Ibaitik Itsasora
******
Gaza BEFORE Israel showed up
Israel is a criminal state.
Bideoa: https://x.com/i/status/1887980771178070396
******
******
Zionists in 2025… “Palestine never existed”
Zionists in 1899… “We will colonise Palestine”
******
»Europe isn’t planning for peace Moscow has repeatedly stated that it does not view a ceasefire as viable without a broader framework for negotiations. But the parties are far from agreeing on this broader framework. Russia’s demands are clear: above all, legal recognition by Ukraine and the West of Russia’s annexed territories as part of the Russian Federation.« https://unherd.com/2025/03/europe-isnt-planning-for-peace/?=frlh
ooo
Europe isn’t planning for peace
It will pay the price for this tug-of-war
(https://unherd.com/2025/03/europe-isnt-planning-for-peace/?=frlh)
How long will European leaders prolong the war in Russia? Photo: Alexey Furman/Getty.
Thomas Fazi
March 12, 2025 7 mins
In a surprising reversal from the Oval Office standoff between Zelensky and Trump and the suspension of US military aid to Ukraine, Kyiv, late on Tuesday, announced its willingness to implement an immediate 30-day ceasefire — provided Moscow agrees to reciprocate. This followed initial talks between US and Ukrainian representatives in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, prompting Washington to swiftly resume military assistance to Ukraine. “The ball is now in Russia’s court,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated — a sentiment echoed by several European leaders.
This marks a significant shift in the US approach to ending the conflict. Previously, Washington sought to pressure Ukraine into accepting a US- and Russia-brokered deal largely on Moscow’s terms. Now, America is attempting to strong-arm Russia into accepting a ceasefire as the first step toward a broader peace plan — warning that if Moscow refuses, “we’ll unfortunately know what the impediment is to peace here,” as Rubio put it.
Whether Russia will agree remains uncertain. Moscow has repeatedly stated that it does not view a ceasefire as viable without a broader framework for negotiations. But the parties are far from agreeing on this broader framework. Russia’s demands are clear: above all, legal recognition by Ukraine and the West of Russia’s annexed territories as part of the Russian Federation.
Yet, just days ago, Zelensky reiterated his opposition to any territorial concession, while all European leaders (except Orbán) outlined a “peace strategy” that involved boosting Ukraine’s military capabilities (including through the delivery of air defence systems, ammunition and missiles) in order to improve its position at the negotiating table and achieve a deal that “respects Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity”. In other words, no territorial concessions. This would be followed by strong security guarantees in the form of European (ie, Nato) troops on the ground — a demand echoed by Zelensky but firmly rejected by Russia.
It’s difficult to see why Moscow would accept a ceasefire under these conditions — especially as it continues to make gains on the battlefield. But that may be precisely the point from the perspective of Zelensky and European leaders: to “put the ball in Russia’s court”, anticipating that Moscow will reject the offer — thus allowing them to portray Russia as uninterested in peace. If so, it would mean that Trump has been cornered by the pro-war party.
Indeed, ever since Trump began negotiations with Putin to end the proxy war in Ukraine, European leaders have been doing everything in their power to derail his peace efforts, hijack the negotiations and prolong the conflict. After all, their insistence on a “just and lasting peace”, and their emphasis on Ukraine’s “territorial integrity”, is, in effect, a recipe for continuing the war under the guise of “peace through strength” — the same failed strategy that has landed Ukraine in this mess in the first place. Meanwhile, the Europeans have unveiled a sweeping rearmament plan, aimed at deterring Russia’s alleged expansionist ambitions — if not actually preparing for a war with Russia.
This is not the behaviour of those genuinely seeking peace. The same can be said for Zelensky’s insistence on territorial integrity and European peacekeepers — both non-starters for Russia. Adding to the contradictions, just hours before the US-Ukraine meeting in Jeddah, Ukraine launched its largest drone strike yet on the Moscow region, killing at least three people — an unusual way to enter peace talks.
At this stage, the most probable outcome is therefore a continuation of the war — at least in the short term. This would be the worst possible way forward for Ukraine: the longer the war continues, the worse Ukraine’s position will become. However, from Zelensky’s standpoint, it makes sense. If the war were to end, his political career would likely be over — and, in a more extreme sense, his very life could be at risk. In other words, Ukraine’s interests aren’t necessarily the same as Zelensky’s.
The same goes for Europe. From the perspective of Europe’s core interests, it is entirely irrational. Far from protecting Europe, the continent’s military build-up could very well create the very danger it purportedly seeks to avoid. Russia has neither the means nor the intent to invade Europe, yet the continuation of the proxy war, and Europe’s rearmament plans, only increase the risk of escalation. This is the exact dynamic that we saw play out in the case of Nato’s eastward expansion, and then in Ukraine.
Yet for the current European leadership, admitting defeat in Ukraine would be a massive political blow — especially given the steep economic toll borne by ordinary Europeans. The war has arguably become the sole source of purpose for EU leaders; without it, their failures would become painfully obvious. Meanwhile, the massive increase in defence spending, and the escalation of tensions, will further empower military-industrial lobbies and solidify the elites’ grip over European society by undermining welfare states and continuing their stifling of democracy under the guise of “fighting Russian interference” — as we are seeing in Romania.
“Far from protecting Europe, the continent’s military build-up could very well create the very danger it purportedly seeks to avoid.”
Escalating tensions with Russia also offers a chance to further centralise power within the supranational arm of the EU — the European Commission. As Politico reported: “National capitals fear European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will exploit this crisis to extend Brussels’ powers to new areas and strengthen her influence vis-à-vis national governments.”
Yet it would be a mistake to view the current transatlantic rift solely through the lens of the diverging interests of the European and American leaderships. Beyond these differences, there may be deeper dynamics at play: a coordination between Europe, the Democratic establishment and the liberal-globalist faction of the US permanent state — the web of entrenched interests spanning American bureaucracy, security state and military-industrial complex. These networks all have a shared interest in derailing peace talks and disrupting Trump’s presidency.
The US has, of course, a long history of political influence in Europe. Over the decades, it has built strong institutional ties with the state apparatuses of Western European countries, particularly among their defence and intelligence services. Additionally, the US establishment exercises considerable influence over European public discourse through mainstream English-language media outlets and think tanks. These organisations, such as the German Marshall Fund, the National Endowment for Democracy, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Atlantic Council, help shape the political narratives that dominate European society — and indeed today are at the forefront of pushing the idea that “no agreement is better than a bad one”.
Its origins lie in the Cold War, with the US actively promoting European integration as a bulwark against the Soviet Union. In other words, the EU, especially through its earlier iterations, has always been wedded to Atlanticism, and this has only intensified post-1991. This is why the EU’s technocratic establishment — specifically the European Commission — has historically been more aligned with America than European national governments. Ursula von der Leyen, dubbed “Europe’s American president”, is a prime example of this alignment, working tirelessly to maintain the EU’s commitment to America’s hawkish geopolitical strategy, particularly regarding Russia and Ukraine.
A key tool in this alliance has always been Nato, which today plays a key role in countering Trump’s efforts to shift the US approach towards Russia. In this context, Europe’s stance, though ostensibly aimed at Trump, stems from the recognition that elements within the US ruling class strongly oppose Trump’s overtures to Putin, harbour deep animosity toward Russia, and view the President’s threats to disengage from Nato and undermine other pillars of the post-war order as a strategic challenge to the systems that have upheld American hegemony for decades.
In other words, what on the surface appears to be a clash between Europe and the US may actually be, in a more fundamental sense, a struggle between different factions of the US empire — and, to a large degree, within the US establishment itself — waged through European proxies. After all, many of today’s European leaders have strong connections to these networks.
This could explain the “irrational” policies of those leaders, at least from the perspective of Europe’s objective interests — first, their blind support of the US-led proxy war in Ukraine, and now their insistence on continuing the war at all costs. According to this telling, the objectives of the transatlantic establishment appear quite clear: to demonise Trump, portraying him as a “Putin appeaser”; and to stoke European anxieties over their military vulnerability, including by inflating the Russian threat, in order to push the public into accepting increased defence spending and the continuation of the war for as long as possible.
Neither side in this transatlantic civil war truly has Europe’s interests at heart. The Trumpian faction deems Europe as an economic rival, with Trump himself repeatedly criticising the EU, calling it an “atrocity” designed to “screw” America. Just last week, he announced plans to impose 25% tariffs on European goods “very soon”. On the other hand, the liberal-globalist faction views Europe as a critical front in the proxy war against Russia.
In this context, a scenario in which Europeans prolong the war in Ukraine — at least in the short term — could be seen as a compromise between the two factions. The US can extricate itself from the Ukrainian quagmire while pursuing rapprochement with Russia and shifting its focus to China and Asia-Pacific, all while placing the blame for the failure to achieve peace squarely on Zelensky and the Europeans.
Meanwhile, Europe’s continued involvement in the war ensures its ongoing economic and geopolitical separation from Russia, and reinforces its continued economic dependence on the US — especially in the context of its defence spending hike, much of which would flow to the US military-industrial complex. At the same time, the European representatives of the liberal-globalist establishment would continue to use the Russian threat to entrench their power. Overall, this arrangement could be seen as acceptable by both sides.
