting now on Konstantinovka. That's got to mean something. They've been ignoring the military activity on the front line for a good two months,

a signal that Konstantinovka and Lehman will be captured by the Russians any day now. And we have this row with Zelensky and Navrovsky. in Navrovsky, president of Poland. And this is over the naming of Ukrainian military units, as well as a hero's burial to Nazi collaborator, Melnik. And this is upset Poland and Navrovsky. So where should we begin? And just to add to that list, of course,

another row between Zelensky and Lukashenko. with all kinds of threats, with all kinds of threats from Zelensky to attack to attack Belarus. I'm going to suggest we... And Putin meeting with, or he's going to meet with Lukashenko or talk with Lukashenko?

They're going to have a conversation to discuss all of this. Exactly. And I'm going to suggest we do start with the Stalk Shadow Strike on Varanish. Unreported here in the British media, by the way. There's been no mention of it that I can find, but I think you have explained exactly what the reason behind it was.

Britain is very, very short as storm shadows. I should say that each one is handmade, something which I found extraordinary, but it's true. France apparently is the same. So the stock pile is very small now because most of them have been used up, but there's still a few around, and they launched one into Varonis, attacking an electronics factory, and obviously it's intended as a signal to the Russians

that don't expect that because we're changing Prime Minister, anything on our part has changed. We're going to continue to support Ukraine, if that's the right word, or we're going to continue with Project Ukraine, and we have no intention of changing or softening our stance towards you whatsoever. And the Russians, by the way, in that respect, haven't needed the message because they were already saying that previously. But Peskov, Putin's spokesman, has said it too. He said that the Russians have no expectation that anybody from within the political system in Britain is going to change policy towards Russia or change support for project Ukraine. And the Russians know it and they don't expect any change from Britain. And they're absolutely realistic

about this. The Russians also, by the way, are barely reporting this incident. I suspect that both sides understand that it was a signal more than anything else. Are T-tas? I mean, I think the English language, Russian media is reporting on this. Exactly. The Russian internal media is not. So, yeah. Yeah. Can you say that this is a message from the UK, not so much as we're going to continue to support Ukraine, but we will continue to attack you? Oh, absolutely.

So much strikes into Russia. Well, that's exactly what you do. I mean, I've seen some media saying that these are Ukrainian storm shadows. I mean, I've actually seen titles which say Ukrainian storm shadows hit a facility in Russia. Yeah, which is of course not nonsense. Ukraine is no ability to make storm shadows. It is no ability to make missiles except, you know, the, you know, the military. enormous flamingo missiles which are completely ineffective. It has no ability to make ballistic

missiles, though it's tried to do so. It's launched what it claims is its own surface to air missile. And again, everybody knows that this has been done mostly with the help of the British. And those who understand about these things, engineers in other words, they say that this missile is far too slow and not going to be able to successfully intercept Russian ballistic missiles or even cruise missiles, let alone hypersonic missiles. Ukraine has no ability to conduct these kind of these kind of military industrial preparations, certainly not on its own territory. All production now for Ukraine military production, serious military production is being done in Europe and it's been done by

the Europeans. And storm shadows, in my opinion, are gradually going to, well, I mean, they've mostly faded away. There's now a lot of talk about the British developing and designing a new cheap missile, which supposedly has no American components. If you know anything at all, by the way, about industrial structures in Europe, you will know that that is impossible. There has to be some American component in any weapon system, even if it's not a physical component,

there will need to be intellectual property elements, which are ultimately American incorporated in any weapon system. This is, again, a joint operation by the US deep state and the British producing a missile. Well, apparently, again, I'm told not a particularly effective missile because the components to produce it are not there. And the testing program, despite what you read, apparently he isn't going that well. But anyway, it's clearly a attempt by the US deep state to get around whatever restrictions

Trump is ineffectively placing by having these weapons produced in Britain and running with the narrative that their British designed and British made and have nothing to do with the United States so that they can eventually be supplied to the Ukrainians to conduct the missile strikes against Russia. So that's what this is all about. I don't think we're going to see this in any significant level this year. It might start to have an effect next year. But my next year things will probably have changed any way on the ground and anyway, we'll just have to wait and see. I mean, isn't that the point of this missile program? I read the telegraph article about this. They're claiming that this missile will, in three months, we'll have about 20, the production

goals are about 20 missiles a month. That's what they're putting the goals of the missile at, a 300 kilometer range. Yes. A certain requirement for the warhead. And they're testing it. And the telegraph's title was pretty clear.

