Alexander Mercouris · published 11 h ago ·
found by searching “ES chaosas Rusija stipri”
Mercouris: Europe fails to pick a negotiator, Russia sets conditions for a seat at the table
Putin Demands Trigger Huge EU Split Chaos No EU Negotiator Chosen EU Excluded; Russia Jams Starlink
What the site found
Leans that way — check · agenda: US-Russia talks decide Ukraine's fate
Belief the Pravda network pushes: Russia and the United States should negotiate Ukraine's future without Europe, while Ukraine and the West block peace and threaten Russia.
Mercouris says the US-Russia talks are in effect Russia dictating the agenda, that Europe can join only on Russia's two conditions (a chief negotiator and a constructive strategy), and that a divided Europe has failed to meet them.
The video says · at 0:26 · quote checked against the transcript
“They seem to be actually more like the Russians telling the Americans what they want to discuss and the Americans um agreeing to discuss it even as the Russian position on the Ukrainian battlefields becomes every day just a little stronger.”
They seem to be actually more like the Russians telling the Americans what they want to discuss and the Americans um agreeing to discuss it even as the Russian position on the Ukrainian battlefields becomes every day just a little stronger.
The video adopts the Kremlin framing that Russia and the US decide matters, that Russia sets the terms for Europe's participation, and that Europe's hardliners are obstructive; however, it is mostly one-sided commentary on reported statements and Politico coverage rather than clear fabrication, and the transcript is cut off, so it is not certain it distorts events.
The Pravda stories it echoes
Closest stories from the Pravda network, by meaning. Each links to the site’s comparison with trusted Lithuanian news.
23 days ago · British media named five possible candidates for negotiator role with Russia
M low
F low
2 verified differences
5 days ago · Europe shares a seat at a table to which it was not invited
M medium
F medium
2 verified differences
23 days ago · European Council President could become negotiator for dialogue with Russia over Ukraine, says Lithuanian President
M low
F low
3 verified differences
5 days ago · Artiomas Šeininas: Continuing the topic, Who do the far-right represent in negotiations
M low
F high
5 verified differences
17 days ago · Europeans will not be invited to trilateral negotiations on Ukraine table, Kremlin emphasizes
M low
F low
2 verified differences
Transcript (en, 1582 lines)
0:00 Good day. Today is Saturday 14th
0:02 November 2026. And before I proceed with
0:06 this program, let me remind you to tick
0:08 the like button and to check your
0:10 subscription to this channel. Well, in
0:13 my last few videos, I have been
0:16 discussing extensively the negotiations
0:19 between the United States and Russia. if
0:23 negotiations is the right way to
0:26 describe them. They seem to be actually
0:29 more like the Russians telling the
0:31 Americans what they want to discuss and
0:35 the Americans
0:36 um agreeing to discuss it even as the
0:41 Russian position on the Ukrainian
0:43 battlefields becomes every day just a
0:47 little stronger. But anyway, I discussed
0:50 the interactions. let's call them
0:52 interactions between the Americans and
0:55 the Russians. Um, and the talks in Abu
1:00 Dhabi and the critically important
1:03 meeting between Witgo and Kushner and
1:07 Vladimir Putin and his officials in the
1:11 Kremlin on Thursday.
1:14 Now, over the course of all of these
1:17 discussions, there's been much debate
1:21 about whether Europe will participate in
1:26 the talks from this point on. And in my
1:30 program yesterday, I said that uh Jared
1:35 Kushner's various claims that the
1:38 Russians had agreed to the European
1:41 participation in the talks is clearly
1:44 wrong. the Russians,
1:46 Putin himself, his foreign policy aid
1:50 Yuri Ushakov,
1:52 previously the Russian foreign minister
1:55 Sergey Lavrov,
1:57 and Putin's spokesman Dimmitri Peskov
2:01 have all said the same thing. Yes, the
2:05 Europeans might
2:08 participate eventually in the
2:11 negotiations.
2:13 both the negotiations to determine and
2:16 end the conflict in Ukraine,
2:20 but also perhaps more pertinently
2:23 the negotiations
2:25 over the new security architecture
2:29 of Europe.
2:31 But this can only happen on two
2:35 conditions. Firstly, the Europeans must
2:38 appoint a chief negotiator.
2:41 And secondly, they must agree a
2:45 diplomatic strategy,
2:48 a set of proposals
2:51 that will convince the Russians that if
2:55 the Europeans do participate in the
2:59 talks, the Europeans are coming to the
3:02 talks in a constructive way that they
3:06 generally seek peace in Ukraine and
3:09 peace in Europe. through the
3:12 renegotiation of the security ar
3:15 architecture there and they're not just
3:19 coming to the talks in order to be
3:23 obstructive.
3:25 Well, there's been a meeting of European
3:28 leaders in Dublin. Zalinski was there,
3:32 by the way. And for the record, I
3:34 believe that after this meeting,
3:37 Zalinski returned to Kiev. And I believe
3:40 that for the first time in I think over
3:42 two weeks he is once more in the
3:46 Ukrainian capital. Though I don't expect
3:49 him to stay for very long. But anyway,
3:51 Zalinski was there. Witgo and Kushner
3:55 after
3:57 that session of being steamrolled by
4:01 Putin in the Kremlin. They also came
4:05 there and talked both to the Europeans
4:08 and to Zalinski.
4:10 And anyway, the Europeans had their
4:13 opportunity to appoint a chief
4:17 negotiator.
4:18 They had their opportunity to agree a
4:22 united diplomatic strategy which might
4:26 just possibly convince the Russians that
4:29 they could have a place in the talks.
4:32 But rather, as I expected, they totally
4:36 failed to do so. Now, very
4:39 interestingly, the European media has
4:41 been obviously so embarrassed by what
4:43 has happened that they barely talked or
4:46 touched upon what took place in Dublin.
4:50 There's been almost no reports about it,
4:53 for example, in the British media. So we
4:57 have to go to the Americans to Politico
4:59 to be precise to get a sense of what
5:02 actually happened and frankly it is a
5:06 dismal story. So Politico tells us that
5:10 Europe failed to find a superhero to
5:13 take on Putin. And um we go on to read
5:18 that some European leaders wanted a
5:21 superhero negotiator to take on Vladimir
5:24 Putin and Donald Trump. secure a fair
5:27 peace deal for Ukraine and safeguard the
5:30 continent's own security as ceasefire
5:33 talks gather pace. That paragraph, by
5:36 the way, is full of um points I would
5:41 fiercely contest. Um there is no
5:45 question to my mind of a superhero
5:49 negotiator,
5:51 just a chief negotiator.
5:54 and
5:56 ceasefire talks are not gathering pace.
6:01 The Russians have repeatedly said that
6:04 discussion of a ceasefire is totally out
6:09 of the question. The Americans have
6:13 accepted that position which is why we
6:17 have drifted onto the totally different
6:19 topic of the security architecture of
6:25 Europe. But anyway, put aside this
6:28 deeply misrepresent mis misrepresenting
6:32 paragraph.
6:34 Let's go and see what actually happened.
6:37 We're going to Politico continues that
6:41 when it comes to finding a superhero
6:45 negotiator and it, by the way, it wasn't
6:48 just European leaders who asked for one.
6:52 The Americans, the Russians, and
6:54 Vladimir Zalinski
6:57 wanted one, too. Anyway, Politico goes
7:01 on to say that they were never going to
7:05 find one. that had already become the
7:08 view of diplomats and officials close to
7:11 the discussions granted anonymity to
7:14 comment on the sensitive Ukraine peace
7:17 process. This dividing European capitals
7:21 even before
7:23 the EU decided on Friday that it would
7:28 have to be a team effort. The push to
7:33 identify one representative to speak for
7:36 Europe was understandable.