In other words, as the geopolitical researcher Brian Berletic has suggested, what is often presented in the media as an unprecedented “transatlantic rift” may, in fact, be more of a “division of labour” in which the Europeans maintain the pressure on Russia while the US turns its attention to China. What’s worse, the scenario wouldn’t change that much even if some kind of peace deal were eventually worked out. Europe would bear both the cost and the responsibility for post-war security arrangements, while remaining locked in a new Cold War with Russia — all while the United States secures its control over Ukraine’s resources.
The long-term effects of this strategy would leave Europe in a perpetual state of instability, its resources drained by ongoing defence spending and its political autonomy further undermined. The true losers in this arrangement would be the people of Europe — and, of course, Ukraine — who will continue to bear the burden of this geopolitical tug-of-war.
Thomas Fazi is an UnHerd columnist and translator. His latest book is The Covid Consensus, co-authored with Toby Green.
oooooo
Sprinter Observer@SprinterObserve
An archived video of Zelensky, in which he states that he has no political prospects or plans
and that Russians and Ukrainians are one people, is widely distributed on social networks
Bideoa: https://x.com/i/status/1899850980088324566
oooooo
Things are as @battleforeurope says they are, in this podcast with
youtube.com
The Ukraine War and the U.S-Europe Split | Feat. Thomas Fazi | The…
Buy us a coffee or subscribe to access exclusive content here: https://buymeacoffee.com/ninab
ooo
The Ukraine War and the U.S-Europe Split | Feat. Thomas Fazi | The Winter Latina Show | Ep. 51
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HN-K_W2iDeA)
Thomas Fazi, a journalist, political commentator, and author, joins us to discuss the latest developments in the war in Ukraine by focusing on the relationship between the United States under the Trump administration, the European Union, and Russia. Is there a split between the U.S. and the EU on the subject of Ukraine peace talks, or is the split really between the so-called party of war and the realists?
Transkripzioa:
0:00
[Music]
0:12
the winter Latina show hosted by IDM
0:19
[Music]
0:40
and we are not live we are once again recording it so
0:46
we’ll be speaking to you from the past Nina how are you doing
0:51
today uh I’m doing as I’m usually doing I’m very caffeinated I’m very sleep
0:56
deprived which means I’m ready to go but I might crash in the middle of the episode so just a fair warning welcome
1:03
guys welcome to another funfilled installment of the winter Latina show where we talk about difficult subjects
1:09
like war and geopolitics with a little bit of humor and today we have another very special guest who will hopefully
1:17
help us understand some of the most recent geopolitical developments his name is Thomas fi he is a journalist a
1:24
geopolitical commentator and an author he runs his own website which is say
1:30
name.com which of course we link to the video description he’s featured in other
1:35
Publications such as Compact and unheard uh for example he writes very detailed
1:40
articles with really interesting analyses on politics of country like Germany for example and these articles
1:48
help us understand the broader framework of EU geopolitics and ultimately Global geopolitics today he also recently
1:56
published a book called the co consensus hopefully he’ll tell us a little bit about it I’m not sure the extent to
2:01
which this topic is still censors of YouTube we might have to be a little bit careful but folks like this are very
2:08
relevant to understanding more explicitly political content and subjects that we cover on this channel
2:14
and of course on our respective social medias so Marcelo let’s bring Thomas on
2:20
and he’ll tell us a little bit more about him himself of course without further Ado here we have Mr Tom fatti
2:29
how are you doing guys hi thanks for having me and thanks for the generous
2:35
introduction yeah hopefully I didn’t miss anything up so
2:40
there if there is anything that you’d like to add perhaps about your current
2:45
Endeavors and tell us a little bit about this book again I don’t know the extent to which the subject which used to be
2:51
very much censored um seems to be sort of getting uncensored but you published it when it was still a taboo subject
2:57
maybe we’ll talk about that before we jump into to um sort of more broader issues of us Russian SL EU relations and
3:06
the war in Ukraine of course right so um yeah so the co consensus was a book that um I wrote
3:13
with um a British historian called Toby green and um it came about because we
3:20
started uh I don’t I can’t even remember how we met exactly I mean online
3:25
obviously but you know I think he he he maybe came across some stuff that i’ written about covid um and I guess what
3:33
was sort of well not unique but maybe kind of different from the sort of more
3:39
um the more widespread Co critiques that were happening at the time was that I was writing specifically from my
3:45
left-wing perspective uh I’m someone who comes from the left the Socialist left
3:51
and um I was you know really appalled by
3:56
the sort of the left’s reaction to uh I mean not so much to the pandemic I would
4:01
say to the to political management and and even biomedical management of of the pandemic and uh which you know I felt
4:09
violated what you know would have been core you know leftwing principles you know until uh not too long ago um and so
4:18
you know I wrote a few art I’d written a few articles in unheard trying to kind of U sort of sort of critique what was
4:25
you know the policies that were being rolled out from a uh sort of left Social socialist of
4:30
anti-authoritarian perspective and um and um and and and he was coming very
4:36
much from a similar background and so we started uh first of all we started just
4:42
talking and uh you know we had some very long kind of therapeutic sessions you
4:47
know because it was a very hard time I mean if you were someone from you know if you were a leftist uh who didn’t
4:53
agree with with the policies that were um happening at the time so you know for people I asked that you know for
4:59
leftists who were sort of critical of what was happening it was um it was a very lonely time I mean my my circle of
5:07
left when friends had already you know seriously diminished over the years because uh I you know for a long time
5:14
I’ve been taking positions that have been at odds with the mainstream left for example you know I’ve I’ve always
5:20
been very critical of the European Union which uh a lot of the left you know I think we’re very um you know deluded
5:26
about and uh and so you know I’d already uh sort of find found myself estranged
5:33
from sort of you know the broader left family um specifically I mean mostly you
5:40
know as far as the European Union was concerned but on other issues as well and of course the uh the pandemic just
5:45
to to Tober charged at because uh as we know most people on the left just you know completely embraced the policies
5:51
that in fact uh were often arguing for even harsher policies and so um so it
5:57
was just good to find someone who was coming from my same background ground and had my same sort of you know
6:02
feelings about what was happening and um and so that that’s where the idea to write a book um about about it all came
6:10
about and um and I think you know it really came from a an almost a physical
6:16
need to get this out it was very similar for both of us uh you know we it wasn’t
6:21
you know we didn’t expect the book to to have you know such a huge impact especially because you know we all
6:27
remember how hard it was to get you know any alternative views about the pandemic
6:33
across um at the time so we really weren’t expecting much I mean it was just more it really something we had to
6:39
do for ourselves you know I mean just sort of you know for the historical record just so in the future at least
6:45
people would know that not everyone you know on the left you know went along with with these policies and there were
6:50
people on the left that criticized them you know from a um from what we would consider a a principle kind of you know
6:57
left um in my case social in Toby’s case maybe more libertarian stance as we kind of also brought you know into the book I
7:04
think sort of two different strands of leftwing thought um and um and and yes
7:10
and I think you know the the the title and subtitle of the book really sum up what it’s about you know it’s the it’s
7:17
called the co consensus the global Assault on uh democracy on and the poor a leftwing critique and um and um yeah
7:26
it was just uh sort of our attempt to analyze sort of what was happening while it was
7:32
happening to a large degree um but I think uh you know I think a lot of the
7:37
analysis um sort of holds even you know uh a few years now you know after the
7:43
end of the pandemic um and I think um I think it’s really important I think
7:50
there’s a tendency which is natural I think maybe to want to just forget what happened because it was just so horrific
7:56
um for for most of us at least I mean and um and um but I think a lot of what
8:03
we’re witnessing now uh in terms of you know um just sort of Social and
8:11
Engineering policies and I think um the ground was really laid during the
8:16
pandemic so a lot of what we’re witnessing now in terms of censorship and in terms of the Crackdown on
8:22
Democracy the uh Crackdown on civil liberties uh sort of the um the
8:27
introduction of a permanent state of exception uh under the guise of fighting
8:34
you know whatever happens to be the emergency of the moment and I think it’s interesting in that respect how we
8:39
basically um sort of moved on seamlessly from one crisis I.E the pandemic to
8:45
another crisis the Ukraine war um I mean literally I mean really seamlessly I
8:52
mean if if you look at the Timeline it’s really quite impressive uh they you know as soon as they started announcing that
8:58
the basically the emerg was over um a new emergency happened in the form of
9:05
Russia’s invasion of um of Ukraine and um and we saw I think a lot of the
9:10
similar tactics deployed in terms of sort of managing that crisis and even exploiting that crisis to further
9:17
certain political aims um I think you know there are a lot of similarities you know in terms of uh sensorship and in
9:24
terms of you know just trying to impose a single narrative a single voice and uh ter terms of sort of the harmonization
9:31
of the narrative in the media and so on um so I think it’s um you know I think
9:37
that wasn’t just something that began and ended me I think that began a
9:43
transformation in the way Western society’s work and which we’re still living with today and so um yeah and so
9:52
so um so yeah so I think it was U was something that we felt we had to write and um and uh you know I find myself
9:58
going back to it you know just just to find a lot of analogies with what’s happening now really yeah I think the
10:06
cathartic aspect definitely makes sense to our listeners and me me specifically
10:11
I have two questions one is a clarification question when you refer to yourself as a leftist and a socialist
10:18
are you talking about that more in a classical sense in terms of the labor left or do you mean sort of the newer
10:25
left that is seems to be more focused on culture and less interested in Class
10:30
Type topics no I would definitely consider myself uh sort of within the strand of
10:36
the sort of the old school um class-based uh left um so I I I I very
10:43
