The Duran Podcast - UK Flips on Oil Sanctions. EU Scrambles to Find Negotiator to Face Putin

Episode Date: May 21, 2026

UK Flips on Oil Sanctions. EU Scrambles to Find Negotiator to Face Putin

All right, Alexander, let's talk about Europe's search for a negotiator for Russia. Putin has floated out Schroeder. It doesn't look like Schroeder's going to be the negotiator for the Europeans, if we even get to that point. So now the Europeans are searching for a lead negotiator. And they're talking about Merkel, Alexander Stubb, Mario Drag. Of course, Mario Drag. Of course, Mario Draghi, right?

And even Kayakalis has been brought up as well. The Russian ambassador to the UN has said, no, that's never going to happen. But we also have the UK actually pausing oil sanctions because of shortages in jet fuel and diesel fuel, or a fear of diesel and jet fuel shortages. And when this was announced, the conservatives, they were very upset with Stommer, rolling back sanctions or pausing sanctions on Russia. And this is going to strengthen Putin's war machine. And the conservatives did not like it. And you even had people in the Labor Party like West Streeting hitting at Stommer. It actually caused Stommer and his administration to roll back the rollback, to take back the taking back of the pause of sanctions against Russian oil.

And that he called Zelensky and he apologized, I guess. Sorry, Zelensky, for even thinking about pausing sanctions against Russia, which would benefit the people of the UK, right? I mean, if you were to do such a thing, you're doing it because you fear that this is going to cause trouble for the citizens of the UK. But I guess Ukraine comes first. Well, of course it does. This is what is so extraordinary about this, because Stama, of course, himself, ever since

he became prime minister in 2024, has been. been Zelensky's greatest friend and greatest ally. He's hung him continuously outside Downing Street. He's introduced him to the king. He's been the major advocate of Zelensky in international fora. He's the person who's been promoting the coalition of the willing to send troops, British and French troops to Ukraine. He's hosted meetings about this. He's supported everything. conceivable sanctions that you can imagine against the Russians. He was an advocate last year of confiscating the Russian frozen assets. And recently he's been proposing that Britain actually contribute to the 90 billion euro loan. So this absolute hardliner, the person who, again,

a few weeks ago, was giving permission to the Royal Navy to seize Russian or tankers carrying Russian oil on British territorial waters does this complete flip. He says that in fact we're going to go on buying oil, diesel oil and aviation fuel from the Russians, after all, in contradiction to our own sanctions. And he doesn't come out straightforwardly and say why. he doesn't make a speech or go to Parliament and say we have this crisis that is developing. We all know what this crisis is. This is the crisis that comes to the situation with the Strait of Hormuz.

It's essential to do this because people in Britain are suffering from it. What he does is he publishes this information in a technical document, hoping that No one will notice. Of course they do. There is an enormous crisis about this. And as you rightly say, what does he then do? He comes and apologises to Zelensky and he's criticized right across the British elite, British establishment, from within his own party, by the conservatives, by all sorts of people, by the media for making this pusillanimous gesture of helping Putin's war machine. No one in Britain, no one in Britain, no one. has provided any alternative solution for the oil shortages that we are going to start to see.

But anyway, that's where we are. But it highlights the fact that one way or the other, Britain, as well as the other European states, however reluctantly, however grudgingly, are now facing realities that they really can't escape from. Economic realities in terms of the energy crisis, the deepening problems in the economy, the rises in the cost of living in Britain, in Europe, right across Europe. They are also now having to face the fact that the Americans are reducing their military footprint in Europe,

They pulled up 5,000 troops out of Germany. They're not going to deploy the 4,000 troops they said they would deploy in Poland. There's apparently reports that more and more Europeans leaders are starting to think that the US is going to end its entire military presence in Europe altogether. So they're having to think of contingency plans for that. So they're having to face all of these things. they're having to face the fact that despite all the rhetoric about, you know, Ukraine holding its own, it is not holding its own on the front lines and things are deteriorating there.