7:39 The appeal,
7:41 notice again the extraordinary way in
7:44 which this is discussed. The appeal of
7:46 having a single respected leader taking
7:49 the reigns is largely based on a desire
7:54 to project European strength and unity
7:59 as well as an interest in making
8:02 negotiations with Russia, the United
8:04 States, and Ukraine efficient and
8:07 effective.
8:09 Well, that is true up to a point, but to
8:12 reiterate again, the fact is that the
8:15 Americans, the Russians, and the
8:18 Ukrainians have all said that the
8:21 Europeans need to appoint a chief
8:25 and that was the primary reason for the
8:29 discussion yesterday. It's perhaps also
8:33 worth recalling
8:35 that in December last year at the
8:39 Security Council meeting, the Europeans
8:42 agreed that they would appoint a chief
8:47 though they have never achieved that.
8:51 And then we read that the leaders at the
8:53 summit on Friday decided that the EU5
8:58 made up of the four big EU countries,
9:01 Germany, France, Poland, and Italy,
9:04 where is Spain, by the way, just to say
9:07 it's a pretty big country. The EU5 made
9:10 up of the four big European EU
9:12 countries, Germany, France, Poland, and
9:15 Italy. and Britain, which of course is
9:18 not properly speaking a member of the
9:20 EU, plus officials from the European
9:25 Commission and Council would take the
9:29 word work forward as a team.
9:34 So in other words, they weren't able to
9:36 agree on a chief negotiator.
9:40 And Politico
9:42 gives all sorts of
9:45 frankly poor reasons for this. It says
9:49 that the discussions in Abu Dhabi and
9:53 for the moment are purely technical. It
9:56 says that proper discussions and the
9:59 need for a single negotiator will only
10:02 arise when the then the big political
10:05 players Putin, Zilinski, Trump all agree
10:09 to be to participate in the talks.
10:12 Again, this is simply wrong. Um, if it's
10:16 going to be a negotiation between
10:20 leaders, then obviously leaders should
10:25 be there. But we're not talking about a
10:27 leader at the moment. We're talking
10:29 about a chief negotiator. The Americans
10:32 have one, at least in theory, who is
10:35 Steve Wickoff, though in practice Jared
10:38 Kushner seems to be playing an ever
10:41 larger role. The Russians have one,
10:44 Vladimir Midinski, who was in the
10:47 meeting in the Kremlin yesterday. The
10:50 Ukrainians have one, Rustm Umeov, though
10:54 he is on very bad terms with his number
10:57 two, Kiril Budanov,
11:00 Zalinsk's ursw chief of staff and former
11:03 head of military intelligence who was
11:06 also there in the talks
11:10 in Abu Dhabi. So all of these three
11:13 countries have a chief negotiator who is
11:16 not
11:18 the leader.
11:21 The Europeans were asked to appoint
11:25 someone like that and they failed. So
11:30 that is the simple reality. We then go
11:35 on to read in politico that some of the
11:38 points some members states and Brussel
11:42 insiders
11:43 uh were missing is structural. There are
11:47 just too many European stakeholders with
11:50 equally important but very distinct
11:52 interests and reits making consolidation
11:55 of all the different strands under one
11:59 person impossible. The commission can't
12:03 negotiate Europe's future security
12:05 architecture. That's for NATO and
12:09 national capitals to decide
12:12 and the European Union supposedly is not
12:15 a s a superstate. That is what Politico
12:20 says. I think someone should explain all
12:24 of that to Osilla Fonda Lion and Kala
12:29 Kaakalas
12:31 because Kaya Kalis of course is supposed
12:33 to be the European Union's high
12:36 representative
12:38 representing the European Union and all
12:42 of the member states. Um, Usula
12:45 Fondonder Lion frequently acts as if the
12:48 European Union is a is indeed a
12:53 superstate
12:55 and as for security and defense policy
13:00 as the Russians have been complaining
13:02 for over a year now and as the European
13:06 Union has itself been boasting,
13:11 the European Union has increasingly ly
13:13 been extending its remit into areas of
13:18 security and defense and foreign policy
13:22 encroaching on the prerogatives the
13:26 previous prerogatives of the member
13:29 states. So when Politico says that the
13:35 European Union cannot agree on a chief
13:39 negotiator because of all of these
13:43 structural reasons, what they're telling
13:46 us, what they're actually telling us is
13:48 that the Europeans are too split and too
13:50 divided and too much in argument with
13:54 each other to agree a chief negotiator.
13:58 And that is true. Though it should be
14:01 said that some of the arguments are
14:05 indeed about policy, one gets the sense
14:08 that some European states
14:11 might want to engage the Russians in
14:16 some sort of serious negotiation.
14:20 Probably that is why the Spanish are
14:24 being excluded because the Spanish
14:27 appear to be the leaders in this. Though
14:30 every so often one gets word from Italy
14:33 that they would quite like to have
14:37 negotiations with the Russians as well.
14:40 Maloney insists on taking a very tough
14:44 line against the Russians and in support
14:47 of Ukraine. But one gets the sense that
14:50 in Spain both Prime Minister Sanchez and
14:54 his opponents would favor a more
14:58 consiliatory
15:02 diplomatic approach and as I said
15:05 probably that is why the Spanish have
15:08 been excluded. For the record, I
15:11 remember about 10 years ago when the
15:16 then very hardline Spanish prime
15:20 minister Aznar
15:22 actually took the lead in European
15:25 negotiations with the Russians. Now we
15:30 see Spain
15:32 distrusted by the others because it is
15:35 not hardline enough. That is my view.
15:38 But I see no logical other explanation.
15:43 We see that Spain is totally excluded.
15:46 Just to say but even amongst the
15:50 hardliners, the French, the British who
15:52 are not of course members of the
15:54 European Union but who unlike Spain are
15:57 there, the Germans, the Italians, the
16:00 European Commission and all of the
16:02 others. uh all of even amongst these
16:06 hardliners
16:08 there is no complete unonymity.
16:11 Some of them
16:13 perhaps would be interested in some
16:17 level of outreach to the Russians.
16:21 Others of course adamantly oppose it.
16:25 But again, well, I I can't help but
16:28 think that the major reason the
16:32 Europeans have not appointed a chief
16:34 negotiator is none of the reasons
16:37 floated by Politico and none of the
16:41 reasons that I've just been talking
16:42 about, but because
16:45 they cannot agree
16:48 that person with each other. MRO wants
16:54 to be that person. Stu wants to be that
16:59 person. Fredic mouths has recently been
17:02 maneuvering to try to get himself
17:04 appointed that person.
17:07 President Costa, the head of the
17:10 European Council. He wants to be that
17:13 person. Many of these people dislike
17:16 each other intensely. is well known that
17:19 Mackerel and Maloney don't get on very
17:22 well. Everybody does everybody dislikes
17:26 Kaya Kales who would like to be that
17:28 person too even though she doesn't
17:31 actually believe in negotiations with
17:34 the Russians. Mattz is widely disliked
17:39 also. So because of these rivalries and
17:43 vanities
17:45 and because there's no diplomatic
17:48 strategy agreed anyway, we have no chief
17:54 negotiator
17:55 appointed by the Europeans
17:58 and there is no sign, none whatsoever
18:03 that they are in agreement on a
18:06 negotiating strategy. We've had comments
18:09 from some of the European leaders.
