Transcription
person make us. >> Exactly. You got you got to leave soon before before you become one of the become before you join the front line. >> You go on the front lines and then and then when the conscription starts and they close the airspace, I be like, "Lenn, I told you so. Glenn, I told you so." That's what I'd be saying. >> I don't know. I was in the army in the 90s, so I might be too old now. So, >> you were in the army in 90s? >> Yeah. 90. 99. Yeah. interesting for one year. Yeah. >> Yeah. I was going to I was planning on doing a military career, but then I was there in March of 99 to down to June of 99 when they bombed Yugoslavia and then I lost my interest. So, I don't blame you. I don't blame you.
>> Um, let's talk about the funeral that's happening now in Iran. Um there was a report I don't know if you saw it yesterday according to New York Times the Israelis were the Americans were worried Israel is going to kill Arach and Galibah and they warned Iran through Pakistan and Qatar to warn Iran that Israel may assassinate them sorry during the negotiations in Pakistan during the negotiations that were medi that were mediated by Pakistan at the request of the Americans. Um so that came out uh um yesterday and then in that report as well it said that the Galibbath's plane when returning from the negotiations had to land up north at an airport emergency landing because two fighter jets Israeli fighter jets were spotted in Iraqi airspace I think entering Iranian airspace. So they had to land the plane as an emergency landing and drive to Dhran. Um, so that kind of gives you if true because Netanyahu a few minutes ago, his press office denied the claim just a few minutes ago. If true, that shows you how bold and one could say reckless the Israelis can be. And the reason I mention it now is the um funeral proceedings that are ongoing. Um, Ali Kam's funerals started I think yesterday, goes on for a few days. A lot of world leaders from all around the world, Mediev included, are in Iran right now paying their respects. Um, so I'll jump straight to it for the the big question. Do you think there's a risk that the Israelis could uh decide to assassinate Mushabaka Kame if he does show up or even not him maybe in just other Iranian leaders? Is that something that worries you?
>> I think it would be too too much because there as you said there's too much of an international delegation there. I I I can't remember how many from how many countries there were 70 or 100. Anyways, there's a lot of people. I might got to get those numbers wrong, but there's a lot of foreign delegations there. So, as you said, you have the former Russian president Medve there. You have the Saudis. They sent their own delegation. I mean, yeah, we can't go through the whole list of all the countries, but uh starting to assassinate leaders there. It would be very problematic. I think they're already struggling with their international reputation and yeah, murdering risking this kind of collateral damage would be a pretty bad thing. But of course this news indicates that Israel is becoming more reckless. And if again as I like you added if it's true because if it's true then then obviously this also yeah signals a bit of a split between the fact the Americans would warn about Israeli intent. I mean I I am not sure is if again are they playing good cup bad cup or is this real in which there's a split? I I always think there's a limit to all this political theater because even if this wouldn't be real, even if the whole story is made up, uh these stories, you know, they travel through the media, through the population, and they, you know, well, what is the American population stuck with? Uh well, at this time when there's more anti-Israel sentiments than ever before in the American population, now they're being told, you know, we are definitely not joined at the hip anymore. uh the Israelis are extremely reckless to the point where actually have to warn the Iranians about you know the Israelis. So you know this is very damaging to relations. So you know you have if it's just political theater it would be very counterproductive.
>> It's also if it's true it's it's it's a pretty big signal of weakness if the Americans can't even tell the Israelis not to kill the negotiators they're negotiating with in a war that is catastrophic for the US. That says a lot about that relationship between those two countries. Again, I keep saying if it's true because it's a pretty wild claim even for Israel to be killing the negotiators and for the Americans not being able to >> to stop it. But does it so just on the funeral that's happening as we speak? >> Um do you think he will show up and um do you think they would kill him if he does? Mustaba. >> Well, again, there's a lot of speculation, but I I think he will show up simply because it's um yeah, it's it's necessary. I mean, he's establishing himself as well. He doesn't carry the same authority as his father. He needs um uh so I assume he'll show up, but uh I don't think they will assassinate him. Uh again, I I don't have much to base this on. So, but but this is my what I would where I would put my money. But I could well be wrong, though.
