The Duran Podcast - West will choke on Putin's terms for Ukraine

Episode Date: November 8, 2023

West will choke on Putin's terms for Ukraine

All right, Alexander, let's talk about Project Ukraine, the collapsing Project Ukraine. So many articles that have come out now, Time, The Economist, the NBC article, which I think said two very important things. The first thing that it said is the Biden White House is concerned that Ukraine is running out of soldiers. remember six months ago they were telling us that the strategy was to conserve Ukrainian forces. That's the strategy. Now it's revealed that there are no forces to conserve. The average age is 43. We got that from the Time magazine article, the average age for a Ukrainian soldier.

And the second interesting thing that the NBC article said is that if they don't negotiate with Russia soon, from a position of a stalemate, because that's what they're trying to tell us. It's a stalemate, which is ridiculous. But anyway, a lot of people are buying into this narrative that we have a stalemate. But if they don't, if they don't negotiate now while it is a stalemate, then in three, four months, there are various officials in the Biden White House who fear that we could be seeing a collapse in the Oleski regime. They actually gave it till the end of the year.

That's what NBC said. To the end of the year, maybe a little bit more. So a stalemate Alensky is saying that there is no stalemate. No, no stalemate. He's right. He's right. He's right about that.

There is no stalemate. But he can't admit to, he can't go along with the stalemate narrative because if you went along with the stalemate narrative, then they would force him to negotiate. And then, you know, the Bandarites would get him. But anyway, a collapsing, collapsing situation in Ukraine. Yeah. Yes, and it's been picked up around the world, by the way. People are starting to see it. There's been a lot apparently about this in the German media,

and there's been more about this in the British media, even places like The Guardian. The Guardian up to this point has not been perhaps quite as fervidly, you know, extremely pro-Ukrainian as some places have. I mean, it's been pro-Ukrainian enough. But one thing it has tended to do is it's tended to ignore the bad, news about Ukraine in its reporting and I noticed that this time they were publishing commentaries from Ukrainian soldiers saying we're losing the war I mean you know that

was something that starts to appear in the Guardian in other places the Daily Telegraph which in some ways is even more fiercely pro-Ukraine than the Guardian is but there was an article yesterday which said that Ukraine has lost its chance to defeat Russia, Putin as they always say, and that the outlook is terrible. And of course what gave the game away finally and conclusively and publicly was Zolluzni's interview with the economist because he basically said what when he talked about his stalemate, what he was really talking about was a war of attrition. And he admitted that Ukraine is losing.

He cannot win a war of attrition. against Russia. He said it quite openly. The country that benefits best from a war of attrition is Russia. And when the, we learn from NBC that the administration is worried that Ukraine no longer has troops. Well, that was also there highlighted in the Time magazine article that even if Ukraine got all the weapons it wanted, there probably aren't enough people now to actually use the weapons. which is a pretty incredible thing. And when they tell us that Ukraine only has until the end of the year to get some kind of deal done with the Russians,

or at least to start negotiations to get some kind of deal done with Russians, that suggests that in private the briefings that the administration is getting from its intelligence officials, point to a catastrophic situation. Far worse than even we know. And we've been covering the situation in Ukraine, rather more accurately, if I may say, than most people in mainstream media have been doing.

So it is a disastrous situation. And of course, what it has done is that it's left Zelensky looking increasingly isolated. We can now see the point of the Time magazine article, The purpose of the Time magazine article was to basically isolate Zelensky, who is now seen as the obstacle to negotiations. Zelensky says that nobody has talked to him about making concessions to the Russians or seeking peace with them. Well, the NBC article about Ukraine being pressed to start negotiations comes from a senior current. official, in other words, a top official of the US government, and EU officials were also apparently

saying that as well. So assuming that what Zelensky says is true, which by the way it may be, what that means is that the US, the administration and European officials worried about the rapidly deteriorating situation in Ukraine are now talking to Ukrainian officials. Are now talking to Ukrainian officials and are keeping Zelensky himself out of the loop. So we can see the crisis. There's already, in other words, there's clear moves now, first to isolate and discredit Zelensky and eventually, no doubt, to shuffle him off the scene. And the idea is try to get him out, try to bring someone else in, try to get the negotiations with the Russians started, and try to get to get something going before the end of the year.