18:13 Kaya Kalis unsurprisingly continues to
18:16 say that it is a massive mistake to talk
18:19 to the Russians about the security
18:21 architecture of Europe. Any discussion
18:24 on that question is a trap. Um Friedri
18:29 Matz, the chancellor of Germany has just
18:31 made several more comments. He continues
18:34 to insist that the only way forward is
18:37 for the Russians to agree to stop their
18:40 advance on the existing conflict lines,
18:43 to agree to an unconditional ceasefire,
18:46 and then just possibly the Europeans
18:49 might decide, or maybe they might not
18:51 decide, but they might perhaps
18:55 consider
18:56 gracefully,
18:58 generously to entertain some of these
19:01 concerns that the Russians have raised
19:04 about the security architecture of
19:06 Europe and all that in talks. Though
19:11 Matts was careful to reiterate that as
19:14 far as he's concerned when it comes to
19:17 the question of Europe's security
19:20 architecture, there really is nothing to
19:23 discuss. The security architecture of
19:26 Europe has already been settled. The
19:29 security architecture of Europe is NATO
19:33 and there is nothing more to be said.
19:35 That is Meltz's position.
19:39 Macron, as far as I'm aware, has said
19:42 nothing, nor as far as I'm aware, has
19:46 Maloney.
19:47 But obviously if these people do want at
19:53 least some contacts with the Russians,
19:56 if people like Stub and President Costa
20:01 want some contact with the Russians,
20:04 then it's difficult to see what they
20:07 would go to the Russians to talk about
20:11 given the stance taken by people like
20:15 Callus and Mel. else. So no negotiating
20:20 strategy, no agreement to talk about
20:23 anything, no chief negotiator.
20:27 It is total paralysis. It is a situation
20:32 like that of the rabbit caught in the
20:35 headlights of the oncoming
20:38 juggernaut
20:40 on the highway.
20:43 They can't agree. They can't
20:47 agree on the person who will represent
20:50 them.
20:51 They can't agree on what they would say
20:55 to the Russians if they were to find a
21:00 person to represent them. It is all It
21:05 is all We're all stuck exactly where we
21:10 are. Nobody trusts the Spanish. So they
21:14 are kept
21:16 outside
21:18 and the French, the British, the
21:20 Germans, the Italians
21:22 don't really trust each other and the
21:26 European Commission doesn't properly
21:30 speaking trust any of them. So they're
21:34 all going to be there again operating as
21:39 a team without notice. even a leader
21:44 appointed to take charge of this team.
21:48 They're all going to be there that it's
21:50 going to be the same situation as we
21:53 have seen. There will be meetings in
21:56 hotel rooms in Abu Dhabi or somewhere
22:00 else. The Russians, exactly as I
22:03 anticipated in my program yesterday, are
22:06 now pushing for a further meeting to be
22:09 held as soon as possible. If that
22:12 meeting takes place, the Russians will
22:15 say that none of the conditions that
22:17 they have set for the Europeans to
22:20 participate have been met. There is no
22:24 role therefore for the Europeans in the
22:29 talks and well the Europeans will turn
22:33 up again at the hotel. Lavough might
22:36 crack more jokes about perhaps shooting
22:41 the plane that carries them down, but
22:44 they'll no doubt be in the hotel
22:47 and they'll be waiting outside the room
22:50 when the talks take place. It will all
22:53 be as unedifying
22:55 and as ridiculous as always.
23:00 But that straightforwardly
23:03 is the position we are now in.
23:06 Anyway,
23:08 does any of this ultimately matter? We
23:11 see that the Europeans
23:13 ultimately do not want to talk about a
23:16 new negotiation, a new security
23:19 architecture
23:21 for Europe. There have been two leaks in
23:26 two different newspapers, one built
23:28 Saiton, one the New York Times setting
23:32 out what the Russian proposals for a
23:37 security architecture in Europe is
23:40 supposed to be. I am going to say in
23:43 advance that I profoundly mistrust both
23:47 of these leaks. I don't believe that
23:50 they represent the Russian position at
23:53 all. I believe that they are inventions
23:57 of
23:59 European officials who are very very
24:02 unhappy about the whole idea of a
24:06 renegotiation of the security
24:08 architecture in Europe and who are
24:12 already therefore planting stories in
24:15 the media in order to wreck this whole
24:19 process before it gets going.
24:23 So the article in built ziton says that
24:28 the Russians say that they must have all
24:30 of Donas
24:32 and all of the other territories that
24:36 they currently occupy.
24:39 They say that Ukraine must be a neutral
24:42 country and must remain outside NATO.
24:47 They say that there must be a pull back
24:50 of some kind by NATO
24:54 from
24:56 territory that NATO expanded into
25:03 following the
25:06 agreement of the Russia
25:09 NATO founding act of December 1997.
25:16 Um, Bill Zaiton says that the that the
25:20 Russians insist that there must be no
25:23 military bases, NATO military bases in
25:26 the Baltic states. And they also insist
25:30 that Finland must leave NATO and become
25:36 a neutral state again. And in return for
25:40 all of this, apparently the Russians are
25:44 prepared to withdraw their ballistic
25:47 missiles and nuclear weapons from
25:50 Belleris.
25:52 Now to someone like me, these actually
25:57 do not seem unreasonable proposals.
26:00 I would say that if something along
26:02 these lines were actually agreed,
26:06 it would actually
26:09 stabilize the situation in Europe and
26:13 secure peace. If something like this
26:17 were agreed, we would be well on the way
26:20 to seeing an end of the conflict in
26:26 Ukraine. though of course Zilinski will
26:30 vehemently
26:33 oppose
26:34 all of these proposals
26:37 and well if I was the United States I
26:41 would actually be quite keen on these
26:44 proposals. It creates a potentially
26:49 stable and peaceful situation in Europe.
26:54 It means that
26:56 after an agreement on these lines
26:59 was drawn up and agreed,
27:04 the United States and Russia would be
27:07 able to work on achieving confidence
27:10 building measures to secure this peace.
27:14 And that would eventually allow the
27:17 Americans to reduce their military
27:19 footprint in Europe so that they could
27:24 then focus
27:27 their increasingly overstretched
27:30 resources on those
27:34 theaters like the Far East and the
27:38 Middle East that they seem to care more
27:40 about.
27:42 So to me, this would look like a good
27:45 proposal and one that actually is for
27:50 the benefit of Europe and of the United
27:54 States also. But of course,
27:58 everyone else in Europe, all the
28:00 European leaders, all the key ones would
28:03 be furious about this. Finland, the
28:07 Finnish foreign minister has already
28:10 angrily denounced this. He says that
28:14 under no circumstances will Finland quit
28:17 NATO. That this is a subject that
28:21 Finland is not even prepared to
28:24 look at or entertain.
28:27 And since there is no mechanism to expel
28:30 a country from NATO without Finland's
28:33 agreement
28:35 to leave NATO, something by the way
28:37 which has never happened, there's never
28:39 been a state that has joined NATO that
28:41 has left it. And there are various
28:43 reasons for that which I will discuss in
28:46 another program. But unless Finland
28:49 itself were to make the decision to
28:51 leave NATO, then obviously this idea of
28:56 neutral status for Finland could not be
28:59 achieved and the Finns are very are
29:05 already rejecting it. But everything
29:07 else, everything else that is here would
29:12 be deeply objectionable to people like
29:16 Matts and the British and the NATO
29:20 officials in Brussels and the EU
29:24 officials in Brussels. Also,
29:28 to me, this looks again like a leak
29:32 intended to address some of the ideas
29:37 that the Russians are likely to present
29:39 in due course and
29:43 to mobilize
29:45 opposition
29:48 in advance.
29:50 So when the Russians make these
29:54 proposals,
29:56 the Europeans
29:58 and the Americans, the entire NATO EU
30:02 blog, in other words, will have rejected
30:06 them. And well, there's been this other
30:09 leak in the New York Times, and I would
30:12 say it's basically the same. It says
30:16 that it says some of the same things.