>> Cool. Let's bet how much you said that's where you put your money. You said it right. >> They probably go on the poly markets. That'll say >> I don't know if they put assassinations anymore on poly market. I think it was removed. I I'll check after. Um, we haven't spoken in about a week or so. What's your stance on where the negotiations are today? Um, the there's a a power struggle on the straight home. The Europeans seem to have accepted the fact that Iran will charge a fee. According to a Bloomberg report yesterday, the Americans are still trying to convince Iran not to charge a fee to trade home. They're saying, "Hey, we we'll lift sanctions. We'll unfreeze assets." There was an offer made yesterday, a pretty shitty offer to be to be honest, but the Americans wanted to unfreeze $6 billion in return for Iran not charging a fee at the straight of Hamuz. Iran rejected that offer. Um, but you know, not much has progressed. If anything, there's more tension in the region. Lebanon is on edge with Hezbala, the Lebanese government wanting government wanting to disarm Hezbollah, which I don't know how they're going to how that's feasible after Iran won the war. Um, the mobilizations in Yemen between the two different factions, one supported by Saudi, one supported the Houthi, supported by Iran. Um, the crackdown in Iraq against some members of the government based on corruption, it's always corruption that um close to Iran aligned with Iran. just all these different moves within, you know, a month or two, a couple of months since the MOU was signed. Um, not even a couple a few weeks. Um, it's not looking good. Um, not looking good. And I know I know that's a concern you've always had, but for me it's not looking good on how many fronts it's done to impact.
>> Yeah. Well, last we spoke, we we I think we're more or less in agreement that it's very unlikely this uhou would be implemented in full as it was outlined. Uh so again I think both sides will you know they they would um will try to do something with it. That is for the Iranians I think they will take this as an opportunity to all establish new realities on the ground as you said as long as they stick uh to their guns. uh other countries will realize that this is the new realities and if they want to prosper and be able to use this trait then as you said they will have to begin to make their peace with the idea that a fee has to be paid and I think that's the that that's the position the Iranians will take they won't take at all which would be defined as merely you know charging someone for passing through but a fee because anyone who passed through will require some uh you know possible search and rescue um assistance if required. There's some environmental issues all this you know you can always slap some extra taxes on essentially and and call it a fee and I think that's what they will do. Uh I think so far the the main uh I think at least Europeans many states are making their peace with this. The only problem is I think many of them would like it to be standardized. They don't like the idea that they would pay higher than say China or Russia. That's what the Europeans That's what the Europeans are saying. It's like they've accepted according to Bloomberg, they've accepted there'll be a fee, but they're like, "Hey, please just make it standard. Don't charge us more than the Russian or Chinese."
>> Yeah. But that's, you know, why would they charge the same for the countries that tried to destroy Iran versus the country that helped Iran survive it? You know, it's uh it's hard for the Europeans to sound very serious when they're going to lecture because uh you know, they the way they use sanctions as well is uh Yeah. I mean the way they use economic portion it's it's it's quite extreme. So uh yeah again they can complain but at the end of the day if they want to use the straight they're going to have to pay. It's uh and uh to what extent though the Iranians will lower for lower the fee for some countries or other. It it remains to be seen but again I think there will be a difference in the fees because again uh there's when you look at the economic states the state craft and world economics it's not just about how the state can make more money it's also how you convert economic dependencies into uh political currency that is uh you know for example for over the decades Germany and Japan had good economies but were never able to convert this into political influence uh I think what the Iranians will is not just to make some money but be able to use it somehow. So again, if you go to the Gulf States and suggest that they might pay lower fees if they don't host American bases, you know, then you're converting your economic power that is over a maritime transportation corridor and you convert it into uh political influence and incentive. So I think that's how Iran will use it. I mean, that's at least what countries been doing over the centuries. Um, anyways I I think that's the uh the European approach regarding the deal proposed by Washington unfreeze some assets in return for opening up the straight of her moose. I mean, for me, it's it's absurd. The controlling the straight of her moose is the main uh prize, the spoils of war for the Iranians, and they're going to give it away for unfreezing assets. And and I mean, even if all assets were unfrozen, all sanctions are gone. It's it's still who would trust it? You know, new sanctions will come next week. It's uh why would you believe anything after all of these broken deals? Indeed, theou itself says that the Americans should uh unfreeze the assets and they should pay reparations and remove all sanctions. So now they're going to, you know, they're going to renegotiate this and this is all based on trusting uh in trust in the United States even though they're currently trying to renegotiate what they already signed only a few days ago. So no, I I don't