Testing long-range missiles to bomb to help Ukraine bomb Moscow. I mean, quite an incredible title. I mean, wow. That was, I mean, you read that title and I mean, you know, where have we where have we come to.

But isn't the point to not to have the missile ready now, but to keep the strikes going for the next two, three years? So even if it's ready by 2007, let's say it's ready in three months already in six months, or ready in a year. The point to all of this is to continue the strikes into Russia. And as the title says, into Moscow, seems like the UK and the U.S., the Europeans, they don't want to lose the ability to hit Moscow and St. Petersburg.

They don't want to lose it in six months. They don't want to lose it in a year or two. It doesn't, my point is it doesn't really matter what's going on on the front lines for them. I think they've opened up the operational ability. to hit Russia and they don't want to lose that? Well, I think there may be some truth in that. And I'm sure that there are some people in London who are now so hard-lying and so

obsessed with hitting and striking at the Russians that this is basically what they want to do. I should say it's 20 missiles a month of what is supposed to be a cheap missile. Again, the Russians use that many missiles in a single strike sometimes. I mean, again, it highlights the difference in production and capabilities in terms of the two sides. But in my opinion, this is more about political messaging than anything else. The title of the article and the article itself was unbelievably provocative. It is basically telling the Russians,

your mortal enemies. We will go on fighting you. What is it, you know, from Moby Dick, you know, in death, do I spit on thee? It's that kind of message to the Russians. From a newspaper, the Daily Telegraph, by the way, which is pretty, pretty extreme on these sort of issues, even by British standards. So it's a message to the Russians that Britain is going to remain committed to this conflict, no matter what, whether Ukraine goes down, whether it keeps going. Britain is now once and for all and forever Russia's mortal enemy. That's what the deep state in London wants to convey to the Russians. And of course, it's also a message in the time of political crisis, to the British people, to the British government itself, to the new Prime Minister

Andy Burnham, whoever he is, well, it will be Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, that, you know, whatever you may think, whatever, if you have any fancy ideas of trying to improve relations with the Russians, forget it, because we are committed to this and we are committed to this indefinitely. It's as much about that by now. than actually trying to do anything in terms of changing the direction of the war. And, you know, it's going to succeed. We recently did a program about the political crisis in London, and we discussed over the course of it how the British political system,

constitutional system, is about having the prime minister take over immediately, a new prime minister, take over immediately, when an old prime minister fails and how this isn't happening, how we have a month of effectively no prime minister with a deep state in charge and shaping and preparing everything. Well, yesterday there were reports that there are now attempts to find a Labour MP to stand against Andy Burnham in the Labour Party leadership,

election, not because anybody expects that this Labour MP, whoever he or she is, is going to win against Andy Burnham. But in order to prolong this transition to the end of August, precisely in order to ensure that this policy is going to be embedded into hardwired, if you like, into British decision making, even more than it has been up to now, and to ensure. And to ensure that no change, no change or shift in policy is going to be made. So this, I mean, it's, I think, absolutely disastrous for Britain long term. It's not going to do Ukraine any good either. It's not going to be obviously good for the Russians too.

But, you know, we have to take, we have to assume from now on that Britain for the foreseeable future, during this war, Beyond this war, long after this war is going to remain an implacable adversary of Russia. The hardliners here are in absolutely complete control. Yeah, I think we have to start analyzing things from a perspective of two wars, or maybe one battle and one bigger war. And the one war and the one battle is Ukraine. So maybe, yes, it's a war, but maybe that'll be a battle that folds under this bigger war. which is the collective West against Russia.

And then, of course, you can extend it out and say it's the collective West against, you know, Russia, China, bricks, etc. But, I mean, if you look at it from a two-war perspective, then I think things start to make sense. You know, yesterday we talked about the war against Iran and how a Rubicon was crossed. the neocons, the United States, Israel, they started to attack Iran and they have successfully attacked Tehran. And that was something that was considered unthinkable, maybe two, three years ago, right, to actual strikes into Tehran, missile strikes. And now that Rubicon has been crossed and it's going to happen again because they've done it

now. They've ripped off the bandit and they've now finally attacked. Tehran, so Tehran and Iran should be ready for attacks to happen well into the future. Can the same be said about Moscow and St. Petersburg? And the message from the collective West being that now we have crossed that Rubicon and we can hit Moscow and we can hit St. Petersburg when we want going forward. Once again, what's happening on the front line is one thing. But what we can do to you is a separate war, separate battle.