much um come from that from that older tradition what you could call the labor left or you know the Socialist or even
10:50
communist left I mean sort of we’re talking about very much the same thing I mean often the labels change depending on the country on what happened to be
10:56
the kind of prevailing tendency in in in that country especially in Europe but um
11:02
but yes no I mean I I think that old left is something that’s very different from what the left has morphed into um
11:09
over the past few uh few decades you know this where it’s you know virtually abandoned the class terrain to embrace
11:17
uh sort of you know sort of completely different forms of of struggle you know very much kind of individual based
11:23
struggle uh struggles identitarian based struggles and uh a lot of this I think would you know is is in many respects
11:30
not just sort of um a different approach from the old one I would say in very in
11:35
many respects it’s it’s an it’s a diametrically opposed um approach to dealing with uh with with sort of you
11:43
know our society’s problems uh because it’s um you know again that was you know
11:50
it’s um it’s yeah it’s the opposite of a class-based approach I mean you’re creating completely different uh sort of
11:57
you know uh you know fishes and and fractures and divisions in society which uh often go against a uh sort of a
12:05
class-based vision uh which tends to uh sort of you know transcend um sort of
12:11
identitarian differences and said we see this new left trying to heighten these uh differences at the expense of a more
12:17
kind of um a broader class-based perspective so um yeah and so so yeah
12:24
that’s what I say when I you know that’s what I mean when I say that I’ve you know long considered myself found myself
12:29
for odds with with the mainstream left and increasingly so I mean this is something that’s not a recent phenomenon
12:34
I mean it’s something that can tra can be traced back all the way to you know in many respects the 80s if one wants to
12:40
go you know if not sued and that but definitely you know from the 90s onwards um and um so this has been this has been
12:47
a long process and so what we’re witnessing now is simply kind of you know the final chapter of this uh of
12:53
this transformation really and I think the consequences are are before us and that’s uh and part of that is the you
13:01
know the complete disappearance of um if not you know um yeah I mean if not you
13:08
know almost complete disappearance of the um of of the kind of the old left left approach to um to analyzing um sort
13:15
of yeah it seems like this this emphasis on uh the individual is not really like
13:22
you’re saying an a value of the classic you know classic labor SL class-based
13:28
left ISM it’s more it’s it’s more of a of a feature that came from liberalism
13:34
so that focused on liberalism as a historical subject right it sorry on the individual as a historical subject is
13:41
really not something that’s present in the left so I think that transformation as as you’re saying it’s probably
13:47
something that started happening in the if we use periodization in the early postmodern period which would be as
13:54
you’re saying the late 80s uh in the 90s so I think your type of critique of you
14:00
know the basically the the the biosocial managing that happened during Co is is
14:06
definitely something that’s been missing so uh when you talk about that seamless
14:11
transition from one crisis to the other are you suggesting that all these different governments kind of initially
14:17
took that opportunity and then used it to their benefit or do you think there’s something more Sinister you know if we
14:23
were to put on our tinf hats in terms of the way that this particular crisis the so-called health crisis was then used to
14:31
uh maintain and sometimes expand certain policies that then were used during the war the ongoing war in Ukraine yeah I
14:39
mean you know that’s obviously the million dooll question and we probably you know we would need you know hours
14:45
just to uh really um you know get through it but I think in very basic terms I mean this idea that this was you
14:53
know a largely um you know that this was a response that was dictated by confusion
15:01
and just not you know and and really political Elites not really knowing what to do and kind of grasping it you know
15:07
straws and I think this is refuted by the historical evidence I mean I think that you know the historical evidence
15:13
shows that in fact there was uh an incredibly coherent and cohesive
15:19
response on the part of um of most western uh governments if not you know
15:25
virtually all Western governments with very few exceptions and uh I mean if we look at the um at the kind of the single
15:31
narrative that imposed itself very early on uh which was virtually the same
15:39
across the board in every country uh you know this idea that you know we’re facing um an incredibly dangerous virus
15:48
that threatens everyone regardless of age of pre-existing conditions which of course we we we knew already at the time
15:55
to be false this idea that you know there is there is there is no um um
16:03
there is there are no therapies that can you know reduce the harm in any possible
16:08
way that can reduce the kind of rate of hospitalizations for example that was really known to be false at the time the
16:14
idea that you know there was no other solution but to uh to wait
16:20
for a vaccine a miraculous vaccine and that until then there was no other
16:26
solution but for countries to implement this completely unprecedented policy of national
16:32
lockdowns um when you look at how you know governments basically adopted this narrative in almost identical form
16:39
across the board it’s uh sort of it’s really hard to conclude that that this
16:45
just em happened this same narrative happened to emerge organically in very different you know countries and
16:51
political contexts uh so you know clearly the governments were were taking their cues from from somewhere and um
17:00
and we know that you know I mean again if we if we go back I mean it’s clear that there were certain institutions
17:05
that were you know driving through this narrative very early on um of course I
17:11
mean the wh the World Health Organization was among these institutions that really played a key
17:17
role in kind of harmonizing this um this response even if this me meant adopting
17:22
policies that went completely against what had been the consensus even among you even within the who on how deal with
17:29
pandemics up until basically you know the end of 2019 uh when in fact the who itself had
17:36
published um sort of a um um a pandemic response um plan which uh you know
17:43
didn’t even remotely take into consideration you know policies like lockdowns and and and the universal use
17:49
of masking and you know the these were all things that in fact were actively disc discouraged in this document that
17:55
was published by who at the end of 2019 so we see a complete reversal of what had been the prevailing scientific
18:01
consensus until then in in in really you know the course of weeks and um and of
18:07
course you had very you know powerful um sort of private um sort of
18:15
um centers of power for example um you know um people like Bill Gates and
18:21
others they were also pushing through this exact same narrative and uh you know and really pushing it through the
18:27
media and um and so I think when you when you consider this um I think it’s
18:32
um it’s it’s pretty clear I think that there was um that there were certain
18:38
sort of you know institutions and and and centers of power that were pushing through um sort of a certain approach to
18:47
how to deal with the pandemic and this was then kind of adopted uh sort of the you know there was a blank adoption of
18:55
these policies across um you know especially across Western countries and I think i i i specify Western countries
19:01
because we often think of the pandemic as a you know a global phenomenon and of course in many respects it was but when we look at the political response it was
19:07
very much a specifically Western phenomenon uh almost you could say sort of a
19:13
NATO uh I mean the response of NATO countries I mean that these were these were the countries that were um that
19:21
that that essentially really went you know went all in when it came to uh you
19:26
know the lockdown policies and and everything that came after that um in
19:32
kind of non-western countries the adoption was much more you know um much more checked much more random I mean the
19:38
West tried to impose these policies on virtually all countries but you know it didn’t always work but in in sort of in
19:45
NATO stand we saw sort of you know with again almost maybe one exception in the former Sweden we saw the blanket
19:52
adoption of virtually the same policies uh of course you with small variations but virtually the adoption of the same
19:57
policies across the board and so um so yeah you have to consider you know the
20:03
idea that this wasn’t you know this wasn’t completely organic and neither was it just you know I mean I think and
20:09
again you know I mean I think one doesn’t have to go I mean this doesn’t mean that there were you know there was
20:14
a dark room somewhere where everyone where where everything was decided I think it’s important to
20:20
understand that a lot of the conditions for that response were already in in place in in many ways uh in a ways you
20:27
know they they’d been at at Elite political levels in the west there have been a lot of discussion in prent years
20:33
about you know how how you would deal with the pandemic and this when you this wasn’t in the official again who
20:39
documents or even in the pandemic prepare preparedness plans but there had been kind of a pandemic response
20:46
industry that had been building up um over the years and um which was
20:51
proposing kind of you know very radical responses to uh to Future pandemics and
20:57
um and so behind the scenes of official politics you had you know you sort of
21:02
had a very powerful kind of uh pandemic you know preparedness complex you could
21:07
say that had been establishing itself and so I think you know it uh you know it really was already in place and even
21:14
if you look at for example you know the media and the level of harmonization across the media again you know this the
21:22
initiatives like The Trusted news initiative and other initiatives were specifically aimed at harmonizing sort
21:28
of The Narrative across Western countries across the media of Western countries these were already in place you know and and to some degree had
21:35
already been um sort of implemented for example you know um as a response to the
21:40
first Trump Administration and then other other other events and so um so I
21:46
think yeah and Al you know the growing power of the um kind of the but you know
21:52
the the the biof pharmaceutical complex again this is this is something that was already in place these people didn’t just pop out of nowhere um these you
22:00
know the big farmer was already the big farmer companies were already among the most capitalized companies in um in in
22:07
Western capitalism especially in American capitalism before the pandemic and so you can see that a lot of the
22:12
pieces were already in place for sort of these conver these of um different
22:18
interests to converge you know once the right the right conditions emerged in
22:25
the form of this uh of this um of this of this virus and this is without even
22:31
going into the whole you know debate about the origins of the virus again you know we have to stay here all night but