think the Iranians will go for this. Uh again, the straight of moose will be under Iranian control. uh this has as I said economic benefits uh has political benefits but also this is how you know the the war has been sold to the Iranian public at least this is what we get from it this is how Iran will come out on top so for Iran to trade all of this away for some empty promises no I don't think so and uh but this is what I think was predictable would happen it was same as the 10point uh plan of the Iranians which America agreed to with the ceasefire the Americans will sign under it in order to get uh the fighting to stop and then they will gradually try to water it out, renegotiate as they go along and um possibly they will also uh well try to reshape the battlefield that is uh uh perhaps you know instigate a civil war in Lebanon uh which you know they could achieve now which is uh yeah quite an achievement by the Israelis again normative or approved the stamp of approval but just the fact that they're able to outsource this to make the Lebanese fight each other or if Trump gets the the the Syrians into this, you know, uh and also Iraq, if they're able to start to limit or weaken uh the Iranian loyalists within Iraq, then they could also begin to shape the region more in their favor. But I don't think the Americans are >> I'm not touching the table, Glenn. It's making a lot big sound on the mic. Okay. It is you. It >> is me. >> Yeah. It's been It's been doing boop boop boop for a while. I'm waiting for the right >> knocking my phone on the table for no good reason. >> Yeah. Oh, it's very very loud. Yeah. Yeah. >> Sounded like air strikes. I'm like, you are on the front line. Um, so let's um I want to get your thoughts on on the piece of news. H still some sound. This is weird. Yeah, >> that's weird. Not not a big one. Yeah, something like something moving. You have a mouse or a hamster on the table. >> Did you get a parrot? A pet parrot? >> No, not so much. >> That's weird. Yeah, something's touching the mic. I don't know what it is. It's a bit odd. So, you can hear, you know what I mean? You've got guests as well. So, it's like something's touching the tables, touching the mic, it's making a bit of sound. It's not loud now. Not as loud as the phone. The boop boop. Um, all right. So, about the Ukraine war. So, the Telegraph came up with a great story today to get you to give you more incentives to move the hell out, which I know you don't need more incentives, but you got a new one. The US has warned Poland that Russia may be preparing a limited armed provocation on Polish territory within months to test NATO's resolve. According to the Telegraph, quote, according to ONET, possible scenarios include Russian missile or drone strikes on Polish critical infrastructure, cyber or hybrid attacks, or a small crossber incursion from Kenigrad or Bellarus disguised as an accident. Polish and Baltic security sources believe Moscow's goal would be to create a crisis that pressures Western allies to reduce or suspend military support for Ukraine without triggering a full-scale NATO Russia war. One scenario being considered, excuse me, involves Russian or Bellarussian soldiers crossing into Poland and claiming they entered by mistake due to GPS failure or as part of a rescue mission. Polish sources say Moscow could then seek negotiations rather than confrontation, potentially using withdrawal from Polish territory as leverage to demand an end to western aid for Ukraine. Holy What do you think? Could that be true?
>> Well, it's a bit too elaborate. I think it's uh I I think there's a possibility that uh Russia could strike uh European country because uh uh well, they already outlined the yeah where the production facilities are for the weapons that being sent to fight Russia. they made the point that these are legitimate targets and uh so uh so the the Europeans have hasn't taken the warning and they they continue only to escalate both the rhetoric. They're making clear their intentions on intensifying the war against Russia and uh they're building the capabilities to do so. They even set dates now for when the war with Russia would likely start. So, I'm assuming that for the Russians, they're not going to wait for, you know, allow the Europeans to set a date when they're ready to fight the Russians. I think uh if if they think a war is unavoidable now, then uh I think the Russians would at some point decide to throw the first punch. But um but whether or not this is real, I mean, >> nothing nothing touching the table still. You sure? >> No. Uh maybe not. >> But um >> Oh, good. Go ahead. >> Yeah. No, what I was going to say is uh it's hard to tell anything because of the fog of war here. That is for the um for for the the British of course they they want to sell the idea that you know Russia's want to restore the Soviet Union. They want to conquer Western Europe you know march west you know this imperialist narrative which is very key to keep the support for the war going. So they have every reason to sell the story of a of a Russia which is dying to attack Western Europe. Uh on the other hand, the Russians are also now in a position where they really need to restore their deterrence because the Europeans are now preparing to escalate in such a manner which it becomes possible for the Russians to ignore. So they also have to you know essentially yeah throw down the gauntlet and tell the yeah tell the Europeans either you back off or there will be war. So but again this was a very specific mission into into Poland. I I just don't see especially from Khalenrad. Why would the Russians want to make this vulnerable region even more vulnerable? I would assume that there would be some strikes on some uh production facilities uh clearly weapons which are headed to to the front which makes them legitimate targets for Russia. So um I'm uh I'm skeptical but it's not impossible.