30:19 They're not exactly the same things as
30:21 the build siton article says. It says
30:25 that
30:27 Ukraine can join the EU. By the way, the
30:31 Build Siton article also says that the
30:35 Russians accept that Ukraine can still
30:37 join the EU. A very controversial point,
30:41 by the way, and one which some Russians
30:45 have already made clear that they
30:47 oppose. But the New York Times piece
30:50 says that the Russians say that Ukraine
30:53 can only join the EU on condition that
30:59 it remains outside any of the security
31:02 agreements that the EU agrees with
31:06 itself
31:08 and which according to the Russians is
31:11 converting the EU
31:14 away from a trading block and more
31:18 towards a military alliance.
31:22 Again, it is inconceivable that the EU
31:26 would agree to this,
31:29 but anyway, the New York Times article
31:33 says this. And well, as I said, it says
31:37 some of the other things that the Build
31:39 Sighting article says as well. Again, in
31:44 my opinion, this is a strategically
31:46 placed leak in order to build opposition
31:51 specifically in Congress and within the
31:54 permanent government of the United
31:57 States, the deep state, if you will,
32:01 against any proposals for a security
32:06 architecture, a renewed different
32:08 security architecture of Europe that the
32:12 Russians might be thinking about. I
32:16 think it is extremely unlikely
32:19 to the point of being impossible
32:23 that the Russians have yet
32:25 made proposals
32:28 that go to this level of detail.
32:33 No doubt there have been contacts with
32:35 between the Americans and the Russians
32:38 throughout the summer and the autumn,
32:42 but those contacts have been
32:44 contentious.
32:46 Witgolf and Kushner have been talking
32:49 quite a lot over the last few weeks to
32:52 Kiriel Dimitrif, the head of Russia's
32:55 direct investment fund. But Dimmitrif to
33:01 reiterate is not formally speaking a
33:04 member of the Russian government. He is
33:07 not a member of the Russian foreign
33:11 ministry. I think it is inconceivable
33:15 that the Russians would
33:19 float
33:21 proposals
33:22 of this kind of this very sensitive
33:26 nature addressing security is issues and
33:32 making proposals like for example
33:36 proposals for the Russians to withdraw
33:39 their nuclear weapons and ballistic
33:41 missiles.
33:42 from Bellerus or to agree to Ukraine
33:46 joining the EU on condition that
33:51 it is not part of the EU's security
33:55 systems. I think it is inconceivable
33:59 that the Russian foreign ministry and
34:01 the Russian military and the security
34:04 agencies or the other officials
34:07 on the Russian security council would
34:10 agree or would accept
34:15 a intermediary
34:17 like Dimitrif
34:20 as the person to communicate ideas about
34:27 such extremely sensitive topics to the
34:31 Americans.
34:33 And well, as far as I'm aware, the first
34:36 serious suggestion that the talks move
34:40 towards a discussion of the security
34:42 architecture of Europe began in October
34:47 during Putin's and Witgov's meeting in
34:51 the Constantinowski palace. In other
34:54 words, they were the whole process was
34:58 just started off less than a month ago.
35:02 And it is beyond belief, at least to me,
35:06 that the Russians would have formulated
35:08 their proposals to this level of detail
35:15 by this time.
35:17 Moreover, there is no
35:21 information
35:22 that the Russians presented
35:25 proposals like this at the talks in Abu
35:30 Dhabi
35:31 which seem to have basically focused on
35:35 other things. Firstly, the the idea of
35:39 agreeing a prisoner a war exchange.
35:42 Secondly, what the Russians and others
35:44 refer to as technical issues.
35:48 Um, thirdly, probably
35:51 topics like agreeing the agendas for
35:54 future talks,
35:56 that kind of thing. I suspect that if
35:59 the Russians had made proposals of this
36:03 kind at the talks in Abu Dhabi,
36:08 then we would have known about it. and
36:12 we would know about it in a much more
36:15 formal and convincing way than these two
36:22 leaks in bid built ziton and the New
36:26 York Times suggest.
36:29 So some of these ideas
36:32 might indeed
36:34 reflect
36:35 proposals that the Russians might make
36:39 in future.
36:41 But they are not proposals that the
36:45 Russians have made so far.
36:49 Now having said this, we do actually
36:54 have
36:56 some actual information
36:59 about what the Russians did discuss, the
37:03 proposals that the Russians did make,
37:07 specifically at the meeting between
37:11 Witgo and Kushner and Putin in the
37:16 Kremlin on Thursday
37:19 and here again it's worthwhile going
37:22 back to Ushikov's
37:28 comments
37:30 which I discussed fully in my program
37:35 yesterday
37:36 and these are the relevant words again
37:42 Ushakov's briefing
37:45 the president that's to say Putin
37:48 recalled our vision of the key pillars
37:51 of the architecture and indivisible
37:54 security which we presented back in 2021
37:58 in the form of draft agreements with the
38:01 United States and NATO on security
38:04 guarantees.
38:05 These included the non-expansion of the
38:08 NATO block, the non-deployment of
38:10 threatening weapon systems near Russia's
38:13 borders, and a return to the
38:17 configuration of the alliance's forces
38:20 as it stood at the time the Russia NATO
38:24 founding act was signed, which is to say
38:27 in 1997,
38:30 in December 1997.
38:32 to this list which is not limited to the
38:36 points I have outlined. We would like to
38:39 add certain new considerations of our
38:41 own based on the lessons that we cannot
38:44 simply cannot fail to draw from the
38:47 present situation in which the
38:50 collective west has taken up arms
38:52 against us, making no secret of its
38:55 desire to secure to save the Kiev regime
38:59 and to inflict a strategic defeat on
39:03 Russia.
39:04 So
39:06 these were the ideas, the actual ideas
39:12 that Putin presented to Wit Golf and
39:15 Kushner
39:17 in Moscow.
39:20 We don't have to go to leaks,
39:25 unreliable leaks in newspapers like the
39:30 New York Times and Bill Zaiton. And of
39:35 course the key the key word is this um
39:41 a return to the configuration of the
39:44 allianc's forces as it stood at the time
39:49 of the Russia NATO founding act in
39:53 December 1997.
39:56 Now that means basically a pull back to
39:59 the German border. A number of people
40:02 have made the point that the Russians
40:05 at the time when they presented these
40:07 two draft treaties in
40:11 um in um December 2021
40:16 were
40:18 not seeking the exclusion the withdrawal
40:23 of NATO forces that had already been
40:26 deployed
40:28 in Eastern Europe.
40:30 before the signing of the NATO founding,
40:35 the Russian NATO founding act in
40:42 But the number of those forces as I
40:45 remember was extremely small. I mean
40:48 they were basically token forces and
40:52 they did not change the overall military
40:55 configuration in any way. The Russians,
40:59 as I discussed in my program yesterday,
41:03 are saying
41:06 that the military side of NATO, its
41:10 armed forces must be pulled back in
41:14 their entirety to the German border.
41:18 That is the Russian position.
41:21 The Russians are saying that they are
41:24 going to demand further things, but it
41:29 looks from Ushakov's words that they
41:33 have not yet said what they are, though
41:38 they clearly do have ideas of their own.
41:42 And here I'm going to say something
41:43 else, which is about the way in which
41:45 the Russians conduct negotiations.