And Zelensky's being told, if you don't do it, if this doesn't happen by the end of this year, with you or without you, the next year it will definitely be without you. But by that point, of course, it may be too late. And there was something else that I found very, very interesting about both the Time magazine article and the NBC article, which is that they weren't talking about a freeze any longer. They were talking about negotiations for peace. In other words, the fact that the Russians are not interested in a peace has gradually come to be understood.

Though that doesn't mean, of course, that the administration, that the EU are reconciled in any way to the kind of peace proposals that the Russians would almost certainly demand as a condition. for entering into any kind of negotiations at all. And lastly, just to say this, the Russians undoubtedly have picked all this up because Putin during a meeting with, you know, Russian civil society people, you know, two days ago,

actually laid out what looked to me suspiciously like positions that the Russians would take in case they did actually get a substantive offer of the negotiations. And they looked to me to be absolutely unyielding, just saying. What were those positions? Well, I mean, he was basically saying this. Yeah, absolutely. I remember him very well. He was saying, first of all, he spoke about the borders of Ukraine as having been

artificially constructed by the Soviets. He's talked about that many times. He's talked about all of these territories, not just in the east, but in the south of Russia, being Russian, about these cities. And he didn't mention Odessa, but Odessa clearly was one, being Russian cities founded by Catherine the Great. Now, I have to say, reading all of that, it made it absolutely clear to me, that he is now clearly thinking about some kind of general settlement about Odessa as well. He made it clear that NATO membership

for Ukraine is a complete non-starter. We knew that already. But he said some things even about Ukraine minus these regions, all these Russian-speaking regions. He said that Ukraine is a fraternal country and he said,

that it's a fraternal country in an ethnic sense. He said that Ukraine, when it joined Russia in the 17th century, consisted of Kiev, an area around Chernigov and Jietermir, and that was all that Ukraine was then. and then he referenced a letter which the people of those regions, Kiev, Cherdiguf and Jitemir, had sent to the Tsar seeking union with Russia in which they referred to themselves as Russian Orthodox people, Russian Orthodox people. So he's basically saying, look, all of these other regions, you know, the Dombas, Zaporosia, Herzl, but also Nikolaev, also Odessa, all of these regions.

They're completely Russian. But even, even core Ukraine is ultimately a part of the Rusky Mir, the Russian world. And, I mean, that, it seemed to me, is fully in line with what we've been hearing from people like Vyajislav of Al-Din. that unless Ukraine completely capitulates and accepts all Russian demands about eastern Ukraine, about NATO membership, about rights of Russians in any area that is previously Russian that remains under Ukrainian control, like conceivably Odessa, then the Ukrainian state itself will cease to exist. And it seemed to me from what Putin was saying, that the Russians are all are now starting to think about a future of Ukraine without a Ukrainian state,

with Russia once again establishing its historic boundaries, including Kiev, Chernikov and Jitemir. But importantly, because Putin did not mention Lviv or Galicia, those regions, they have no interested. So, I mean, these are demands. or at least a preparation, laying the groundwork for demands that potentially go far beyond anything we have seen from the Russians up to this point. Yeah, demands that the collective West will never be able to accept. Well, they would choke on them. They would choke on them. And of course, the Ukrainians would also choke on them too.

But we can see what's going to happen. You know, the Ukrainians come along. They start negotiations. The Russians say, right, we need all the four regions. You need to accept those as part of Russia. We also need very, very strong protections, indeed, for Russian speakers in places like Kharkov, Adessa, Nikolaev, and all those places. Conceivably, because we don't fully trust you.