22:37
let’s just say that there are a lot of you know a lot of parts of this story that just don’t don’t fit with the sort
22:42
of the idea of a completely um sort of unexpected event
22:49
uh which caught everyone off guard uh which resulted in governments just trying to do their best and yeah maybe doing some mistakes but you know they
22:55
were still you know just just trying to deal with a completely unprecedent situation I think this is a very naive reading of what um of what happened I
23:02
think there’s a much bigger story at play there and one which in fact we haven’t fully written um because we
23:10
still don’t know a lot of elements of the story I mean beginning and again here I am getting into yet but I mean we
23:16
still don’t know really you know where this virus truly came from and uh you know how it and you know and then how
23:23
you know where it comes from how how it was created whether it was you know humanly engineered or not and where and
23:32
how it you know ended up in the you among the general population I mean these are all questions that don’t have
23:38
an official answer yet and uh I think you know that you know that tells you everything you need to know about how
23:44
little we really know about this uh this you know this his completely really you
23:51
know history changing um event yeah so it seems like um The Narrative
23:59
management that was perfected perhaps uh within a system that was already set in
24:04
place during the you know the deadly virus uh as you know we can call it we can call it that here uh were then
24:12
implemented for the war in Ukraine because up until recently uh every
24:17
single big media so Legacy Media Source in the west politicians and even social
24:23
media would use the verbatim statement about Russia’s fullscale unprovoked invasion of Ukraine it’s always those
24:30
words it doesn’t matter if it’s some troll on social media that is basically disseminating these NATO narratives or a
24:37
well-known politician or Reuters or AP or any of these sources they would always insert that particular that
24:45
particular line to you know obviously implant that in your subconscious so when you’re thinking about it you’re
24:50
going to have a particular perception regardless of what news comes out about the subject that may or may not
24:56
challenge that particular perception ction but now that we have this supposed splid between the United States or at
25:03
least Washington and Brussels and London it seems that that particular narrative is slowly being broken down so what is
25:11
your perception on these recent developments in terms of narrative Management in the media
25:18
yeah yeah so it’s um yeah it’s been it’s been an interesting few weeks uh you can
25:25
say that because it’s been you know just arious seeing now you know the most powerful
25:33
and important political figure in the west say what we have been saying for
25:39
the past three years uh and what we have been censored for saying for the past three years or ridiculed or attacked for
25:47
or been called you know Putin stoes simply for you know just saying the truth about you know the origins uh of
25:53
this war I.E the fact that it was you know Pro clearly provoked by I would add
25:58
deliberately provoked by NATO um that it that it clearly is you know in a fundamental sense not a war between you
26:07
know Ukraine and Russia but between NATO and Russia uh so it is a proxy war uh if
26:13
ever there was one um and um and it’s
26:19
yeah it’s been it’s been really interesting I think this is uh part of
26:24
you know this explains a lot of the kind of mental break down that we’re witnessing among the kind of liberal uh
26:31
establishment especially uh especially here in Europe I mean of course in you you know you’ve got the liberal
26:37
establishment is freaking out as well in the US but you know at the moment it doesn’t have in terms of formal political power it does there’s not much
26:43
it can do even though I think there there’s a lot of can do behind the scenes maybe we’ll get into that but um
26:48
of course you know the um virtually you know all European governments have been
26:55
going along with this narrative you know with with these uh with this completely false
27:00
narrative for the past um for the past three years and now here you have you know the U that effectively their
27:07
transatlantic Master uh saying you know this is all you know I mean we’ve been you
27:14
we’ve been lying to everyone for the past three years uh and and and and now
27:19
we’re gonna you know and now we’re gonna bring this to an end uh you know and um
27:25
and I think you know I I use the term peace derangement syndrome to explain the kind of hysterical reaction of um
27:32
sort of the European political SL media establishment but especially the political establishment I mean it’s um
27:39
it’s just been unreal to witness I mean not that I had very high expectations from you know this the current crop of
27:45
European leaders but what we’ve witnessed over the past few weeks is just I mean it was it’s been it’s been
27:51
really hard to stomach even for even for someone like myself um and I think you
27:58
when trying to analyze the hysteria I think there are different levels um that
28:03
explain the um this kind of insane reaction of European politicians um I
28:09
think there’s a there’s a psychological level there’s a level that relates to sort of you know their immediate
28:15
material interests and then there’s kind of a deeper level that relates to the kind of behind the scenes transatlantic
28:21
politics and so so we can very briefly kind of go through each one I think in in in psychological terms I wrote an
28:28
article for compact which is BAS which was basically kind of a psychiatric you know analysis of uh the European
28:34
response to um to Trump’s sort of peace overtures and um I think on a
28:39
psychological level what you’re witnessing is you know here you have European politicians that have been in a
28:45
toxic sort of you know abusive relationship uh with uh America a kind
28:50
of you know dominant subordinate relationship with America for a very long time and now suddenly you know that
28:58
they’re being you know completely dis disregarded and humiliated uh by their
29:04
sort of their Master by the by the abuser who’s now saying that you know he’s not you know he’s not even interested in abusing him that much
29:10
anymore you know he’s done and I think you know what we’re witnessing is something that you know psychology has been you know long studied to explain
29:17
how people react to uh you know through toxic relationships and abusive relationships you know often your
29:22
reaction is you know you you suffer an identity crisis when that abusive relationship comes to an end and in some
29:29
ways you try to almost regain your abuser your abusers um you know love in
29:35
in some respects I think that’s kind of on some level that’s what we’re that’s what we’re witnessing I think a complete
29:41
shock at the uh you know at the idea of this um of this toxic abusive
29:47
relationship coming to an end because you know a lot of abusive relationships means that the you know the abused you
29:54
know kind of has really has to completely sort of nullify you know
30:00
nullifies their identity and so now this is what H this is what we’re witnessing now a political class that realizes that
30:06
you know they have no identity this is why they’re going through this you know massive identity crisis they have nothing to replace you know their role
30:13
within this kind of hierarchy that they’ve played um you know for for so long I think that’s why we’re witnessing
30:20
I think or maybe almost on a maybe on a subconscious level an attempt to regain America’s Love by trying to uh by trying
30:27
to mimic sort of America’s approach to foreign policy by showing you know you know that we can be as tough and strong
30:34
as you want us to be you know we’re not um I think that’s you know on some on some level I think that’s what’s
30:40
happening but sort of in more praic terms I think clearly it’s it’s not hard to understand why the Europeans can’t go
30:46
along with this 180 degree turn I mean you know there’s been a change of regime in America so Trump can do it uh you
30:53
know he can his devis is you know very easy and somewhat very simplistic narrative you know it was all the fault
30:58
of the previous administration now I’m coming along and I’m solving this you know of course you can do that but um as
31:05
I would say as as sort of very simplistic as that narrative is but um but the Europeans can’t do that I mean
31:10
they just can’t do a u-turn on this because they’ve invested so much uh in this war and um you know they’re already
31:17
suffering from a pretty sort of deep and serious crisis of legitimation and you know consensus um in Europe and uh for
31:25
them to admit that this was just you know that Not only was not only have they lost a war but in fact but in fact
31:32
they would you know to admit that they were the ones that were respon that were responsible for starting this war in the first place uh a war that you know
31:39
contrary to America which you know one may argue has gained some at least
31:44
short-term benefits and in sort of Economic and even geopolitical terms from this War uh Europe has gained
31:50
nothing I mean Europe has only uh has only you know lost from this war in in
31:56
you know in every respect you know economically geopolitically um strategically it’s been a complete disaster that has again
32:03
unlike America really reverberated across Society you know it’s had you know very deep you know and serious
32:09
impact on on on sort the everyday life of people um it’s been you know who who
32:14
who have been really carrying the burden or the economic burden of this war and so the Europeans can’t they can’t let go
32:21
at least not from one day to the next you know I mean that’s just something that’s not that’s not going to happen I think more in general they again and
32:29
this relates to the kind of you notion of the state of exception that we were talking about earlier this kind of
32:34
permanent state of emergency so long as as there as there are sort of very heighten tensions with Russia they can
32:40
keep justifying their grip on power they can keep justifying sort of you know cracking down on Democracy cracking down on civil liberties cracking down on Free
32:47
Speech because you know we’re at war with Russia you know uh and and War you
32:52
know and and and the creation of a fictitious fictitious external enemy has always been you know the last resort of
33:00
uh of of desperate Elites Americans have been doing this for a very long time and now kind of European the Europeans are
33:05
trying to clumsily sort of go along with the same Playbook you know I mean it’s it’s it’s a standard neocon Playbook you
33:11
know just you know create an external enemy in a form of Russia and then you use that you know to um to uh to to
33:18
adopt you know increasingly authoritarian approach to uh of uh governing domestic you know your
33:23
domestic populations and especially domestic unrest and this is of course happening at a time when you know U again as I said earlier
33:29
Elites are you know more delegitimized than ever you know you’ve got of you know populist anti- establishments movements and parties popping up
33:36
everywhere um so I think this is really their last resort they know that if you know to admit defeat you know about this
33:43
war is really uh would really have a calamitous political sort of blowback for them and I think and then lastly I
33:50