41:48 I think it's unlikely to say the least
41:51 that Putin would preempt future
41:55 negotiations
41:56 in Abu Dhabi or anywhere else
42:00 by making proposals, detailed proposals
42:04 to Kushner and Witkov at the Kremlin
42:07 meeting. The Russian practice is that
42:12 the proposals are made through the
42:14 negotiating teams and Russia now has a
42:18 very strong one. the negotiating teams
42:22 at the actual talks, the venue of the
42:27 actual talks which are taking place and
42:31 that the leaders actually become
42:34 involved
42:35 and start making proposals
42:39 at the very end of the process when all
42:43 the key issues have been settled and
42:47 agreed and a Few details which only the
42:52 leaders are able to resolve are left and
42:57 that's the point when the leaders meet
42:59 and agree to resolve them come up with
43:02 formulas to resolve them. So
43:06 one should not see
43:09 the meeting in Moscow on Thursday as a
43:15 negotiating session. Apparently, it
43:19 lasted for two hours,
43:22 which is about the time that you would
43:25 expect if it was, as I said, a case of
43:30 the Russians steamrolling over Kushner
43:33 and Witkoff and telling them that this
43:36 is what we're going to discuss from now
43:38 on. We're going to discuss the security
43:40 architecture of Europe. We're going to
43:43 use the draft treaties of 2021 as the
43:46 basis of what we are going to talk
43:49 about. We have some additional ideas
43:52 which we're going to present to you in
43:55 the future. And if you are not prepared
43:58 to agree to that, well, the war itself
44:00 will continue. We've already made it
44:03 clear that we reject totally the
44:06 presence of European forces in Ukraine.
44:10 And
44:12 well, if you don't agree, if you won't
44:15 agree to negotiations,
44:17 serious negotiations on these terms, and
44:20 if you don't agree to an agreement on
44:22 these terms, then of course the war will
44:26 go on, and we will roll over
44:30 whatever
44:32 territories in Ukraine
44:36 we judge, we need to roll over. and
44:40 bring under our control in order to
44:43 secure our position
44:46 the ultimatum. In other words, the
44:48 implicit ultimatum
44:50 that I discussed in my program
44:53 yesterday.
44:54 So anyway, there we go. There we go. The
44:58 there are already, as I said, this is
45:00 what the two leaks are telling me. There
45:03 are already forces at work
45:08 seeking to undermine this entire process
45:13 to bring it in effect to a stop as soon
45:17 as possible. The Europeans have very
45:20 unhappy at being maneuvered into a
45:24 discussion on these precise questions.
45:29 The Europeans have been unable to agree
45:32 to a chief negotiator.
45:34 They have no proposals
45:36 now anymore than they did previously. So
45:40 the big question is whether there are
45:44 going to be any future talks at all.
45:50 I have already said that it has long
45:54 been my belief that Zilinski, who has
45:57 never been comfortable about
45:59 negotiations with the Russians, his
46:03 priority is to keep the war going and to
46:06 keep the money flowing to Ukraine.
46:10 He, I have always suspected, will at
46:15 some point make the decision to pull the
46:19 Ukrainian negotiators
46:23 out of the talks, bringing the talks to
46:27 a stop.
46:31 after what happened in Abu Dhabi on
46:37 Tuesday and Wednesday and what happened
46:40 in the Kremlin on Thursday,
46:44 his imperative need to do that
46:49 and basically to wreck the talks has
46:53 only increased.
46:55 And of course
46:58 he now has the definite
47:02 support of the Europeans in doing it.
47:08 all of the steps that the Europeans have
47:11 taken over the last 24 hours, their
47:16 failure to appoint a chief negotiator,
47:19 their well essential rejection
47:24 of the renegotiation of the security
47:27 architecture of Europe, the exclusion of
47:31 Spain, the one country that might be
47:35 prepared to look into these questions,
47:38 the one big EU country that might in
47:41 theory be prepared to look into these
47:43 questions from the entire negotiation.
47:47 All that tells us that if Zalinski
47:52 does decide to pull the negotiating team
47:57 out of the talks,
48:00 then the Europeans are going to be both
48:04 relieved and will publicly back him.
48:09 And we've had a further sign of this
48:13 today because Zalinski, who as I said I
48:17 now believe is in Kiev, has made a whole
48:20 number of further statements. He says
48:23 he's not prepared to withdraw from
48:24 Donbass. He's not prepared to seed a
48:27 millimeter of Ukrainian territory to the
48:30 Russians. He continues to insist that
48:33 Ukraine must join NATO and the U. EU and
48:38 that the Russians must not be allowed
48:40 any say or veto over the matter.
48:45 And he's now come forward and said
48:50 something further.
48:52 He said that over the course of the
48:56 discussions,
48:58 the Americans put forward a proposal
49:03 that in return for Ukraine
49:06 seeding
49:08 the rest of Donbass to the Russians,
49:12 withdrawing from the rest of Donbass to
49:14 the Russians,
49:16 Ukraine should be able to enter NATO.
49:23 And without of course accepting this
49:26 so-called proposal,
49:28 Zalinski says that he is now going to
49:32 explore with the Americans whether this
49:37 idea is real, whether it actually
49:41 exists.
49:42 And he's going to contact the Americans
49:46 about it.
49:48 And well, you can see what is going on.
49:51 Firstly, this proposal does appear to
49:53 have been made. In fact, it was made as
49:56 I understand it in Oslo in October.
50:02 And from what I have understood, it was
50:04 a European proposal which the Europeans
50:09 actually floated
50:11 and pushed upon Zalinski
50:16 and had previously discussed with the
50:21 And well, those of you who may remember
50:24 will recall that Zalinski came to Oslo.
50:28 All of the European officials were
50:30 there. The European Commission was
50:31 there. The NATO secretariat was there.
50:34 Um, officials from all of these
50:37 countries were there. The national
50:38 security advisers of Britain, France,
50:41 Germany, and Italy were also there.
50:43 They're all gathered in Oslo.
50:46 And when Zalinski
50:50 eventually met with Goff,
50:53 um the Norwegian Prime Minister Stirer
50:57 and the Finnish President Stub were also
51:01 there and the word came out that over
51:06 the course of this meeting the Russians
51:09 were going to be presented
51:13 with two options.
51:16 Either
51:18 the Russians
51:20 ex took Dombbass
51:24 were accepted Dombbass,
51:28 the rest of Donbass,
51:31 but also agreed that Ukraine
51:36 should join NATO
51:39 or the Russians
51:42 should agree that Ukraine would not join
51:48 NATO, but the contested territory in
51:52 Donbass,
51:54 which as I and now Putin have pointed
51:57 out, um varies on whose map one is
52:04 reading. Just saying. Anyway,
52:08 um either Ukraine,
52:12 as I said, enters NATO and Russia takes
52:16 all of Don Donbass or there is a buffer
52:21 zone
52:23 in the area of Donbass
52:27 that is supposedly contested
52:30 with a ceasefire along the conflict line
52:34 above a zone which would be a
52:38 demilitarized zone. Though it is
52:41 important to say that Ukrainian
52:43 sovereignty would remain over this
52:46 territory in Dombbass and Ukraine would
52:49 continue to administer this territory.
52:54 And in return, if the Russians were to
52:57 accept that, then
53:00 for the time being anyway, Ukraine would
53:04 remain outside NATO, though it would be
53:08 given security guarantees.
53:11 So that was the eitheror proposal
53:15 that the Europeans
53:18 and the Americans
53:21 put to Zalinski in Oslo
53:24 and which
53:26 Widg
53:28 basically took with him to the
53:30 Constantinowski Palace in St.
53:33 Petersburg.
53:34 And what we now see is that the
53:38 Europeans
53:39 who do not want to talk about the
53:41 security architecture of Europe are
53:44 trying to revive it. They are telling
53:51 and of course the Americans, let's
53:53 forget about the security architecture
53:56 for Europe idea. Let's go back to what
54:01 we were all talking about with each
54:03 other in Oslo.
54:06 Let's again propose to the Russians the
54:11 Oslo formula. Either you take DMBAS and
54:16 Ukraine
54:18 joins NATO or Ukraine stays out of NATO
54:25 and you accept a buffer zone and a
54:29 ceasefire on the existing conflict lines
54:32 in Donbass.