So gradually, ever so unwillingly, they're having to make concessions to reality. Stama tried. He didn't really succeed because, well, he's scared Starmor. And he doesn't really believe in this. And Britain still remains, you know, wedded. to these policies and will probably be the last to change. But we're starting to see signs across Europe that they're beginning very unwillingly to understand that some kind of change or apparent or pretended change, because I don't

believe it's real, but some kind of pretended change of approach must happen. And that's why we hear about negotiations with the Russians. Yeah, we'll get to that. But one more question about Stommer and what's going on in the UK. It exposes West Streeting, doesn't it? Because he came out hard against Stommer and this decision to pause the sanctions on Russian oil. And he's all four keeping the sanctions going, escalating the sanctions, continuing to

give money to Ukraine. So I mean, West Streeting is the same as Stommer, if not a worse version of Stommer. I mean, West Streeting is absolutely in favor. of putting Ukraine above the well-being of British citizens and British taxpayers. I mean, that's now out there because he went hard against Stammer. Absolutely. No question. And doesn't this, they all are.

They all are. All of the people who are contending for to replace Stama are the same on this. There is no, I mean, you know, Andy Burnham and the people are talking about that, he's not going to be any different on this issue either, just as they all support. Britain rejoining the EU. If we talk about Burnham, he has to win an election in a part of Manchester in order to get back into the House of Commons, which voted overwhelmingly to leave the EU. But he's now been embarrassed because, of course, he's previously said that it's essential

for Britain to rejoin the EU. So he's trying to row back. He says, well, when I've said, we join, I didn't mean no, I meant eventually, and this isn't really the issue today. But fundamentally, they all share the same policies on Ukraine, on the EU, which, by the way, if you support the EU in British politics at the highest level, you support Ukraine as well. I mean, the two essentially, I'm talking about the politicians now, essentially go together. You are not going to find somebody who is at the top level of British politics who say, I want to rejoin the EU, but I want to end support for Ukraine. That combination does not exist. Well, that was my follow-up question.

Isn't it so weird, shocking, that the entire political class in the UK, or at least the establishment political class in the UK is so open about the fact that Ukraine comes ahead of? of their own citizens. Yeah. I mean, that is the message. When you break it all down and you make it very simple, the message is, we have Ukraine above the well-being of our citizens. Yes. That's the message.

That's what they're saying. And they're completely open about it. UK citizens, you suffer and you perhaps pay more for fuel. Perhaps you have fuel shortages, because under no circumstances are we going to ease sanctions. They're not even talking about getting rid of sanctions. No. No circumstances. Are we going to pause sanctions on Russian oil in order to make things a little bit easier for your lives?

No way. Yes. Well, which is the difference between the British and the Americans, because the Americans are now granting licenses to countries to trade in oil. And they do that because they understand that it's important to keep. some Russian, to keep Russian oil trading, because at this point of stress, that's lowering the oil price, which would otherwise be higher. So the Americans, and this isn't even very controversial than the US, are much more concerned about the standard of living of Americans than they are in Britain. Now, because the justification in Britain is that, you know, we've got to stand up to the

Russians, because if we don't stand up to the Russians, they're going to come over here and they're going to take us over. And we've had the British Defence Minister who's showing pictures of Russian fighter jets, buzzing British aircraft, flying over the Black Sea. Nobody asks what British reconnaissance aircraft are doing flying over the Black Sea, by the way. That's not a question which you find asked anywhere in the British media. But the idea is, you see, that British aircraft are being buzzed by the Russians. So that must mean that the Russians are aggressive and dangerous and any sacrifice is justified, because we must keep the Russian bare, which is clearly on the prowl.

we must keep it as far from our country as we can. So this is the argument that is relentlessly made, and which many, many people in Britain, by the way, believe, but of course it isn't helping Britain's underlying economic problems, which with every day and every week and every month get worse. In Europe, some places in Europe, they are starting to think differently in France, in Italy, to some extent in Germany. And the British are very worried about that, by the way, and they're doing everything they can

to try to dissuade the Europeans from making approaches to the Russians. And they're not happy about the fact that the Europeans are talking about a chief negotiator, appointing a chief negotiator, and of course, the British is showing absolutely no sign of thinking about a negotiator of their run. Yeah, good point. What are the British jets doing close to Russia on the Black Sea? Would they like it if the Russian jets were flying over British territory or British airspace or close to British airspace?