think we also um have to consider the possibility that the Europeans aren’t acting alone but are in fact acting in
33:58
coordination with sort of factions I would say the liberal globalist factions
34:03
of the US deep state which are still very much you know sort of entrenched it’s not like you know again uh the
34:10
American power system is a very complex one it’s not something that you know Trump’s you know trying you know
34:16
taking a hedge you know a sledgehammer in many respects you know to to the to to to the current power system to the
34:22
existing power system at least but you know that takes a long time so we have to assume that you know a lot of the you know the entrenched P structures that
34:29
were in place you know until two months ago are are still clearly in place um
34:35
and I think these these you know these are very powerful factions within American um society and I think we we
34:42
have to consider the possibility that they are act that they are sort of acting in coordination with the Europeans and even pressuring the the
34:49
Europeans in a way um to uh to continue this war and also using Europeans to try
34:54
to disrupt Trump’s plans and you know the and that includes of course the Democratic establishment uh because I
35:02
mean I would consider the current sort of European leadership sort of almost a
35:08
um a subsidiary of the US deep State uh many of these politicians in Europe were
35:14
essentially you know cultivated in vitro you know by the US deep State uh and I
35:20
think that also explains why you know they’re adopting policies that are completely irrational from kind of the
35:26
perspective of Europe’s objective your core Economic Security and strategic
35:31
interests because uh you know on some level that they globalists and so of course they’re not be holding to any
35:37
notion of national interest but um I think more in general we have to consider that they may actually be playing for the other side you know or
35:44
for a faction of the other side and I think that’s uh this is something that
35:49
I’ve you know my next piece and unheard is will be about this and I think that’s so that’s a fact I think that we have to
35:56
uh that we have to take into into consideration so to some degree what we’re witnessing I mean this simplistic Narrative of sort of Europe versus the
36:03
US I mean it’s it’s complete I mean this is more of a what we’re witnessing is kind of an epic phenomenon
36:09
of a sort of a struggle I would say within the US establishment uh itself
36:15
and the transatlantic establishment more in general but of course you know us has always been the core of that sort of
36:21
transatlantic um Elite and a lot of those Power Systems are still in power you know all the thing tanks that influence European politicians all the
36:27
the atlanticist think tanks I mean they’re still out there you know pumping pumping out propaganda uh the media is the English
36:34
language media is still out there pump pumping out propaganda and then you’ve got all the you know very deep linkages
36:40
you know operating kind of at the stay behind level of Western Security and
36:46
intelligence agencies you know uh these networks are all still in place I mean they don’t just disappear because you
36:52
know there’s been an election in in the US and so I think so I think these are the three main factors I think to try to
36:58
kind of explain what’s what’s going on in um in in Europe but I think the most paradoxical aspect is that at the end of
37:04
the day I think they’ll um they’ll they’ll end up going along exactly with what to some degree both factions want I
37:12
think what we what we’ll end up with in the short term is you know America disengages from Ukraine and um and
37:18
Europeans pick up the uh the slack for a while even maybe continuing the proxy war for a while while you know remaining
37:25
in a cold war standoff uh with with Russia I think that’s uh that’s that’s
37:30
an outcome that’s agreeable both to the Deep State faction because uh you know it keeps the pressure on Russia but it’s
37:36
also agreeable to the trumpan faction which gets to disengage from Ukraine uh while continuing to reap the benefits of
37:43
a uh of a Europe that will remain more sort of geopolitically and economically
37:48
dependent from the US than ever precisely because it has no intention of reestablishing kind of relations with uh
37:55
with Russia so uh the Paradox is that you know at the end of the day I think they’ll settle for a solution that is actually quite quite in line with what
38:01
Trump um you know expects from them and this of course includes you know the massive rearmament of Europe much to the
38:08
benefit of the US military industrial complex so uh I think it’s very much a charade I think it’s it’s super
38:16
interesting that you mentioned this abusive relationship because just in the last few weeks I had uh a couple of uh
38:24
shows in my channel where I talk about this and with even with other people and
38:31
there’s been a perception that the the abuser was but that concerning NATO that
38:39
the abuser was actually Europe and and
38:45
not the other way around so what I came to what I came to realize is that there
38:51
is actually a bilateral abusive relation is it’s not
38:58
as simple as just one abuser and one abused it’s it’s depending on the on the
39:04
perspective it can be one or or the other so I even had a show yesterday
39:10
where where I was um where I call uh that I called uh batting with with the
39:18
other what buttoms I canot say the the a word uh which basically it’s it looks to
39:25
me that as you just men now is amazing that the United States needs to
39:31
disengage and this is this is clear water clear the United States needs to
39:36
disengage from Ukraine and have its own stuff but does not want Europe to
39:42
disengage from ukra from Ukraine and actually looks more like you
39:49
know the British plans like the old times British plans
39:54
that is it’s actually pushing Europe like we had this this uh this article from the telegraph yesterday saying that
40:02
well it would be super fun if Germany build up its Army again and you know
40:07
protect Europe that’s a great idea and that also
40:13
uh uh brings you know what I mean this brings ghosts back to back to life it
40:18
keeps people exactly like your reaction yeah that’s perfect idea and at the same time
40:27
why not some people say well why not and perhaps they do and perhaps we go back
40:33
to another cycle of European Wars and we
40:39
keep Europe uh uh uh more and more and more dependent as other people say the United
40:46
States also needs to eat so people are disengaging from the United States oh
40:51
Europe’s left is still here and it’s willing to be eaten that’s the worst part yeah
40:58
well I mean look I think it’s important to understand that in many respects what we consider the West in political terms
41:05
sort of you know the collective West it’s a very recent invention I mean it’s basically a post World War II creation
41:12
uh before that there was no such thing as a you know political West so it’s
41:17
very much I mean it’s really a euphemism for the sort of post World War II us
41:22
Empire um really I mean that that that’s really all there is to it and um and um
41:29
so you know as that as as the postor War II Global architecture starts to unravel
41:36
I think it’s only natural that this uh this relationship which was very much
41:41
artificial in many respects because yes of course I mean there are there are cultural commonalities of you know
41:47
between you know Europe and and America you know there certain degree of shed
41:52
Heritage but there also a lot of differences of course I mean this idea you know that Europeans are and
41:57
Americans you know are one and the same thing I mean this is uh um this is you
42:03
know this is just completely this is just complete um I think you know this idea
42:09
that um that Europe and and America have a sort of a shared Destiny and will have
42:15
you know until the end of time is um is really very much an illusion or and
42:20
especially a European delusion I would say which has really bought in I mean Europe Europeans have really bought into
42:26
this idea of the West as a community of values you know uh I think the Americans
42:33
have never really believed it you I they they’ve used this rhetoric but to pursue you know um sort of in a very of cold
42:40
brutal way the their National Imperial interests and you know including Ukraine of course uh but EUR the a lot of
42:47
Europeans have a very sort of naive idea of this kind of Western uh this Western
42:52
Alliance of of values which actually really never really existed I mean it was just you know it was just the uh
42:58
this was the pr you know for the you know for the US uh for the US Global
43:05
Empire um and was used to mask the fact that in fact you know every other member
43:11
of this uh so-called Western Club is in fact a colonial Outpost you know of the
43:17
US and uh and this is you know so this is still very much true today and so but
43:22
it’ll be interesting to see how this um how this plays out and so so of course course in a very fundamental sense um
43:30
you know I’m someone who’s been criticizing sort of you know US influence you know over Europe for for
43:38
as long as I can’t remember and so you know you could say well great you know
43:43
finally you know finally they’re you know up and leaving well you know than you know about time um and now we can
43:50
you know get on with our lives you know without um without our Colonial Master
43:56
uh of Watching Over Us and um and overseeing every uh every action of us
44:03
but um but he I mean I don’t think that’s that’s what’s happening I mean all this
44:08
talk of disengagement I think is very much overblown I mean so are we going to
44:14
see the Americans shut down you know the dozens and dozens of military bases they have across Europe that would be a you
44:20
know that would be a that would be a serious first step towards disengaging from Europe uh I don’t see anyone really
44:28
talking uh of that I see Trump saying I want you to pay a bigger share for us to
44:33
maintain our military bases over in Europe but I don’t see Trump saying okay you know we’re going to shut down these
44:38
military bases because you know we’re finally just cutting Europe loose and we’re leaving you know leaving them to
44:43
their own fate um so that’s that’s really not happening uh so I think this whole talk of American disengagement is
44:51
somewhat um somewhat overblown but um but I think more in
44:56
general I mean even if that even if that were true um we you know we clearly
45:03
don’t have a political class that’s capable of seizing this uh this
45:08
opportunity because you I think you know again you know this even assuming that
45:14
this is sort of a sort of you know the beginning of a process of sort of you know uh
45:21
decolonization of Europe uh even assuming that’s true you know we where
45:27
completely unprepared for this in in Europe because we’re still very much sort of colonized in our minds and this
45:34
is true sort of at the level of the general population but it’s especially true at the level of our political
45:40
Elites um so you know of course so potentially this could be of course you
45:45
know a huge opportunity but um for Europe to finally you know Define its
45:51
role in in the world or whatever you know and uh and um but of of course I
45:57
think it’s telling that now Europe is talking of you know disengaging itself
46:04
also from America and is now now we’ve got you know again all this talk of you know you know the need for greater
46:10