54:34 The Russians of course have completely
54:38 rejected this proposal.
54:41 Putin made that crystal clear to Witgov
54:45 in the talks in the Constantinowski
54:48 palace in October when these proposals
54:52 were made to him.
54:55 The Russians instead insisted that the
55:01 must be based on revisiting the topic of
55:05 the security architecture of Europe. The
55:09 Americans agreed and the Russians have
55:14 repeatedly said that the status of
55:19 Donbass
55:21 and of all other territory that
55:24 according to the Russian constitution is
55:27 Russian including Zaporosia and Hassong
55:31 is as far as Russia is concerned
55:34 nonnegotiable.
55:36 All of it, every single part of it,
55:41 every millimeter of territory must be
55:44 handed over to Russia.
55:48 But well, the Russians might have
55:52 rejected this proposal, but by refating
55:57 it again,
55:59 re
56:01 putting these identical
56:04 either or options to the Russians.
56:08 Again, options which the Russians, as I
56:11 said, have already rejected.
56:14 What then happens is that the Europeans,
56:20 the Ukrainians
56:22 can then say that the Russians are
56:25 digging in. They're taking a hard line
56:29 and therefore there is no point in
56:31 continuing with the talks and Zilinski
56:35 can then order the Ukrainian delegation
56:39 to walk out.
56:42 And this entire discussion of the
56:45 security architecture in Europe which is
56:50 so unwelcome
56:52 is finally and fully brought to a stop.
56:57 The Americans obviously have to be
56:59 brought on side and persuaded
57:04 to represent these options to the
57:06 Russians and to move away from the
57:11 discussion of the security architecture
57:13 of Europe which they agreed to discuss
57:17 with the Russians.
57:19 But frankly, I think the Americans are
57:23 as are as unhappy
57:27 about moving the whole discussion onto
57:31 this topic
57:33 as the Europeans and the Ukrainians are.
57:37 And I expect them to agree.
57:41 So more likely than not, we are going to
57:46 see this entire negotiating process
57:49 collapse at some point over the next few
57:54 weeks. The Europeans don't want to have
57:57 any true part in it. They simply want it
58:01 to end. Zalinski
58:04 clearly wants no part in it.
58:08 The Americans
58:10 are very unhappy about it. The Russians
58:14 sensing the advant their advantage are
58:17 now attempting to push it forward.
58:20 But that's a reason why all of the
58:22 others probably want to bring this
58:25 process as quickly as possible to a
58:28 stop. I am going to here express my own
58:33 view that Zalinski was
58:37 encouraged
58:39 by someone from Europe to reflat this
58:43 proposal.
58:45 Ukraine gives Donbass
58:47 to the to Russia and in return joins
58:52 NATO
58:54 precisely in order to prepare
58:58 prepare the situation
59:01 for the walk out and the collapse of the
59:06 which is going to come. Now all of this
59:10 of course
59:13 explains the various maneuvers
59:17 that the Europeans are making and the
59:21 Ukrainians are making.
59:25 But it doesn't resolve their underlying
59:31 problem. And this takes us back to the
59:36 question of why the negotiations,
59:40 the attempts to talk to the Russians
59:44 were restarted in September in the first
59:49 place. And here I'm going to recap on a
59:53 few points that I've made in previous
59:55 programs.
59:57 Clearly and about this I have little
59:59 doubt. There has been a major effort by
60:04 the Europeans, the Ukrainians and the
60:07 Americans, the CIA specifically to
60:11 develop a major offensive against the
60:16 Russians which was supposed to be
60:18 launched this summer. A massive
60:21 offensive with drones and missiles.
60:25 It was first floated, as I seem to
60:28 remember, by Victoria Nuland in the late
60:31 winter
60:33 uh in in in um late winter of 2023 2024
60:40 after the failure the defeat of
60:43 Ukraine's 2023 offensive and after
60:48 especially after the Russian capture of
60:51 ADFA.
60:53 The idea was to build a drone wall to
60:57 stop the Russian advance
60:59 and then to conduct a
61:04 program
61:05 of long range strikes against Russia
61:11 which would destabilize
61:15 the internal situation in Russia. It
61:19 would create a crisis within the Russian
61:22 economy.
61:23 It would put President Putin under
61:26 intense political pressure
61:30 and it would force the Russians
61:33 basically to capitulate and to accept
61:36 Western demands. And a massive amount of
61:39 work was done between late 2023
61:43 and the start of this year to get this
61:47 drone offensive up and running. And the
61:51 drone offensive
61:53 was launched properly in June of this
61:57 year. There were massive attacks on
62:00 Russian refineries, attacks on
62:04 warehouses
62:06 of Russian ecommerce companies like Wild
62:12 Berries and Ozone. Notice, by the way,
62:15 that Ukraine has basically given up on
62:19 those. Um, Wildberries and Ozone, the
62:24 two big e-commerce companies, quickly
62:28 adjusted to the attacks on their
62:30 warehouses. And I understand that they
62:34 are now again operating normally inside
62:39 Russia. But anyway, there were those
62:40 attacks. There were the attacks on the
62:43 refineries.
62:45 There were other attacks on
62:49 well occasionally rocket factories
62:53 and um military sites as well.
62:58 The CIA
63:01 expanded
63:02 its intelligence envelope with
63:04 permission from Donald Trump to provide
63:07 the Ukrainians with more targeting data.
63:10 Um, the Ukrainians appear to have been
63:13 using Starlink or SH Star Shield or
63:17 whatever it was in some way, no doubt
63:20 with the assistance of the CIA to try to
63:26 affect these strikes. there was a major
63:30 operation against the Novorosia highway
63:35 um linking
63:37 Russia with Crimea.
63:40 Um that happened as I remember in the
63:43 spring. All of that took place.
63:47 I've pointed out in many programs the
63:50 enormous investment in funds that this
63:54 offensive required.
63:56 Ukraine in fact had to use
64:00 most of the funding allocated from the
64:03 EU's 90 billion euro loan for 2026
64:09 just for this particular drone offensive
64:15 and the result was a failure
64:17 despite the attacks on the refineries
64:20 despite the effect on the Russian grain
64:22 ships in the Sea of Azor despite the
64:26 attacks on wild berries and the
64:27 warehouses. Despite the attacks on the
64:31 other major well military installations
64:35 and things of that kind, the Russian
64:38 economy remained stable. Russian public
64:43 opinion
64:46 strengthened behind Putin. The patterns
64:51 of normal life in Russia were
64:54 inconvenienced to a certain degree, but
64:58 in no sense disrupted.
65:02 Putin's political position remained as
65:06 strong as ever.
65:09 And in the September parliamentary
65:12 elections,
65:13 Putin
65:15 Putin's party increased its majority.
65:20 So the
65:23 massive investment in the drone
65:26 offensive
65:28 proved unsuccessful.
65:31 Whereas, by contrast, the Russians used
65:35 the drone offensive that had been
65:37 launched against them as a pretext to
65:41 launch their own immeasurably more
65:45 powerful missile and drone
65:48 and bombing offensive
65:51 on Ukraine.
65:53 And the result is that Ukraine's Black
65:55 Sea ports are now blockaded. Its
65:59 railways are coming under systematic
66:01 attack. Its energy system is coming
66:05 under systematic attack and is
66:08 collapsing. Its economy is in freefall
66:13 and recently the Russians have begun
66:16 attacks on the deeper bridges and I
66:20 understand that both the north and the
66:22 south bridge in Kiev remain mostly out
66:27 of action. There was an article in the
66:30 Daily Telegraph about this yesterday
66:34 which seemed to say that most of the
66:39 traffic on these bridges is now
66:41 pedestrian.