No, the UK would lose it if that were to happen. But the search for a negotiator. So let's talk about that to wrap up the video. Merkel is back. She's back in it now. They're talking about Merkel. And you know what? I think if they offered it to Merkel, even though she was playing it like, no, no, don't

choose me, choose a politician. I'm out of the game. I think if they offered it to her, she might take it. I don't know how Russia would react, given that Merkel has openly said that when she negotiated Minsk, it was all the Russe. It was all a farce in order to trick Russia and in order to arm Ukraine for an eventual war. So I don't know how Russia would react if Merkel were to be the choice, but though they're floating out some other names.

We're getting the narrative as well from Europe, especially from top diplomat, Kayakalas, that Russia is losing the war. Zelensky is also talking about losing the war. The media is saying that the tide has changed and now it favors Ukraine. It's all nonsense. But here's my point to all this, Alexander. Would the side that's winning be scrambling to find a negotiator? Right?

Is that the winning side? Because Putin's very calm and he says, look, I'm ready to talk. I'd like to see Schroeder, but I'm ready to negotiate. I'm ready to talk. So send me your person. And meanwhile, you have the EU trying to scramble and find out who is scrambling around trying to find out who's going to negotiate with Putin, who's going to be acceptable for negotiating with Russia.

Is that what the winner does? Is that what the side that's winning does? They're the ones that scramble around in search for a negotiator, or is that what the side that's losing does? Well, in this case, it's clearly what the side that is losing does, because, of course, sometimes in some wars, a wise party that is winning will say to itself, well, let's see whether we can get the side that is losing to negotiate and agree with us so that we can end this thing quickly. But that's not what the Europeans have been doing at all at any point in the war.

Throughout the four years of the war, indeed before the war began, the position that the Europeans had was very simple. The Russians are completely in the wrong. There is nothing to negotiate about. The Russians must capitulate. Capitulation means they must pull out from. Ukraine in its entirety. They must retreat back to their 1991 borders. They must agree to pay reparations. They must submit to war crimes tribunals. They must do all of these things. And if you remember back in 2023, 2024, we had a whole series of meetings that were arranged by the Biden administration and by the Europeans and by the Ukrainians, in places like Geneva and Vienna and all of these places, bringing together European diplomats and American diplomats and Ukrainian diplomats with invitations to global South countries.

And it was all a negotiation to try to get the Russians to capitulate. But of course, the Russians were never invited. They never invited them because at that point, they did. think they were winning. The only reason they are talking about negotiations with the Russians now are exactly the reasons you say, because they know that actually they are losing. The Europeans sense that they are losing. They know that the Ukrainians are losing. And they also sense that the Americans have lost interest in the affair. They might not be walking away. The CIA might still be busy guiding drones deep inside Russia, but the flow of American weapons

to Ukraine has stopped. The flow of money from the United States, the direct flow of money by the United States to Ukraine has stopped. Trump is showing no interest in speaking with or meeting Zelensky anymore. Top U.S. officials are not meeting Zelensky anymore. so they sense that their position overall is weakening. And so they're coming and they're scrabbling around and they're looking for a negotiator and they're trying to agree on a negotiating strategy. But that is where the problem is

because none of the people that they're proposing is going to be people that the Russians would want to talk to. The Russians are very bitter about anger, Angela Merkel. Putin feels personally betrayed by her. He was, as he feels, tricked by her into negotiating the Minsk Agreement. He thought that the Minsk Agreement would be the way to end the crisis in Ukraine. He feels strongly that Merkel deceived him. I do that he wants to see Merkel again. I don't think anybody in Moscow wants to see Merkel again. They're talking about Mario Draghi. The Russians have any time for Mario Draghi either. Stub, I mean, again, is an absurd idea.