Are they now going to also open up a front in much the same way that they've opened things up in Russia, in Moscow, in St. Petersburg, opened up those cities and those regions for strikes and for attacks? Are they going to do the same thing with Minsk and Belarus now? Is that what we're going to see? Are they going to extend things out to Minsk and Belarus? Just real quick, at first I thought Zelensky's messaging about Belarus was about deflecting away from the drone strike into the bus, the Belarusian bus carrying the children. I thought, okay, he's saying this stuff about Belarus and giving them this seven-day ultimatum because he wants to move away from the Ukrainian drone that hit the bus. But now we're seeing him say this over and over again about striking Belarus. This wasn't a one-time warning. I mean, he's issued now four warnings. And he's put a seven-day ultimatum. So, I mean, are we seeing the collective West starting to extend this war so that it can even cover Belarus and Minska, perhaps? Right.

Well, first of all, let me begin by your point about whether a Rubicon has been crossed. A Rubicon has absolutely been crossed. I mean, the idea of conducting strikes inside the territory of an adversary superpower has never happened at any time since the end of the Second World War until the conflict in Ukraine began. And we see this constant pattern of escalation. The escalation itself, in military terms, may be ineffectual, but it is happening. And I would just quickly say something. You said that there are two wars when I discussed the subject with people whilst I was in Russia.

And I want to stress I wasn't talking to government officials or people of that kind. But when I spoke to people who, you know, come from every walk of life in Russia, people who are, you know, factory workers, right up and, you know, people in the more executive place. class in Russian companies. I mean, they are all absolutely clear that this is not a war so much any longer between Ukraine and Russia. It is a war between Russia and the collective West. At that level, at the level of Russian society, wider Russian society, they understand that entirely. And that is indeed where we're heading. And in fact, we've just had today, as we're making this program, shortly before we're making this program, a comment by a, a, a Russian deputy foreign minister, in which he says that the Russians are looking at the military

preparations in Europe. And they're saying to themselves that this is Operation Barbarossa all over again. Operation Barbarossa was Germany's attack on the Soviet Union on the 22nd of June 1941. So that is the increasing view in Russia. Now, after, friend, Gordon Hahn, who we've done programs with on our channel, he recently wrote a piece, a very interesting, very good piece, I thought, in which he said that probably most of the political leadership in Europe actually does not want a war with Russia. But that isn't everybody that there is within the Western, the European political leadership, a very powerful, very influential group, which absolutely does want a war with Russia

and is trying to do everything within its power to make that war happen. And that is absolutely, I'm sure he's right. He says, obviously, that this kind of thinking is extraordinarily dangerous and completely irrational. But again, he warns in this really fine article, he says, you know, be aware these people do exist. You can see them. You can see how they behave. You can see what they say. He names Kayakales, as everybody does.

But there are clearly a lot of other people like that, too. And he says, never, ever, ever underestimate the irrationality of these people and their complete lack of contact with reality. And I think this is absolutely correct. I mean, when you talk about the Rubicon having been crossed, it has absolutely been crossed, and it will continue to be. And the Russians currently are focused on the conflict in Ukraine, and the Russians also maintain their contacts with the Americans, and partly the reason they do that. It was explained to me very clearly in Russia, is because they're not.

are looking to the Americans to keep these, as the Russians would say, crazy people in Europe under control. They understand that the Americans are partly complicit with a lot of this, but they still believe, maybe rightly, maybe wrongly, that the Americans retain some degree of agency and reason and realism about this, which you don't find in Europe. And that's the strategy at the moment. But in Russia, certainly, despite, as I said, the appearance of normalcy that you see wherever you go, the assumption is that a long duration, conflict with Europe is not coming. It is underway and that the possibility of outright war today is very real. Now, I want to repeat again what I've said many times, that the idea of war between Europe, any part of Europe, or even Europe collectively and Russia without the United States is a ludicrous fantasy.