66:44 And people anyway hurry over these
66:48 bridges in great nervousness, always
66:51 worried that a Russian attack might come
66:56 whilst they are actually on the bridge
66:59 itself.
67:00 I had heard that a roadway on the north
67:04 bridge had been put brought back into
67:08 operation, a single roadway.
67:11 But, and I believe, by the way, that
67:14 this is the case, but all of the reports
67:17 speak of heavy traffic jams and major
67:21 problems in movement across the river in
67:25 Kiev. And I've also heard reports that
67:30 the main bridge in Zaporosia, the city
67:34 of Zaporo, is also out of action. And
67:38 apparently last night the Russians again
67:40 attacked the north bridge, the one that
67:43 goes above the Zaporosia hydroelect
67:47 electric dam. And again, damage was done
67:51 to parts of this bridge. And again, the
67:55 reports say that traffic across this
67:59 bridge was closed. And of course, even
68:02 as that was going on, the Russians
68:04 continued their military advances on the
68:07 ground. Now, the West, the Ukrainians
68:12 say that the Russians do not control the
68:15 city of Constantinoka.
68:18 I have no doubt whatsoever that they do.
68:21 The Institute for the Study of War might
68:24 push back against this, but on this, as
68:29 on many other things, the Institute for
68:32 the Study of War is wrong.
68:36 And of course, Putin has now come out
68:39 and he said, "Well,
68:43 if you want to prove to me and to the
68:47 world that Ukraine does indeed control
68:51 Constantin,
68:53 well, let's have a ceasefire there. Just
68:57 like the one we had in Alles Alleski,
69:00 there are still civilians in
69:02 Constantinoka who need evacuation.
69:05 We can hold the ceasefire in order to
69:08 evacuate those civilians and then the
69:11 media can come into Constantinfka
69:13 and we can establish conclusively who
69:17 actually controls the town. As I
69:20 anticipated,
69:22 nobody in the west is showing any
69:25 interest in or desire to do this. The
69:30 Ukrainians have already made it fairly
69:32 obvious that they don't want to do this.
69:37 I think that this not only establishes
69:41 beyond reasonable doubt that the
69:44 Russians do control Constantinfka,
69:48 but it also shows that despite all the
69:51 rhetoric, all the claims about the
69:56 Ukrainians still being in Constantine,
70:02 and many of their European allies quite
70:06 quietly know the truth that the town is
70:09 actually securely held and controlled by
70:13 the Russians.
70:15 And anyway, Constantine is a very large
70:22 and important town by Donbass standards.
70:27 It's the second biggest town in Donbass
70:30 that the Russians have captured since
70:32 they captured Marupal in May 2022.
70:37 It opens the way for the general
70:42 encirclement
70:44 of the fortified cities of Slavansk and
70:47 Kamatsk.
70:49 The Russians also claim and I have no
70:52 doubt again that they are telling the
70:54 truth that they have captured the town
70:57 of Doorelia.
70:59 Again, this is disputed.
71:02 But two days ago, the Ukrainians
71:06 suddenly announced that there was a
71:08 massive Russian offensive being carried
71:12 out to storm Doilia.
71:15 that uh large columns of Russian troops
71:19 and tanks and armored vehicles were
71:22 pouring into uh Doilia.
71:25 I believe that this is simply
71:27 preparation for a grudging
71:35 acknowledgment
71:37 perhaps not from the Ukrainian
71:38 authorities themselves but from
71:42 Ukrainian bloggers and people connected
71:46 to Ukraine's defense that doilia also is
71:52 under Russian control.
71:55 So that is what is happening in the war.
72:00 Now the Europeans and the Americans know
72:04 all of this. And uh coming back to my
72:08 rhetorical question of why did they get
72:12 in touch with the Russians in September?
72:16 Why did Ratcliffe the CIA director and
72:19 then Witgo on at least three occasions
72:23 now and Kushner also and uh go to
72:28 Moscow? Why did Trump call Putin twice?
72:33 Why did Stub Stura the pres president of
72:39 Finland and the prime minister of Norway
72:42 call
72:44 Putin? Why have there been talks in Abu
72:48 Dhabi? Why did the Americans and the
72:51 Europeans press so hard for the red for
72:56 the resumption of talks in Abu Dhabi?
72:59 Well, for one very simple reason,
73:02 because they're trying to persuade the
73:05 Russians to stop. Because they know all
73:09 of the things that I've been saying.
73:11 They know how bad the situation in
73:15 Ukraine is. They now face the ultimate
73:19 nightmare that the Russians might
73:22 destroy the Neper bridges.
73:25 There was an article about this in the
73:27 Daily Telegraph yesterday about how the
73:30 Russians are hitting the bridges, how um
73:34 the Russian missiles are achieving
73:39 unheard of levels of accuracy in hitting
73:42 the bridges. How um the Russians might
73:45 be using new electrical electrooptical
73:50 systems to achieve these levels of
73:52 accuracy. All the things of course that
73:55 you've been hearing on this channel for
73:58 several weeks now. Anyway, the Daily
74:00 Telegraph was writing about them
74:03 yesterday. It also made the point which
74:06 I've also made that the actual physical
74:10 total destruction of the bridges might
74:12 be a difficult undertaking.
74:16 The article in the Telegraph denies that
74:20 this can actually happen, but it admits
74:25 that the Russians don't necessarily need
74:27 to do this if they can create disruption
74:32 and disrupt supplies to the Ukrainian
74:35 armies in the east. The West knows about
74:38 all of these things. I'm going to say
74:42 what I also believe. I think that there
74:45 are people in Washington and people in
74:48 London who know perfectly well who
74:53 actually controls Constantinoka
74:56 and who actually controls Doorelia
75:00 and where the Russians really are. And
75:04 they also probably know that Operation
75:09 Vivaldi, Bletki's great counterattack
75:13 north of Slavansk
75:16 in the Leman area that that offensive
75:21 has failed. By the way, I saw that the
75:25 Russian military analyst Serge Polyayv
75:29 is now saying the same thing. Well, he's
75:32 simply repeating my opinion and my
75:34 opinion is what I have just said. So
75:38 anyway,
75:40 we have all of this problem because the
75:45 Russians over the course of September
75:47 and October and early November continued
75:51 their relentless air offensive against
75:54 Ukraine. There are rumors of another
75:59 massive Russian missile strike against
76:03 Ukraine being prepared. The stories say
76:07 that the Ukrainians have been tipped off
76:10 by US intelligence that this attack will
76:13 come at some point in the next 48 hours.
76:17 For example, as we will see in a moment,
76:20 there's been some important developments
76:23 in the Zaporosia battlefields.
76:27 Well, all of this is happening and
76:31 despite all of these efforts over the
76:34 last few weeks going back all the way to
76:38 the start of September, it has not been
76:41 pro possible to persuade the Russians to
76:45 stop.
76:46 So if you're going to pull out of the
76:49 negotiations,
76:51 you perhaps solve one problem. You're no
76:56 longer discussing the security
76:58 architecture of Europe, which you
77:00 absolutely do not want to talk about.
77:04 But you have not solved your immediate
77:09 and most pressing one that you are
77:14 losing and losing heavily now in
77:18 Ukraine.
77:20 What are you going to do about that?
77:25 Well, Zalinski of course has his
77:27 answers. He said that the Freya missile
77:30 system, the anti-air defense system is
77:34 soon going to be in operation. I I'd
77:37 actually heard reports that it was
77:39 unlikely to be fit for use until the
77:43 summer of 2027.
77:46 And I frankly am deeply skeptical that a
77:50 missile system, an air defense system
77:53 designed at such speed
77:56 is going to be remotely effective in
78:00 operations against the ever more
78:03 advanced Russian ballistic missiles.