They floated the previous Finnish president, Nienistok, who was preceded, preceded Stubb. But Ni Nisto was the president of Finland when Finland joined NATO. And again, I do think the Russians are interested in talking to him. And as for Kayakales, well, Kayakales, as we know, is a diplomatic genius who rivals Dalairoar. But for all kinds of unincomprehensible reasons, the Russians don't like her. Well, actually, they're not incomprehensible because you only have to listen to Kayakalas for five minutes to see that she's absolutely not someone. who can negotiate with the Russians. In fact, she doesn't even believe in negotiations with the Russians.

Just two weeks ago, she said as much. So, again, the idea of appointing her to be chief negotiator is absurd. And a huge amount of time discussing who your chief negotiator is going to be, but no diplomatic strategy has been worked. out anyway, there's no idea of going to Moscow, listening to what the Russians are saying, trying to work out what the approach to the Russians should be. All of this is taking place in a vacuum. There's just some understanding that negotiations with the Russians have to start, but nobody really wants to do them or believes of them and the people they're kind of.

up with make no sense. Yeah, I don't think anyone is capable of negotiating at that level either, Alexander. I mean, maybe Merkel could at that level, but, you know, after Minsk, impossible. I mean, Stubb, Draghi, Callas, Ursula, I don't think they're qualified. I don't even think they would know where to begin in such types of negotiations. I mean, you really need someone who knows their stuff, who's a real professional, professional diplomat and these people are just not that. No. When Putin was asked who you think should be Europe's chief negotiator, and he proposed, he mentioned the name of Gerhard Schroeder. It wasn't that he really expects Gerhard Schroeder to be the chief negotiator. He was basically saying, no one. The Europeans don't have anyone.

Anyone that I really believe that I can work with, if it was someone like Schroeder, well, maybe it would be different, but they won't want Schroeder and they don't have anyone else like him. That was the point Putin was actually making. It's very bizarre, by the way, how so many people in Europe actually believe that Putin actually seriously proposed Schroeder as chief negotiator, Again, you would have thought that after 26 years of Vladimir Putin being in power in Moscow, by now the Europeans should understand him and should know how he speaks. But clearly they don't even know that. Well, there is no Schroeder, there is no Schroach, there is no coal.

There's no one like that in Europe anymore. I mean, remember Ursula and Scotland with Trump when they were negotiating the trade deal? I mean, that's the best that Europe has? That trade deal, it wasn't even a. negotiation, that trade deal with Trump was a freaking disaster for the European. The worst negotiated deal in all of history. Correct. So, I mean, Europe, the EU has nobody qualified to go to Moscow and to deal with Putin

and Lavrov and these heavy hitters. No, absolutely not. And no one who even understands the Russian position or if they did would want to come back to Europe and face the others and tell them this is what the Russians are demanding. And we have to agree. I mean, let's say somebody did go to Moscow and came back and said, we have got to acknowledge that Donbass is lost and we've got to get the Ukrainians to accept that and that Ukraine can't enter NATO.

and that's the minimum that the Russians will accept. None of the leaders that we're talking about. Mouts, Macro, Maloney, Routre, Ursula, none of them would accept this. They would reject it completely. And they would turn on and criticize and undermine any of the, negotiator who came back with that kind of information. So nobody in their senses, nobody who has

the actual ability to conduct negotiations would at this time want to put themselves forward for that job. That's by the way what Merkel means when she says that you have to have political authority. You have to be a leader to be able to do it. Because, Because Merkel doesn't want to be put in a position where she might be sacked, even though perhaps being an immensely ambitious person, she would accept it. If you had someone like Orban, who's, of course, now gone, then when he was Prime Minister of Hungary, he might have been able to do it. But he is gone. They have no one like that now. All right, we will end the video there.

at the duran.locals.com. We are on X-Rumble and Telegram. We are also on substack as well. So check us out there. And on the Durand shop, we have a special 30% off all hats and t-shirts. So we have the link to the Durand Shop inscription box down below. Check that special out. Take care.