And Putin went to great lengths to discuss how, you know, the previous history of discussions diplomacy, negotiations, the Minsk Agreement, all of that, how there is really no trust at the moment, and the nature of the political movements in Kiev, in Ukraine at the present time. So conceivably, in fact, most likely he will insist upon the presence of Russian troops in some of these cities. So, you know, to protect Russian residents there. It's impossible to see how any Ukrainian government could agree to that. In which case, one can also see how the Russians will just press on. And they're already, as I said, signalling what the future might be,

a future without a Ukrainian state, with Ukraine east of Galicia, east of the former Habsburg provinces in the West, reabsorbed into Russia, and with this small isolated state, landlocked state in the west around Volf, trying to maintain its independence by itself. It's a disastrous outcome. And Alexei Aristovic, who is now, you know,

Zelensky's former spin doctor, who's now become incredibly dissolution. He made an extraordinary comment. He said, you know, that, you know, I basically lied to the Ukrainian, people in the past about our prospects of a quick victory. I did that in order to build up morale so that we could survive. I am now destroying all of that, telling the truth about the fact in effect that we are going to lose the war so that we can survive. In other words, for Ukraine,

this whole thing is now becoming existential. Now, whether, as I said, this is understood in the West, I don't know, but you can sense the urgency. You can sense the hardline the Russians are going to take, at least at the outset of negotiations. Over the course of negotiations, things might tweak and change, the Russians might soften their positions on some things. But the Russians are clearly signalling what is in their mind. The military situation is disastrous.

The economic situation is becoming increasingly disastrous. Disastrous. Support for Ukraine in Europe and in the United States is collapsing. There's an editorial about this also in the Daily Telegraph today. And the only person who wants the war to go on, as always, is Zelensky, but the Americans now are scrambling far too late in the day, disastrously late in the day, to come up with some kind of negotiations that they can begin with the Russians, via Ukraine itself, notice that they don't want to begin. They don't want to negotiate with the Russians themselves. The Americans don't want to talk to Putin.

They want the Ukrainians to carry the water for them. But anyway, they want the Ukrainians to start negotiations because they can see a disaster coming. And just to finish this particular thing that I'm saying now, we can also see that Zelensky himself is starting to begin. become very, very concerned about his own political position. He's starting to sack generals without consulting Zillusioni. He's talking openly, or rather his officials are now talking openly,

about Zollusini having acted improperly with that interview he gave to the economist. All the indications are that Zelensky wants to have Zoluzni sacked, but one gets the sense that if he does sack Zalusini, that's only going to compound his problems because it also seems that other Ukrainian generals have lost confidence in Zelensky and as we know from Time magazine they're increasingly refusing to obey his orders

Yeah, Time said it, they don't obey his orders I mean it doesn't get more simple than that And yeah, you know, Putin if he If he gets to the point where they actually are negotiating Especially for cities like Odessa You know, one of the terms that the Russians are going to put on the table is that all of these NAsia's and these Azov guys that moved into these areas like Kharkiv and Odessa over the last 10 years, they're going to have to go back to the west of Ukraine. I'm positive of it. They're going to one way or another, these cities like Odessa or like Kharkiv will become Russian cities again.

And that's going to mean that all of the forces that moved from west to east, you know, all the mafia forces, all the ANACI forces that moved into these areas, they're going to have to go back to the west. It's unacceptable. It's going to be unacceptable for the Banderites in the west of Ukraine. And they're going to make that known to Zelensky. They're going to tell Zelensky, don't you dare agree to negotiations with Russia. And so the hope strategy for the West, for the Biden White House with Project Ukraine, is that they can somehow convince Russia to negotiate on the terms of a stalemate. They've already convinced quite a large section of their population as well as all the media, the analysts, the pundits, the pundits, the pundits, they are buying into the narrative that this is a stalemate, which is kind of shocking that they actually believe this is a stalemate. But they have to convince the Russians that this is a stalemate.