But then we come back to what Golden Hahn said. Don't underestimate the lack of contact with reality of these people. They are trapped inside their own world, their own fantasy world. they not only want to war with Russia, they are convinced they can win it. And I believe you met someone in Cyprus, we might say who, or in what context, who has contacts, I believe, with the very highest level of the European leadership. And this person told you the very same thing. Yeah, absolutely.

They are people very high up in the EU. absolutely believe that Ukraine is winning in Ukraine on the front lines that they're winning and that they can absolutely defeat Russia without, with or without the United States. Belarus, are they looking to do to Belarus what they're doing to Moscow and St. Petersburg and to Russia? Very plausibly, and I think this is something else. I, contrary to most people, take these warnings from, Zelensky extremely seriously. Things are not going well on the front lines, and we will get to that

shortly. He's also, Zelensky has catapulted himself, as you rightly said at the start of the program, into a furious row with Poland. I mean, he's naming military units in Poland, in Ukraine, rather, sorry, after people who were collaborated with the Germans during the Second World War and who the Poles accused, rightly, by the way, of having carried out monstrous war crimes against Poles. I've got many people who are Poles and they know all about this and they're furious about this. So he's managed to do that. He continues with this quarrel. any sensible, rational leader in this kind of situation in Zelensky's position,

would want to calm down the argument with the polls. He instead is escalating it. He's being incredibly rude again. He's had to give up his honour, an honour that the polls gave him. So he's got into a furious angry row with the polls, which is getting worse and worse all the time, and he won't let it go. And at the same time, he's making these threats against Belarus.

And I take these threats extremely seriously. Look, Zelensky is under pressure. Things are not going well on the front lines. He has told the president of Honduras, one of the few people, apparently, outside the collective West, that he speaks to, that he absolutely is serious about, these threats to Belarus. And I think it will be very, very unwise to assume that he's not going to act on them.

And this is, by the way, part of the pattern of Zelensky, whenever things are not going well on the front lines, or whenever he's got, you know, a major issue with the polls, as he has at the moment, which is he lashes out. He launches offensives, adventures in places like Gutsk region, if you remember. He conducts violent attacks inside Russia. He tries to assassinate the president of Russia, as he's done more than one time. And this is, by the way, been admitted by his current chief of staff, Kirilo Budanov. And he's now making these very, very extreme threats against Belarus. So quite plausibly, we're going to see missile strikes against Belarus.

I am not, by the way, ruling up the possibility of some kind of. of ground forces attack against Belarus as well. It's entirely in Zelensky's character. He will rationalize it by saying that doing something like that is going to divert the Russians. They're going to have to send reinforcements to Belarus from the front lines. Of course, what it's really going to do is drain Ukrainian resources rather than Russian ones on the front lines. but it is the sort of thing Zelensky does. And this is where it becomes really dangerous because he's going to have the backing

of the same people in London and Brussels that we have just been talking about. Just as these people want a war with Russia, they are determined to overthrow the government of Belarus, to overthrow Lukashenko. They constantly meet what's her named Tchaunovskaya, the opposition leader of Belarus. That agenda is there for them.

And Putin and Lukashenko taking this extremely seriously. That's why they're setting up. It's going to be more than just a telephone conversation. There's going to be military discussions. There's going to be all sorts of plans taken to counter this thing. And we're going to see various moves take place over the next few days and weeks. In my opinion, the war is getting more dangerous. The situation on the front lines is now reaching the point

where even the BBC and the New York Times are starting to see that Dombas is about to fall. Donbass, we've talked about this many times. The ISW has talked about it, is the key fortified line, given that there is no willingness either in Kiev or in Europe to conduct serious negotiations, real negotiations, which of any prospect of succeeding with the Russians. What else can they do?

And what else anyway would these people who we've just been talking about want to do other than escalate the war? And the fact that the Americans at some level are leaving, Europe, they're pulling troops out of Europe, that's going to make them even more determined to escalate more and faster. Yeah, I get the sense that the Europeans don't really care that much about Dombasa. They're just sending the message that Ukraine, if they can keep things at a slow advance for the Russian military or some sort of a stalemate, they're fine with it.