European autonomy etc etc but in fact um you know the Europeans are talking about
46:16
becoming more autonomous in order to you know pursue exactly to continue pursuing
46:22
the same policy that the Americans sort of you know you know pushed them into
46:27
pursuing against their own interests especially when it comes to sort of breaking relations with Russia and so
46:33
it’s so it’s kind of sural you know I mean they’ve gone along with with with us policy you know uh um you know for
46:42
years now you know even at the expense of the sort of of of Europe’s basic economic interests and now that America
46:49
you know now that for once America seems to be one you know be willing to do something good for once at least in
46:54
terms of you know as far as Europe is concerned I.E bring this war to an end now you see them stumping their feet you
47:01
know and and taking this grand stand to actually know we’re going to continue with these policies that have been so
47:07
destructive for um for Europe and so so really it’s it’s a shrade of uh of of of
47:14
autonomy uh and of course you I mean you know this is I guess this is a a trauma
47:20
we’ll have to um we’ll have to go through I mean so in a way you know this
47:26
is I guess this this is part of the S of part of the you know mental decolonization I think of of of Europe
47:33
so if it if it brings us one step further sort of to people realizing that you know this kind the Western Alliance
47:39
was always an illusion really um then then we might be able to see a silver
47:44
line in all this but in the short term there’s uh I don’t see you know I don’t see that the we that this is going to
47:52
benefit Europe in um in in any possible way I mean the short-term reaction is gonna think is going to be increasingly
47:59
insane and increasingly unhinged because of all these various factors that are sort of um that that are playing out at
48:06
the same time on a sort of you know political psychological and and deeper uh of transatlantic level um so I think
48:13
you know it’s very dangerous times I mean I don’t you know not because I I think there’s a risk of sort of you know
48:20
a war breaking out between European countries I mean I think I think a lot of the uh you again a lot of this talk
48:26
about Armament I mean I think it’s um a lot of it is really just talk you
48:34
know I mean I think this you know they have to you know they talk you know they have to talk big they have to talk loud
48:40
because uh you know this is this is a way of you know desperately sort of hanging on to power and cleaning on to power for a bit longer but uh you know I
48:47
don’t think they’re serious in fact I think they’re I think you know an interesting thing about European sort of
48:54
politicians is that I think they’re actually terrified of actual politics you know politics with a capital P
49:01
because they haven’t been engaged in actual high stake politics for so long and so I think yeah that they’re putting
49:07
on you know they’re putting on a strong a tough face now but I think you know they’re themselves because they
49:13
haven’t engaged natural politics for so long because what European politicians have been doing for so long is just
49:18
delegating all the you know all the important decisions to you know foreign
49:23
actors and Supernatural institutions I mean today all the economic decisions in Europe are taken in Brussels and
49:29
Frankfurt and well I mean until yesterday all the major foreign policy decisions were taken well actually also
49:35
in Brussels but in the NATO headquarters and in Washington um
49:41
so and so I think this is uh a lot of this is just um is really just talk I
49:47
mean I think they’re really just kind of winging it you know and just I mean it’s it’s dayto day for them it’s day-to-day
49:54
survival uh I don’t think there’s there’s any real longterm um long long-term strategy and I think uh a lot
50:01
of them I think are acting so boldly because again because because they’re not really acting alone I think they
50:07
feel that you know they feel that they’ve got they’ve got their backs covered by certain sort of very powerful
50:14
factions within the transatlantic establishment you know including uh on the other side of the Atlantic and so um
50:20
so I think that’s that’s partly where the boldness comes from you know um but um but you know we we’ll wait and see I
50:28
mean I uh you know I’m not afraid of you know Germany you know rearming and you know reconquering Europe or anything
50:34
like that you know uh I think you know even even those fears are are overblown
50:39
but I think they will use this to um I mean my greatest fear and so and again
50:45
why this autonomy has going in a completely different direction so a crucial part of Europe you know sort of
50:51
becoming autonomous and independent again is getting rid of the European Union which has been the greatest cont
50:56
strain on sort of uh European uh sovereignty and self-determination for a
51:02
very long time of course this is the opposite of the narrative you know we’ve been told for years that you know we need we needed the European union to
51:07
become more autonomous from the United States again this is all part of the this is the sort of the the for dummies
51:14
version of post World War II history in fact you know the EU has always been an appendage of of American power really um
51:22
and and really one of the core centers of the liberal globalist sort of Elite
51:27
uh the transatlantic Elite in Europe you’ve got of two core centers of of of
51:32
power you you’ve got NATO and you’ve got the European Union um so so long as the
51:38
European Union exists I mean Europe is is never going to be free because you can’t you can’t be free you know if
51:44
you’re ruled by a you a a a an oligarchic technocratic Empire that
51:49
doesn’t really respond to to anyone uh and that has no Democratic legitimacy
51:54
whatsoever so the first step would be you know to get rid of the European Union and to rebuild a new political and
52:03
and even security architecture but based on Sovereign Nations you know collaborating among each other uh people
52:11
say oh you know that’s going to lead us you know H how can you you know that’s that’s never going to work you know and that that’s going to make us more
52:16
fragile and more that’s not true because I mean it’s it’s again a historical record is clear I mean Europe you know
52:23
as a taken as a whole was still and European politicians European countries were much more sort of autonomous in
52:30
many ways in the 80s you know before Mast than so then then then after the
52:36
creation of the European Union uh which has really weakened uh Europe economically geopolitically and you know
52:42
psychologically as well too as well as just being a complete uh you know
52:48
bulldozer um that’s been used against um democracy in in the European Union so the first step would be to get rid of
52:54
the European Union but again we’re going to the exact opposite direction so European Union is and European Commission in particular is once again
53:01
going to use this crisis to further trans centralize power in Brussels in fact it’s already doing it you know I
53:07
mean uh it’s it’s so we’re going to see further centralization and further concentration of power in what is the
53:14
most dangerous institution in Europe today uh which poses a much greater danger to Europe you know than Russia or
53:20
any other country and that is you know the European commission uh especially under V Delan so uh you know yeah
53:27
potentially a uh you know potentially a very fertile moment uh and one that
53:33
could be you know um rich in opportunities but in fact I think uh it’s it’s we’re going to the complete
53:39
opposite uh opposite direction and in many respects it couldn’t be otherwise in the short ter yeah on this channel
53:45
we’ve discussed the post-war martial plan and the connection to the roots of
53:50
the European Union and I think sometimes exactly as you said it blows people’s minds that um contrary to the official
53:57
propaganda of having the European Union as sort of this extra Pole on the map
54:02
that is a counterweight to the US that in fact the situation is very diff different on the inside I’d like to WAN
54:08
a little bit on that abusive relationship comment uh because it’s so interesting and of course I am one of
54:14
those lay people that has an armchair interest in abnormal psychology I think it’s very valid to use this comment and
54:22
this comparison between the abuser and the Abus but I think we have to be a little bit care careful because the other dimension is the way that these
54:29
European leaders treat their own public and in that case the roles sort of switch and they’re the ones gaslighting
54:35
and abusing the population so they’re sort of the miniature abuser perhaps compared to the US whereas the way the
54:42
public is being treated um has all the markings of if if you were to use abnormal psychology has all the markings
54:49
of of a victim of abuse as well so I think that Dimension is really important to point out and sometimes you see this
54:57
particular comparison taken too far I saw a similar comparison used in terms
55:02
of trump being this massive narcissist and zalinki being this poor victim although you know him being an
55:10
actor I think that sort of by definition means that he has some narcissistic traits without even looking at the way
55:16
that he treats his own population through mobilization and so on and so forth so yeah I think we have to be a
55:22
little bit careful in this regard because there’s this other dimension Okay so um thinking about this I read
55:29
your article that’s called the proar party has won for now which was I I
55:34
recommend for you know everyone who’s tuning in right now to go and check it out um because I think the important one
55:41
of the important features of that article is the question of responsibility you framed that article
55:47
along the lines of the zilinsky Trump spat in the Oval Office which has been well publicized but you talk about the
55:54
question of responsibility where the way that the current American for foreign policy or perceived foreign
56:00
policy coming from the Trump Administration uh is operating is to basically blame everything on the on the
56:06
past administration and you try to explain that the situation is much more
56:12
complex much like you were talking about these different factions within Washington and you talk about the long
56:19
long roots of unrest in Ukraine that go back at least 20 years I would make the argument they go back to the 90s with
56:25
the initial arrival of Nos and basically setting the scene for manipulating
56:31
Society to create particular outcomes that would be beneficial to Washington so if you could expand for our viewers
56:37
about the question of responsibility uh in in the war in Ukraine the way that Trump does seem to want to abandon it um
56:44
I think that would be really helpful to set a broader context
56:50
yeah yeah so I mean I think we all you know we all appreciate Trump’s attempts at least to
56:57
uh to bring peace in in Ukraine and you know one should underestimate just how important that is but at the same time I
57:03
think one has to you know remain sort of I think aware of all the limits I think
57:12
in Trump’s approach and I think what we’re witnessing now again you know we’ve been talking about you know the
57:19
responsibility of the Europeans and you know and possibly even of you know factions within the US deep State and
57:25
you know the atlan assists and this and that you know I think and and and of course you know zalinsky himself uh
57:32