And I think that Ursula going to Kiev and talking up Ukraine's accession into the EU is Europe telling Zelensky, look, you're going to have to say this is a stalemate. This is the only way that we can bring the Russians to negotiate on the terms of a stalemate is if you come out and say, okay, it's a stalemate. Let's negotiate. And in turn, we're going to provide some cover to you by dangling this EU session. And maybe that'll take some of the pressure from the banditites off of you. In other words, this is existential.

for you, Zelensky. They understand that for Zelensky, this is existential. This is life or death for Zelensky. And so they have to give him something in order to bring him to admit that, or at least to go along with the narrative, that this is a stalemate because they have to work on Russia for the Russians to agree that they're going to negotiate on the terms of a stalemate, which is laughable. But, you know, we're dealing with with a blinking state department. And so, you know, in the European Union. And they may actually think that they can con the Russians into believing that the conflict is in a stalemate. Like I said, many people in the collective West actually believe that this is a stalemate, which is shocking, but they do. So I don't know. That's what I'm thinking.

No, I think of Ursula's trip to Kiev. You're absolutely correct. And can I just say the Russians, of course, have already taken notice of all of this. And they've already commented about this today. Putin's spokesman Peskov. It's obviously an arranged question, but at his regular morning briefing, some journalists, Russian journalists asked him, are we in a stalemate situation in Ukraine?

Peskov had his reply there, ready to have. No, we are not in a stalemate situation in Ukraine. We are moving forward, you know, steadily and rhythmically, and all the objectives of our special operation will be fulfilled. filled. And that was clearly done in order to signal back to the Americans and to the Europeans that, you know, don't try and fool us with all this talk about a stalemate. We are actually the people who are engaged in this war. We know that it is not a stalemate anymore. So, you know, the Russians have already sort of, you know, seen ahead of all of that. The fundamental problem

with this whole conflict in Ukraine is that at no part, at no means, at no more, you know, at no moment, until now, was the West, was the United States, the administration, looking at the reality of the actual situation in Ukraine? I mean, the amazing thing about the NBC article for me, and it was the same by the way about the Time magazine article, was that finally the penny has dropped and they've suddenly understood the truth of all the things that we've been saying, you know, for months, for years, you know, Russia has limitless resources. It's able to, you know, reinforce. It's not going to run out of tanks or missiles or shells or any of these things. They're able to keep going. Ukraine's losses are impossibly high. You know, Ukraine has always

been pretending that it's losses, the losses that it's inflicting on the Russians are multiples greater. then it's suffering. Well, suddenly, the realization has come. Well, maybe that isn't quite true. So, oh, you know, the miracle weapons, the attackers aren't working. The stormshadows aren't working. Nobody seriously expects the F-16s to be working either.

None of this is working. And suddenly, you know, disastrously late in the day, after almost two years of war, after years, 10 years of this crisis, because it began in its current form back in 2014, finally the penny has dropped and they've understood both the gravity

and the urgency. But the trouble is, again, they've left it too late because the Russians are already feel themselves to be heading towards war. a clear-cut victory. So why should they negotiate for less than they have to? Well, I mean, for NATO, even for NATO, this is becoming existential,

because if they can't sell everybody on a stalemate, then even the image, the confidence of NATO, NATO's big, powerful alliance, is going to collapse. And so, you know, that's why they, that's why, the whole stalemate narrative is so important to them because they're coming and saying, you know, yeah, we've invested $100, $200, $200, $200 billion in Ukraine. We've given them all our weapons. But don't worry, everybody. At least we broke even. You know, that's what they're saying. At least we broke even. So it's not as bad as you think. So all the money and all the weapons,

we ended up even with the Russians. Everything's okay. NATO is still powerful. The collective of West military still powerful. Joe Biden still delivered a break-even situation. All is good. That's why they have to push this whole stalemate narrative. This is where they are now. This is the end. And if they can't get Zelensky to go along with this,

then there's no way to even focus with the Russians. There's no focus on the Russians. The minute you have Zelensky running around saying no stalemate, why should we even try to work on the Russians to agree to a negotiation based on a tell me because Zelensky is not, he's not going along with this. Absolutely. He's not being compliant. So he's the problem now.

He's the problem. And so Ursula is telling him, you know, the EU saying, look, we'll give you EU membership. We'll give you EU a session. We understand that the Bandera guys are after you. We understand that the neocons are pressuring you this way and that way. We'll give you something that you can work with. But you have to go along with us on this one. Absolutely.