I mean, there's an understanding that Donbass will be captured by Russia eventually, but for them, it's just inflict as much pain and damage that you can on Russia. But, I mean, you know, they don't really care about, about Donbass or the east of Ukraine. I think they've moved on from the special military operation and the war in Ukraine. I mean, they care about, say, Kiev and Odessa and then, of course, the west of Ukraine. But as far as the war in Dombas, I think the European elite and NATO are just fine with the Ukraine military, inflicting as much damage on Russia as possible. And they can then focus on the actual drive towards a conflict with Russia and Belarus. And for them, Belarus may be low-hanging fruit. They've always wanted this regime change of Lukashenko going back to 2020.

We're hearing a lot more about Tjanovska, yeah, right? She's now appearing in the media a whole lot more, so that's got to tell you something. And the way they're probably seeing things is, look, if we can pick off Belarus, then we're ever closer to getting the regime change in Russia. So, I mean, you know, a strike from Ukraine into Belarus, I agree with you, is very possible. storm shadows and other NATO or collective West weapons into Belarus is very possible. I'm also afraid that Putin speaking to Belarus will tell Lukashenko a maximum restraint. That could be the message from Putin as well.

We will absorb the hits that the collective West sends at us. I mean, I'm not saying that's what Putin is going to advise, Lucaschenko, but it could be possible that just like what's happening in Moscow or St. Petersburg, the advice to Belarus would be, let's just continue to focus on Dombas. And if they strike without ground troops, if it's just drone and missile strikes, we'll absorb it. Of course, ground troops, I think you're looking at a Kersk type of disaster. But if it's just contained to drones and missiles, you know, Putin might tell, Lucas, Schenko, just absorb it.

Right. There's a number of things to say here. Firstly, I think we have seen an evolution in Europe, at least, about the war. And I'll tell you what I think it is. At the start of the war, it was all about regime change in Moscow. I mean, he's never been about Dombat. The Europeans have never been interested in Dombat. I mean, what they always wanted to achieve was a situation where some kind of regime change

in Moscow was brought about. I remember, again, I go back to the Munich Security Conference in February, 2020. What got all those people excited was not the prospect of Ukraine retaining Donbass or gaining back control of Donbass. It was regime change in Moscow. I don't think it is about regime change in Moscow as such anymore. I think it is about something bigger than that.

that now, and we're talking about, you know, the ultras, the very, very hardline people. I think it is about defeating Russia, about, as they would say, solving Europe's Russia problem. I mean, this is the kind of rhetoric these people engage in, solving the Russia problem once and for all. And we're getting all of these academic discussions taking place in the United States, but even more in Europe, about supposedly decolonizing Russia, which is, of course, a code word for breaking it up. And I think this is now really what the war has got, what the war for the very hardliners that we've been talking about in Europe and in London. That's what that's evolved into. Now, having said that, obviously.

if Donbass falls, Ukraine likely loses the whole of eastern Ukraine, east of the NEPA. I mean, it becomes very difficult. You look at the geography. It becomes very, very difficult to see how Ukraine can hold on to the rest of its territories, east of the NEPA. So if the war continues, Ukraine east of the NEPA would eventually be lost. It wouldn't take, actually, in my opinion, even that. long. The question then becomes, if you want to continue the war indefinitely, can you hold on to the

line of the NEPA? I'm going to say this. I think that's going to be very challenging for the Europeans to do. But maybe that is the strategy. About Belarus and about Putin giving Lukashenko advice, I don't think that actually is the actual dynamics of it. I think the person who has sought restraint and who has tried to keep Belarus out of the war up to now, has been Lukashenko. He has not wanted Belarus to be directly involved in the war. Apparently, he rejected a Russian request back in February 22 for the Belarus military to join the advance towards Kiev that took place then, and he's always tried to maintain at least some kind of stable situation with the Ukrainians. My own personal view, on the contrary, is if the Ukrainians are reckless enough

to expand the war into Belarus, it's going to compound their problems because that will indeed create a situation where the Russian army moves into Belarus and then becomes positioned much more effectively to advance into Western Ukraine than it is today. So I don't think it's Putin seeking to restrain Lukashenko. I think initially it will be Putin talking with Lukashenko about how to defend Belarus. But if there is an attack on me, Belarus, even if it's only a missile attack on Belarus, over time, it's going to evolve into a massive problem for Ukraine and for the West as well, because it will bring more Russian forces further westward.