clearly doesn’t want the war to end um so you know there responsibilities all
57:38
around but I think it’s you know I think it’s I think Trump I think Trump Bears a
57:44
share of the responsibility even for the fact that we got we’ve got to this point I mean he really had the wind in his
57:51
sales uh in terms of you know bringing
57:57
in in terms of initiating this peace negotiation with Russia and yes of course you know you had people that were criticizing the fact that you know the
58:02
Europeans were being shut out and Ukraine was being shut out but but fundamentally I think you know Trump
58:08
really had the wind in his sales for for you know for a while for for a few weeks
58:13
I think uh um and I think the pro war party was really at a loss uh was really
58:20
struggling to to to respond to this yeah we remember you know yeah macron convened a bunch of you know European
58:27
leaders in in in in Paris uh you know some weeks ago but that that really
58:32
didn’t go anywhere I mean like it was forgotten the next day you know usual platitudes about yeah we’ll support Ukraine for as long as it takes but um
58:40
but everyone kind of I mean they were really struggling to regain uh that pro war party was really struggling to
58:45
regain some control of the narrative and um and I think look at where we’re at
58:50
now where I think it’s it’s hard to disagree with the idea that you know
58:56
the pro war party is you know is is is is has very much regained uh control at
59:03
least of of of the narrative and to some some degree of the policy in in Ukraine
59:09
and um and I think you know and and
59:14
this this is largely a result of this you know now famous standoff between
59:20
Trump and zelinski um last Friday and um
59:26
and I think you know this is I mean the kind of the idea you know that you would
59:33
W to that that it would somehow make sense in so far as your goal of reaching
59:38
peace is concerned to just publicly beray and humiliate zalinski in that way
59:44
uh you know I remember a lot of people you know
59:50
especially on the kind of you know anti-war crowd you know were cheering at that and saying ah you know that was such that gave me such great
59:56
satisfaction you know and and this is that I’m sure they’re popping you know they’re popping the the champagne in in
1:00:02
Moscow and I really I wrote an article like I think the same night saying wait a minute you know hold your horses I’m
1:00:08
not so sure that this is actually got somehow conducive to to peace and I got
1:00:13
a lot of push back for that um but I think I mean I don’t want to say I was right but I mean look at where we where
1:00:19
we are now one week after that event and the scenario has you know very much
1:00:25
changed very much changed where for now it seems like you know the war is going to
1:00:31
continue you know and uh and and there’s only so much you know that uh that that
1:00:36
that Trump can do I mean even I’m not I’m not saying he’s not genuine about his his desire for peace but I mean at
1:00:42
this point uh yeah I mean he can do more in terms of you know taking away you
1:00:48
know Aid and you know military support for Ukraine especially you know satellite um um support but at the end
1:00:56
of the day I think um you know I think that was I mean that was a big misstep
1:01:02
in in in diplomatic terms I mean that really you know you you literally hand
1:01:08
it onto a silver platter exactly what the Europeans and the pro war party
1:01:13
needed to sort of you know justify you know this full-blown attack on the peace
1:01:20
negotiations by saying look at you know this is you know he you look look at how he’s treating you know this the our hero
1:01:27
zansky and and of course that’s that’s all you know I mean but that’s the Nar that’s still the overwhelming
1:01:32
narrative especially in the west and so you know you gotta de you gota you gotta keep that in mind so you know to think
1:01:40
that this wouldn’t have had a negative impact on the peace process I think you know was um was very naive and so at the
1:01:48
very least I think that was very Reckless on Trump’s behalf and so um so this is very in very general terms and
1:01:55
then you have the one you know but you know maybe he what how well were the negotiations with Russia going in the
1:02:01
first place you know I think that’s also a question it’s worth asking uh you know
1:02:07
I see you know I’ve seen yes your public Declarations of uh of uh of support for
1:02:13
Trump from you know Putin and high level um people in his administration but also
1:02:19
a lot of you know much more lukewarm reactions you know from people within the Russian establishment about you know
1:02:24
how well these negoti were actually going and how willing the US really was to um sort of compromise with Russia’s
1:02:32
sort of you know core demands um but yeah but but I think more in general you mean another aspect of
1:02:39
you know what I talk about in the article is that you know even this you know even in terms of the peace process
1:02:45
I mean this narrative that Trump this the Trump’s Ukraine narrative which basically boils down to it was all
1:02:51
Biden’s fault you know he you know he he he he you know he led he led the us into
1:02:57
this war and now I’m gon to bring it to an end is you know is of course a a a
1:03:02
very sort of simplistic version of of how these events have gone I mean you know the as you were saying I mean these
1:03:08
these you know the US medaling in Ukraine goes back at least 20 years and of course even even further back than
1:03:15
that of course um in many respects but but this was really sort of a a decades
1:03:22
long sort of Imperial project us imp Imperial project and I think it’s important you know even to look at this
1:03:29
conflict you know to take a long view of this conflict even to understand how you know how Empires operate and why we
1:03:36
shouldn’t give sort of too much importance to you know changes in administration you know because there
1:03:42
are you know there are sort of you know when you’re an Empire you know you may have yes you may operate on a formal
1:03:48
Democratic level you have elections you have you know Administration changes but clearly you know Empires need kind of
1:03:54
you know trans ad administrational you know policies to be um to be you know to
1:04:00
to be pursued in order for you know an Empire to to to survive you can’t you
1:04:05
can’t just let any you know any any elected official come along and just completely rip up uh you know what
1:04:12
you’ve been working at for for for decades and um and so um so I think this
1:04:17
this this narrative is know of course completely false let’s not forget that even Trump’s first Administration played
1:04:23
a key role in you know escalating tensions with Russia and kind of natoy
1:04:30
Ukraine uh I mean you know Trump was Trump’s first Administration was the
1:04:35
first one to provide lethal Weaponry to to Ukraine a lot of Ukraine’s sort of de facto integration into NATO happened uh
1:04:42
during Trump’s first Administration um and um and so again
1:04:49
you know just trying to completely sort of sanitize not just you know his own
1:04:55
role in all this but sort of the Empire’s wider role in all this um I
1:05:00
think is sort of not just you know again false on sort of from a historical standpoint but I’m not sure it’s really
1:05:06
that conducive to peace either to the extent that I mean Russia is clearly demanding sort of um as as as a
1:05:15
condition for peace sort of a sort of a new geopolitical grand bargain basically uh which is about much more than just
1:05:21
control of the territories or or Ukraine’s status I mean this is about reorganized in the world order it’s of
1:05:28
course already reorganized in you know on the ground and it has been especially
1:05:33
you know reorganizing itself radically over the past three years but rightfully so countries like Russia and China they
1:05:39
want a formal recognition a formal acknowledgement of the new balance of power also because this is sort of you
1:05:45
know the only way to avoid other conflicts like Ukraine flaring up um
1:05:51
elsewhere and in this respect I think uh you know I’m not sure how helpful it is
1:05:57
for you know for Trump to just blame it blame everything on the previous administration rather than taking
1:06:03
responsibility for you know as as a nation as a country as a declining
1:06:09
Empire for what happened in Ukraine I think that would be a much braver admission not saying it was all Biden’s
1:06:15
fault but it was us you know it was the American Empire you know we are responsible for this just like we’re
1:06:21
responsible for um you know catastrophes and and and destructive Wars you know
1:06:27
all across all across the world and um and so this is really kind of change of
1:06:32
Paradigm that I that that I don’t see this Administration ready ready to do
1:06:37
and you maybe it’s also expecting too much from from Trump I mean you know I understand that it’s hard for an Empire
1:06:44
to do this kind of you know self uh self-critical and self um reflective
1:06:50
thinking but to a large degree it’s kind of what is needed if we want to you know survive
1:06:56
This Global transition you know without you know really without you know without complete
1:07:03
catastrophe and so so so this is still a very dangerous situation so I mean I appreciate I think you know a lot of
1:07:09
Trump’s instincts you know are positive you know he’s got kind of a basic realist understanding of politics and
1:07:14
that’s positive so at least he’s abandoning the kind of you know sort of you know falsely value driven approach
1:07:20
of the Biden Administration become liberal internationalist or liberal globalist approach to International politics um you know but
1:07:27
um but but still I mean that that’s not enough I mean this is a you know an important you know first step in sort of
1:07:35
favoring this transition but in itself is um is not enough so um so so you know
1:07:42
so what so so I think when I focus on the history of Ukraine and it’s it’s more than just wanting to put the historical records straight I really
1:07:49
think that you know we need a much deeper Reckoning at the level you know at the level of the US at the level of
1:07:56
the West more in general um if we want to you know yeah if we want to get get
1:08:02
get get through this very dangerous moment but it’s not you know um I think all all the dangers are are still there
1:08:08
I mean I think it’s um yeah I mean I think you know it definitely would have been worse than a Biden but again if you
1:08:14
look at it in sort of Imperial terms again maybe we shouldn’t overestimate I
1:08:19
mean you know that this is that the decision to wind down the war in Ukraine is entirely down to Trump I mean if you
1:08:27
see this you know as a conflict that you know as as as something that started 20 years ago and that you know reached its
1:08:34
has reached its apex and resulted really in um a defeat for NATO a defeat for the
1:08:42
west then it would make sense you know that the Empire would have to wind us down in some way you know regardless of
1:08:49
who is in power and so I think maybe you know looking back at this you know assuming that we managed to get br this
1:08:55
war to an end we’ll look back at this and maybe we’ll focus Less on you know the individual administrations and even
1:09:01
Trump himself but we’ll see this as the natural Arc of an imperial cycle uh
1:09:07
which would would have come would maybe have come to an end you know regardless of trump in one way or another it might
1:09:13
have taken longer but yeah I think the consistency of US foreign policy since