78:06 Just saying. and he continues to talk
78:09 about other missiles and other wonder
78:11 weapons that will save Ukraine in this
78:16 increasingly critical situation.
78:19 I don't know who believes that Ukraine
78:23 is about to receive in 2027 a few
78:26 Grippen fighter jets from Sweden.
78:30 There's been a lot of talk about how
78:32 effective the Grippin is, what a
78:34 wonderful fighter jet it is. I think it
78:38 is extremely unlikely that he can take
78:41 on the far more powerful Russian air
78:43 force in Ukraine. The Grippins are not
78:48 stealthy.
78:50 They may be advanced fighter jets in
78:54 some regards, but I don't think they're
78:57 a match for the Russian air force over
79:00 the skies of Ukraine. Just saying.
79:04 Anyway, um there is no solution to
79:10 Ukraine's military problems
79:13 except negotiations.
79:16 But the Russians are now saying that
79:19 these negotiations mustn't just be about
79:22 Ukraine. They must be about the security
79:25 architecture of Europe.
79:31 not prepared to compromise on this.
79:36 After all, it was the Americans
79:39 supposedly who reopened the discussion
79:43 on this topic.
79:46 So, what do the Europeans what do the
79:50 Americans do? Well, I don't know that
79:53 there is an answer to this.
79:58 problem.
80:00 But my guess is that if it comes down to
80:04 it, if it means
80:09 sitting back
80:11 and letting Ukraine
80:14 go under
80:16 rather than discuss the security
80:19 architecture for Europe, that is what
80:22 the Europeans and the Americans are
80:25 going to do.
80:26 Anyway, there's a number of things I do
80:30 want to discuss briefly in the last few
80:33 minutes of this program. Now, I
80:36 mentioned yesterday that Zalinski is
80:39 again bringing up the topic of the
80:42 alleged throttling back of Starlink and
80:45 Star Shield. I am absolutely unsure
80:50 whether Ukraine has actually been
80:52 granted any access to Star Shield at
80:55 all. This is the military system that
80:58 functions alongside the civilian
81:00 Starling system. There is clearly an
81:05 attempt by some people to create
81:08 confusion around this issue. Elon Musk
81:11 seems to imply that Ukraine only uses
81:15 Starlink. Others are saying that Ukraine
81:18 uses both Star Shield and Starink.
81:24 I have pointed out that Zalinski
81:27 always likes to claim that the Americans
81:31 are putting pressure on him to make
81:34 concessions as a way of getting European
81:37 support and eur support from his friends
81:41 in Congress.
81:42 And there may be some element of truth
81:44 to this. But I noticed with interest
81:47 that the Ukrainians are now saying that
81:51 100% of their operations failed because
81:55 of problems with Starlink or Star
81:58 Shield.
81:59 And well, this could be and probably is
82:02 in part intended to prepare for the
82:06 admission that Constantinovka
82:11 um Dorelia
82:13 are indeed under Russian control and
82:16 that the Russians probably are going to
82:19 capture
82:20 Leman
82:23 fairly soon.
82:25 But I wonder whether if there are
82:29 actually problems with Starink.
82:34 Those problems might actually arise
82:39 because of increasing Russian success in
82:43 jamming Starlink. I mentioned in a
82:46 recent program that the Russians are
82:49 increasingly are now serially producing
82:52 um
82:54 units
82:56 uh equipment that they say can jam
83:01 Starlink over a distance of 25
83:05 kilometers
83:07 and that they are placing more and more
83:12 Starlink jammers
83:14 along their state border.
83:17 I wonder whether the Russians aren't
83:22 now increasingly successful
83:25 in their jamming of Starink or Star
83:29 Shield and whether that might be the
83:33 true reason for whatever problems with
83:37 Starlink or Star Shield that the
83:40 Ukrainians might be having. Some have
83:43 noticed a significant decline in the
83:47 number of drones that the Ukrainians
83:50 launch against Russia over the last two
83:55 or three weeks.
83:57 Apparently, last night it was the lowest
84:00 the smallest number of these drones that
84:03 the Ukrainians have launched against
84:05 Russia since the start of this year.
84:09 There may be many reasons for this, but
84:12 could it be that one of the reasons why
84:16 we're seeing fewer and fewer drones used
84:19 is because of effective Russian jamming?
84:24 And might it also be the case that the
84:27 reason that the Ukrainians are becoming
84:30 more aggressive in their launch attacks
84:33 in using the territory of the Baltic
84:36 states, something which no one any
84:39 longer seriously disputes. And why they
84:43 might be focusing more on St. Petersburg
84:46 than on other Russian cities is
84:50 precisely
84:51 because this is the area it is you
84:55 through using NATO territory that
84:58 they're able to approach a Russian
85:01 target with their drones
85:05 most closely
85:07 without having to face problems from the
85:11 Russian jammers.
85:13 Anyway, that's my speculation.
85:17 I don't know. The other thing, however,
85:21 which we can say now with some
85:23 confidence,
85:25 is that garand drones are indeed
85:28 becoming equipped with Rasvet terminals
85:33 and are therefore definitely receiving
85:37 signals from Rasvet. Apparently, the
85:40 Ukrainians have produced wreckage of a
85:43 Geran drone, allegedly
85:46 a uh propeller powered Geran 2, which
85:51 slightly surprises me, but this
85:54 definitely shows that this drone was
85:58 operating with a
86:02 terminal, a a an antenna terminal
86:07 capable of receiving receiving signals
86:10 from the Rasvet system. I believe I was
86:15 the first commentator to speculate in
86:18 the late summer that the Russian and
86:21 aset system was already functioning over
86:27 And we can see that it is. And there is
86:31 now further reason to believe that the
86:35 Russians have been successful
86:40 in launching more Rasvet satellites and
86:45 that the Rasvet array is shortly going
86:48 to grow to some 45 satellites as opposed
86:53 to the current 30, increasing coverage
86:57 of Ukraine even further.
87:00 Lastly,
87:01 the Russians this morning announced the
87:06 capture of another important village in
87:12 um Ukraine in Zaporoia region. This is
87:16 the village of Teriana.
87:19 Terisanka is has been captured by group
87:23 of forces east and it is located to the
87:28 north of the villages of Vasilova
87:32 and Vosena
87:35 that the Russians captured in the area
87:38 of the Velnaya Tersa River and on the
87:42 TO48
87:44 road north of Orov.
87:47 And we can see that the Russians are now
87:50 mopping up all of the villages in this
87:53 area and clearly intend to consolidate
87:57 before they advance westwards on a broad
88:02 front towards the city of Zaporia
88:07 which lies not that far distant to the
88:10 west and in the process also
88:16 closing the lid.
88:17 as I've discussed many times on Oreov,
88:22 the town of Orov, which the Russians
88:25 have already mostly encircled and which
88:29 and of which they undoubtedly, in my
88:31 opinion, occupied part. Anyway, this is
88:36 where I'm going to finish today's
88:37 program. As I said, more detailed
88:39 military updates soon to come. But let
88:43 me remind you in the meantime to um um
88:47 to uh let me remind you in the meantime
88:50 that you can find all our programs on
88:52 our various platforms locals Rumble X
88:55 and Substack. You can support our work
88:58 via Patreon and subscribe Star and by
89:03 going to our shop links under this
89:06 video. Last but not least, if you've
89:08 last liked this video, please remember
89:10 to tick the like button and to check
89:13 your subscription to this channel.
89:15 That's me for today. More from me soon.
89:18 Have a very good day.
Judged by claude-sonnet-5.5-eu on 2026-11-14 21:18 UTC. A flag means “worth a look”; a person decides.