And most likely in three, four months. Once you're, you're going to be gone. But at least he'll still be alive, Zelensky. I think that's the pitch that they're making to him. And I think it's, Zelensky's like, no way. I know, no way. I'm not going to get out of this in one piece. That's what I think he's sensing.

He's sensing this, that he's in big trouble. Absolutely. He senses he says he's in very, very big trouble. And as I said, that's why he's moving to sack generals and try to rally what support he has. The problem with the stalemate narrative, is that it is a fake narrative. It is just the latest fake narrative in the various narratives we've been hearing

ever since this conflict began, the one, you know, all the way back to 2014 and since then. I mean, you know, the, you know, it's as fake. There's the ghost of Kiev, the victory in Snake Island, the Russian defeat in Kiev, all of these things.

It's been one, fake narrative after another. This is just another one that is equally fake. And it's desperate. That's the thing to understand. This is desperately, this is a fake narrative born of desperation. We're not going to achieve regime change in Moscow. We're not going to, you know, defeat the Russian army.

What we perhaps might, are however, achieving is with fighting the Russians to a standstill. So something that we wanted of, you know, Ukraine will remain beyond that. But because it's a fake narrative, because it has no reality behind it, the truth is going to be called on it, just as the truth has been called on all the other fake narratives we've had in the past. And given that they're talking about the end of the year, and, you know, that's only, what, a couple of weeks away now,

seven weeks away now. I mean, I mean, you know, that gives you a sense of how short time now is. I mean, coming up with fake narratives at this point, I mean, it's just,

it really doesn't make very much sense. I mean, all I can say, I mean, I can't put it more simply than that. Well, I mean, it's simple. Lukashenko,

in an interview he gave like two weeks ago, he said Ukraine is running out of men. He said the collective West can give them all the weapons they want, but they don't have any men to use them. Time magazine, The Economist, Zolluzni, NBC, they're saying the same exact thing. Even the Biden White House. The Biden White House is basically saying, whatever weapons we give you, who's going to use them? So, I mean, when the Biden White House, when a Biden White House official says this,

Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House, Rand Paul, J.D. Vance, Josh Hawley. I'm sure they read the NBC article and they say, okay, well, even if we approve $61 billion to Ukraine and even if we give them more weapons, NBC is telling us that these weapons are going to go to Kiev and what? You're running out of men. Well, that's exactly the point because, as I said, what we're also saying now is conflicting. I mean, this is another sign of desperation, because we're seeing conflicting messaging. On the one hand, we're told by the president himself, just a few, you know, just, was it last week or two weeks ago when he addressed the American people from the Oval Office, we must give all this money to Ukraine that, you know, because, you know, they need this money to see off this aggression from Putin and all of that. And then now we're told if we give them all this weaponry, then they don't have the men to use it anyway, so it's not going to make any difference.

when people resort to that kind of conflicting messaging, and by the way, you're absolutely right. I mean, Josh Hawley and Marjorie Taylor Green, they've now got the narrative lines for them. They can just wave this article and NBC and the one in Time magazine. They're going to say, is this really the man, you know, Zelensky, you want to give all this money to? I mean, the man who's hiding in a bunker and getting delusional and giving crazy orders and to the army that's run out of men and can't use them. This is really what we're going to send, you know, the money of our taxpayers to, in the midst of a budget crisis. So you can, it's all made for them.

But, you know, the fact that we're getting these conflicting narrative lines, firstly, it shows how desperate and panicky the situation in Washington is because they can't stick to one particular narrative. But it's also, I have to say, what tends to happen when you start creating, fake narratives. When they start to collide with the truth, it becomes very, very difficult to sustain them. And then the contradictions start to show. We're heading towards a big, big catastrophe for the collective West and for Zalinski.