Is that what the West wants? I mean, once again, leaving Ukraine out of this for the West and Zelensky's situation on the front line in Konstantinovka and Lehman. the West, do they not see this as an opening to strike at Belarus and to get that regime change of Lukashenko? Yeah, well, first of all, I mean, the question is whether they would get a legal regime change on Lukashenko. Strike on Belarus is bar more likely, I would have thought, to harden support for Lukashenko

in Belarus and to confirm what Lukashenko has been saying all along that there is a threat to Belarus from the West. He's been saying this, by the way, ever since the 2021 crisis. So I think that it would not bring about regime change in Belarus. It would commit Belarus even more to an alliance with Russia. And the Russians will defend Belarus. I mean, about that, I don't think there's any doubt at all. They have said it there.

There is a formal military alliance between the two countries. And the Russian army will go into Belarus to defend it. Now, there may be some people, some strategists in the West who think it is a better, it is better to bring the Russian army westwards to the border of Poland. I am not a military strategist, but I don't understand that logic at all. I would have thought you want to keep the Russians further away, not closer to you. Certainly not now when you're trying to conduct a rearmament. a massive rearmament program and are not succeeding.

But as we've discussed in many, you know, throughout this program, we're not dealing with fully rational people. And there may be some complicated game here because I've got a complicated strategy, which I don't understand and which probably, if it was ever explained to me, would make no sense to me. But anyway, to repeat again, I take Zelensky's threats against Belarus extremely seriously.

I know there's some people who think it's just Zelensky sounding off and some kind of poker game that he's playing. I don't think so. I think he's absolutely serious about what he's doing. The big question is, will he move forward with it? Again, it really depends on the Americans more than anything else. Trump has developed a good relationship with Lukashenko. He's just wrote back sanctions to some extent against Belarus.

One would like to assume, what would want to assume, that the Americans who want to pull out of Europe, want to pull more and more of their troops out of Europe, and Trump himself, that the Americans will be telling Zelensky, under no circumstances even think of doing this thing. But as we discussed in this program, the Americans are hardly themselves united about these things. Exactly. That's exactly right.

No, I mean, they may be looking at Belarus in much the same way. They look at Kursk. You know, things are going bad in Konstantinovkan, Lehman. So we need to extend the Russian military, which is what the excuse was for Kirst. Let's remember that Kursk at first was to make a dash towards the nuclear power plan. Exactly. and then exert leverage. But then the narrative changed and the objectives changed and everything switched to extending

the Russian military. So in this instance, the first reason for striking Belarus will be to take out the radars and these air defense systems. And by doing that, you create instability in Belarus, you create instability for Lukashenko, which also creates instability for Putin and for Russia. But then it might turn into a narrative of a narrative of a situation. extending the Russian military, which is the same playbook as Kursk. Absolutely.

Once again, Konstantinovkan Liemann is about to fall. Absolutely, they are. And Don Bass is going to follow. The New York Times starting to talk about this. Even more interesting, the BBC. And it was a very interesting article in the BBC, because for the first time that I can remember, BBC journalists go to Ukraine. They're told the situation in Constantinica specifically is fully under control.

And the BBC journalists don't believe what the Ukrainians are saying. And it's passed on into the article which the BBC publishes. So some people at least have doubts about this. And you're starting to get the sense that this great narrative about the Ukrainians, resting back the initiative, winning back territory, gaining more territory over the last few months than the Russians have done, which isn't true, by the way. Some people are beginning to have doubts about this. We've said that this would happen.

We would eventually get to this point, and it's starting to come about. And, well, Konstantinovka has either fallen or is about to fall. Leman has either fallen or is about to fall. Ray Alexandrefer has definitely fallen. Other places are falling as well. We are starting to look at the end of Dombas and the battle of Dombas, which has been ongoing basically since the summer of 2022, when the Russians advanced and captured Mariupo.

Yeah, just to wrap of the video, I think that the miscalculation from the Kremlin will be that they believe that once they capture Dombas, they will be able to convince their partners in the West to some sort of an agreement. I think that, especially the Europeans and the UK, of course, the EU and the UK, I think they're going to be completely unfazed by it. And they're going to say, we need to continue, we need to escalate even more now with Russia. And then those are going to be the voices of callus, Mertz, Macron, maybe Andy Burnham, right? Well, definitely Andy Burnham. It would be under no doubt about that at all. Here's what I think is going to happen. I've already discussed this.