1:09:19
the dissolution of the Soviet Union especially is really important to note regardless of the administration and
1:09:25
sort of like once the system is set in place it sort of starts replicating itself regardless of who is you know at
1:09:31
the helm at least officially and I think the uh other interesting thing or
1:09:36
probably the most obvious thing is Trump is simply winning you know shortterm populous talking points when he blames
1:09:43
something on the other administration because America is quite partisan especially these days it’s very split my
1:09:50
last question of the day to you is about uh one of the interesting features of
1:09:55
the Trump Administration is the fact that it’s more involved with the media and even social media and one of the
1:10:02
stars of the administration is of course JD Vance with whom you’ve had an exchange on Twitter SLX which is
1:10:10
absolutely amazing regardless of what you think of him because to imagine that someone in that position of power would
1:10:16
be responding and actually commenting in articles that are sort of outside the mainstream and then engaging with users
1:10:24
even users who are you know intelligent and educated like you but are not really in politics I think is absolutely
1:10:30
fascinating so if you can tell our viewers a little bit about that exchange and I know you wrote about it and then we can wrap it up yeah well I was you
1:10:38
know as amazed as you um to to see uh Vance’s response to my um to my article
1:10:44
so the backstory to that is uh so I wrote an article in unheard
1:10:50
um sort of you know criticizing certain aspects of his speech I mean praising some aspects so you know I think it’s
1:10:57
pretty clear to everyone that you know I no one loes the current crop of European politicians more than I do and so of
1:11:04
course I I appreciated a lot of what fance was accusing them of you know of being you know a bunch of you know
1:11:10
anti-democratic you know U Petty tyrants you know and engaging in censorship and
1:11:16
even canceling elections so I mean you know I couldn’t agree more with with that part of his criticism but um again
1:11:23
and this kind of relates to my criticism of trump um Ukraine narrative I think there was a lot missing from there and
1:11:28
that was the extent to which a lot of these policies were in fact you know transatlantically coordinated and in
1:11:34
many cases I would say um it was the Europeans that were taking the queue from the Americans not vice versa so you
1:11:41
know Vance specifically um hones in on the Romanian on the cancellation of the elections in
1:11:47
Romania um you know absolutely shameful uh episode um which isn’t over by the
1:11:54
way um but um but again to to place the blame for
1:12:00
that on primarily on the Europeans I think it’s very disingenuous because I mean my reading of it is that I think
1:12:06
the Americans and you know the state department played a much bigger role in that than you know Brussels um or at the
1:12:14
very least I mean the the sort of the the the attack on uh J Jesu was
1:12:22
coordinated transatlantically I mean it wasn’t you know just I mean so and and
1:12:27
there’s none of that in in Vance’s speech and you know all he does is mention uh and and of course the same
1:12:32
goes for you know the censorship policies which Vance criticizes I mean a lot of you know those policies were
1:12:38
driven you know by the US itself um and uh and of course Vance
1:12:45
does mention in his spe he does you know say yes and the Biden Administration also engaged in censorship but again
1:12:51
it’s The Narrative of you know oh it was all the previous administration’s fault and again he really doesn’t sort of
1:12:57
expand on the extent to which the the Biden Administration really was was also
1:13:02
you know driving these you know a lot of these policies or was one of the driving forces Behind These policies in in in
1:13:07
Europe uh and again it’s not I want I don’t want to defend you know Europe’s European politicians you know but I
1:13:13
think you know we need again we’re only going to get out of this you know if we really you know get the big picture and
1:13:18
um and so that was the gist of the article and and Incredibly yeah Vance a
1:13:23
couple of days later you know responded on on X to to to my article you know sort of um voicing his disagreement with
1:13:31
my analysis and basically say oh I think this you know it’s kind of an unfair analysis because you I do mention that
1:13:36
you know the Biden Administration also also did some bad things and and so you know I responded to that saying yes I
1:13:43
realized that but as I was saying I mean this is about you know it’s not just about what Biden was doing in America
1:13:48
it’s about you know the role that the Biden Administration played in uh also
1:13:54
um driving these the same policies in in Europe and coordinating with European politicians um but more in general I
1:14:01
think you know what I said is that you know if we are in this situation it’s also because you have been you know
1:14:07
because the US has been meddling for so long in European politics so now to turn around and say oh look what you know
1:14:13
look look look how your politicians are yes of course they’re but I mean that’s also because you know you’ve
1:14:19
been you’ve been breeding politicians like the ones that we have now not just
1:14:25
under Biden for decades you know the US has been you know meddling in European
1:14:30
politics cultivating politicians that were more um you know that that that that were more beholden to foreign and
1:14:37
you know specifically us interests than they were to their own national interests uh while um really you know
1:14:45
going out of their way to marginalize if not worse I.E sort of disappear um you
1:14:53
know politicians that were really trying to stand up for Europe’s interests and uh and so um you know don’t act
1:15:00
surprised that now we have this incredibly INF fantalis political class because this is you know this monster is
1:15:07
you know also to a large degree you know your own creation you know and so again it’s like Trump when it comes to Ukraine
1:15:14
I think you know it would be helpful you know for America to take some responsibility for uh for for the for
1:15:20
the complete another mess that that that that you’re in and and and again I think
1:15:26
you know in in a wider sense you don’t get to you I mean as a politician I
1:15:32
don’t think you can you get to be absolved completely for you know the
1:15:37
actions of the actions that your country committed you know before you were in power because this is kind of advanced
1:15:43
Trump narrative you keep hearing oh what do you want from us you know yeah we were in the opposition and we were against a lot of these policies you know
1:15:49
and now you know we’ve only get we’ve only got into power so it has nothing to do with us and this is not how it works
1:15:55
would say in absolute terms like you know if if you’ve you know bombed a country you know if a country has bombed
1:16:00
another country you know just because someone else comes to power that doesn’t mean that you know this this new person
1:16:06
in power gets to berate and laugh at you know what a mess the other country is in you know just because you weren’t the
1:16:13
one physically you know bombing the country yes but it was your country and you should take some responsibility for
1:16:18
that you know uh you know to to to to use a metaphor but and even not really
1:16:24
so much from metaphor when it comes to the US and so um and so I think yeah
1:16:29
this this this idea of uh it’s so it’s kind of a rewriting of history but also
1:16:36
um I think even more concerningly is the fact that that you know the the Trump
1:16:41
Administration is is just in fact even more openly
1:16:47
medling in European politics you know openly trying to uh um trying to um
1:16:55
trying to promote parties that they consider sort of you know more aligned with their you know with their political
1:17:01
views uh you know maybe you know that they’ve been using musk to do this to to
1:17:06
a large degree but um but we’ve seen you know pretty open statements you know in favor of certain political parties in in
1:17:12
Europe and and again it’s not a question whether one thinks that those parties would be better or worse for uh for for
1:17:20
for for Europe or not or for their individual countries or not I mean again it’s you know it it’s it’s the wide it’s
1:17:26
a wider issue of what’s the relationship here you know I mean bottom line is that you know you’re still meddling in
1:17:32
European politics I mean that so so you know and maybe that’s why you can’t acknowledge the wider history of Us
1:17:38
control and influence in Europe because in a way you’re still you’re doing the same You’re simply trying to promote you know a different you know a regime
1:17:46
change in Europe that is more aligned with kind of the new regime you have in America but but that still leaves Europe
1:17:53
kind of you know know a a a passive receiver of you know policies that are
1:18:00
that are being decided in uh in in Washington so yeah so you know it kind
1:18:06
of leaves us exactly where we um where we left off yeah and of course he may not be in
1:18:12
a position to fully address uh what you want him to address because that would
1:18:18
raise a lot of uncomfortable questions about us you know Imperial status and
1:18:24
you know basically a neoc colonial entity um yeah for for a lot of people so that makes sense I think it’s uh it’s
1:18:31
still very helpful to have someone of that status engaged on social media and
1:18:37
absolutely amazing yes so I’m I’m glad that it was you that he engaged with
1:18:42
thank you Thomas can you please tell our viewers where they can find you on social media your website or any other
1:18:48
projects that you’re working on so you I mean I’m I’m ranting on on X pretty much
1:18:54
every day uh like like everyone else and you can find me uh my handles battle for Europe on on X and then uh substack and
1:19:03
um yeah I’ve got I write you know pretty much regular columns for unheard and uh compact so uh but just by if you follow
1:19:10
me on substack you’ll get pretty much uh you know up updates on everything I WR so that’s probably a good place to start
1:19:17
thank you so much for coming on this this was a long time in the making so I’m glad that we were actually able to
1:19:23
coordinate Marcelo any frighting words yeah just remember everybody that
1:19:28
all the links will be on the description like share subscribe all those things from social media that I don’t like to B
1:19:35
but you know it’s that’s how it works and I would like to to thank again
1:19:40
Thomas for coming to to our show this was an amazing conversation I have so
1:19:47
many questions that I’ll leave for another opportunity and thank you everybody for watching it Nina thank you
1:19:54
for tuning in we’ll see you in the next one thank you Thomas bye thank you guys it’s been a pleasure bye bye
1:20:04
[Music]
1:20:25
he [Music]
oooooo
Geure herriari, Euskal Herriari dagokionez, hona hemen gure apustu bakarra:
We Basques do need a real Basque independent State in the Western Pyrenees, just a democratic lay or secular state, with all the formal characteristics of any independent State: Central Bank, Treasury, proper currency1, out of the European Distopia and faraway from NATO, maybe being a BRICS partner…
Ikus Euskal Herriaren independentzia eta Mikel Torka
oooooo
1 This way, our new Basque government will have infinite money to deal with. (Gogoratzekoa: Moneta jaulkitzaileko kasu guztietan, Gobernuak infinitu diru dauka.)