Yes, yes. Crystal clear. Yes, absolutely. And I think, I mean, the Biden administration will be massively damaged by this. I mean, there's no way that they won't be. The United States, will pull through. I mean, you know, this isn't, this is a big blow for them geopolitically,

but it's not an existential disaster. For Europe? It's a big blow. It's a big blow. Europe, yeah. For Europe? For Germany? I mean, really, I mean, you know, for what happens to Olaf Schultz, well, you know, what his record in Germany history is going to be, what people are going to say about the Habek. their book duo well I just shuddered the thing I mean all the countries that went hard all the countries that went hard against Russia

Germany Poland the Baltics Ursula Borrell all of these countries that went hard against Russia even even Greece and Bulgaria and the traditional

allies and friends of I would say allies but friends historical friends of Russia and the Russian people that went hard against Russia. This is going to be a major, major embarrassment, debacle, shame on all of them. And I wonder if they know it. I wonder if they understand what's happening. Oh, I think they do. I think they do. But I mean, they may understand what's happening, but there's nothing very much they can do. I mean, they went down this particular rabbit hole. So, you know, as Putin mocked them, he said, said, you know, their latest sanctions,

the sanctioning screwdrivers and buttons. So, I mean, you know, that's what they've been reduced to. I mean, the great powers, the former great powers of the West, which, you know, 100 years ago, destroyed the world, of Western Europe, I should say, Germany, France, Britain, Italy, they're all now looking increasingly ridiculous. And, of course, the other thing that's going to happen, The United States, as I said, will come through this.

But after a disaster like this in Europe, it would not surprise me. This is not a prediction, but it would not surprise me. If the US said to itself, you know, we don't want to be so involved in Europe any longer. We're going to focus on other places more important to us in the Pacific and wherever. I noticed, again, going back to Putin, that he was actually saying in one of his recent comments that with the Americans, sooner or later, he expects that the Russians will come back to some kind of, if not friendly terms, at least they'll reopen a dialogue. But with the Europeans, he seemed to say that in his time and for the foreseeable future,

that simply wasn't happening. So there we are. Yeah. Anyway, just one final last note, yeah, Ola Schultz, he's going to go down in history as what? Give me a couple of words. Oliver Schultz, what's he going to go down in history as for Germany? The clown who brought Germany down. I mean, Germany has suffered its defeats, as we know. But even when it suffered defeats, it's been led by power. powerful figures, maybe terrible figures, but powerful ones. I mean, all have shorts, by contrast. I mean, an absolute non-entity, a zero. I mean, you're asking me for a single word to describe him.

I mean, I just can't come up one one. They destroy themselves. They destroy themselves for this, for this comedian in Kiev. Absolutely. Absolutely. Absolutely so. And they all did. I mean, can I just say, I mean, you know, Osirlo Schultz is just a ludicrous figure. But Angela Merkel also bears massive responsibility for this whole affair. I mean, she should have understood back in 2014, 2015, the importance of resolve, for Germany, of resolving this problem of Ukraine. And she had the means and she negotiated.

the Minsk Agreement. She should have seen it implemented so that this situation could be parked and put aside. The Americans wouldn't have been happy. The British wouldn't have been happy. In Germany, she would have had support if she'd done that. She didn't do it. She just did what she always did, which is just leave things to fester and get worse. And, well, now we see the consequences. Who comes out of this looking really smart? Victor Orban. And this explains why he is now saying pretty much every single appearance, every speech he's given, he is now saying Ukraine lost this war. We're not going to beat Russia. We need to change our strategy. He's saying this now almost everywhere he goes. He's saying this now. Victor Oban,

he knows exactly what's about to happen. He's position. himself as the Victor. Hands down, without question, Victor Aban in Hungary, they come out of this looking very, very smart. Yeah, I mean, if you want to, if you want to figure in Europe today who most resembles Charles de Gaulle, Victor Orban is the man. I mean, in fact, he does resemble in many respects, Charles de Gaul. And, you know, he's somebody who knows the Russians very well because as a political dissident in Hungary, he opposed them. All right, we'll end it there. The durand.locals.com.

We are on Rumble, Odyssey, bitchchute, telegram and Rock Finn, and go to the Duran shop. 10% off, use the code, the Duran 20. We are also on TwitterX. Take care.