I think that after the fall of Donbass, we are going to get basically an ultimatum from Putin, from the Russians. say, look, we've captured Donbass. This is the last opportunity to move, to come through negotiation, a resolution, Istanbul plus, but it won't be Istanbul plus, it will be Istanbul plus, plus, plus, because the Russians, at every level now, including in a way, in fact, not in a way, I mean, definitely Putin himself are saying that there have to be major political changes in Kiev as well. There have to be new elections, a new government in Kiev, Belensky himself is impossible. We can't work with it. So the Russians will probably say, look, we won Dobbas, we're going to win in Zaporosia and Hassan, we're going to win the war

altogether. We are now offering you this last opportunity to make peace. If you don't make peace, we will continue the war. My overwhelming sense, when I was in Russia, I didn't get any feeling that in Russia anybody has any serious doubts about how obsessed with Russia the Europeans have become. There may be some lingering hopes that something can be sorted out with the Americans. But as I've discussed in previous programs, I think this is more trying to get the Americans to keep the Europeans up to a certain point under control than any real belief any longer. There's going to be a deal, a real deal with the Americans done.

And a Putin spokesman, Ushakov, two days ago, made a statement, which clearly originates with Putin himself. He said the Russians are no longer waiting for anchorage. They no longer have any expectations. Anchorage will ever happen. waiting for is the military victory, which they're going to achieve. So that essentially, if it's Ushakov saying it, you can be sure that Putin is thinking it too. Yeah, but will it affect the West thinking? Oh, no, it's not going to affect the West's thinking.

I mean, there is just a small chance that it might affect American thinking. And the Americans, The Americans, now, even more than it's been at any point recently, it's mostly about China. And for that reason, they don't want their large forces tied down in Europe. But of course, there are still Americans who still remain focused and obsessed with Russia. So, you know, we're not talking about all Americans. But there is perhaps a question mark about whether, ultimately, and in the end, the Americans will be fully signed up to this. In Europe, I don't know there's any question about this any longer. You only have to listen to Mets and Macron and the British,

and look at the missile strikes and Varoni and the question is answered for you. As I said, it's Moby Dick in death, do I spit on thee? They're not going to give up. They are going to continue with this thing until they hope there is a final victory against the Russians or until the point comes when there is, in effect, a defeat in Europe, another collapse in Europe, which I think is ultimately probably what we're going to see. Yeah, okay. I mean, you know, if you put yourself in the Europeans' shoes, had to try to think crazy and mad like they do, why would they give up?

they're able to strike Russia pre-2014. Well, right? I mean, for them, for them, this is, this is a big step forward in an overall conflict with Russia by 2030. Well, indeed. What they go on and on about. I know. If you are rational, if you send your people to Moscow and Russia, if you see what the

actual economic situation is there, you would understand. How utterly fantastic and mad that scenario actually is to repeat again. And to an extent that I had not anticipated, the economic balance is now shifting in Russia's favour to an extent that even I did not expect. But of course, we're not talking about fully rational people. And the problem is they will cherry pick the information they want, which will validate whatever it is that they want to do. So the fact that they're able to strike Varvornish, or indeed Moscow, at least as they say to themselves, is a reason to continue. The fact that Russia's economy is getting stronger, its alliances are getting stronger.

It's just hosted a massive summit meeting with ASEAN. Well, that doesn't even register for them. It rationally, it ought to, but the fact that there's been a major Russia-Azian summit meeting, for example, completely unreported here in Britain. No, I mean, it goes back to what you said and what I know about what's happening at the very top of Europe is that they actually believe that the Russian economy is crumbling. They actually believe that they can defeat Russia and, and regime change Putin. I mean, they believe it. It's not, they're not acting.

No. At least not everybody. That is, that is, maybe some people are acting. Maybe Macaron is acting. Yes. There are other people who are not acting. And that is a very, very important point. And it is one that I think people need to understand. We are not dealing with rational, fully rational people. We are dealing with obsessive people. And they have long since lost contact with reality. They're not able any longer to assimilate information which contradicts their view. And I mean, the point you've just made is absolutely right. I wonder if the Kremlin understands that. Anyway, well, we'll see. I mean, I think so. I think so. I think so. But anyway, we'll see. We'll see. All right. We'll end the video there. The durand.com. We're on Rumble.

We're on telegram. Go to Durant shop. Pick up some merch. Check us out on Substack. and 26% off merchandise on the Durant Shop summer sale. Take care.