>> The reason I I know you're skeptical but it fits into your concern. So you have a concern that there'll be war between Russia and NATO and Russia's already warned of something more drastic of striking certain infrastructure certain targets inside Europe that is used to support Ukraine. So if that is actually being considered then testing the resolve of NATO only makes sense. So this potential plan, the warning by the US, by US intelligence, if true, to be honest, logically speaking, it does make sense for Russia to do this because they'd want to see how NATO responds to see how far they can push.
>> Yeah. No, it is possible. Like I said, it's just uh given >> the question and I'll add a question to it. Sorry, Glenn. And if if they do do it, so I'll let you comment, but also if they do do it, how do you think Poland and NATO would respond? If this if this report is true and does actually happen, one of the various scenarios they mentioned, >> well, then the article 5 will be tested. And I think u for some reason a lot of our politicians and journalists across the West thinks that article 5 makes all countries uh obligated to go to war. But uh I would advise them to actually read article 5 of the NATO charter because what it argues is that each country uh should should consider it as an attack on everyone and they can take the decisions themselves how they want to respond to this. So they can you know write a strongly worded letter or they can join in on a war that you know that's up to them. But this idea that it's an obligatory obligation to go fight the Russians, that's not the case. And even if it was, um, you know, how how certain is it that they would actually live up to this? And, uh, it would be interesting. Well, not interesting, but it would be, I think many countries would not want to go to war with Russia. Some seem very eager, the Baltic states, Germany, the Scandinavians, they seem very gung-ho on war. But there's a lot of countries which would drop off and I'm uh assuming the United States would do the same. I think they would treat the Europeans a bit like the way we treated the Ukrainians. That is, you know, we support you. Good luck. Here's all these weapons. Now go die and weaken Russia a little bit more. But I have a hard time believing that Americans would enter a direct fight with the Russians because at that point it would be near impossible to avoid escalation. I mean, why if if NATO countries get into direct war with Russia, why would Russia accept the idea that the war would be limited to Ukrainian and Russian territory, they would anyone striking Russia would be struck themselves? And I think it would be very easy to escalate up to a nuclear uh strike. So, tactical nuclear weapons at least. So um yeah know so so so this is my con my my concern still and this has been my concern uh since 2014 that is this is the direction we're heading and there's no one seeking any course correction um so no I think uh that's a very strong possibility now which is why the story could be true it's uh just hard to say there's so much propaganda at the moment
>> um funny enough while you're speaking Bloomberg put out a piece is Poland should be this according to Tusk Prime Minister Tusk Poland should be cautious in pledging aid for Ukraine um Poland should be cautious and pledging further financial aid to Ukraine at next next next week's NATO summit in Anchora according to Prime Minister Tusk uh adding to an increasingly skeptical tone in Warsaw towards its eastern neighbor and that's after the disagreement they had where Poland was meant to offer fighter jets to Ukraine for Ukraine offering drone technology for Poland and Ukraine funny enough changed their position. For some reason, they decided not to go not to go ahead with that uh um with that agreement. Um, but also today, Dimmitri MV said the following. Finland has lifted its ban on hosting nuclear weapons. What does that change for the Fins? Just one minor thing. Their country is now at Russia's nuclear target list. Rejoice, Finland. You've reached peak security. Um, also Lithuanian president says, "A few days ago, I initiated a consultation constitutional amendment to remove the current restrictions on the possible deployment of nuclear weapons in Lithuania. This amendment would enable Lithuania to participate actively in NATO's NATO's collective nuclear deterrence. Um, what's going on here in Finland and Lithuania?" Well, well, first of all, the I just want to add on the on the Polish issue that is the the you know the the Ukrainians in the polls are having some problems now because of finally after almost four and a half years the or actually longer since 2014 the polls seems to have suddenly taken offense to the fact that they're celebrating Banda and the UN. So the Ukrainian fascists and well the collaborators of Hitler who massacred a lot of Jews, Russians as well as 100,000 Polish civilians. So uh again they they watched this since 2014. They seen the flags, the pictures, they've seen the streets being renamed after Bandera and and and this group of people. But now suddenly they they have uh yeah taken notice and this has caused uh quite a split between them which uh yeah manifest itself also in the military cooperation. So why this is an issue now? It it could be because it's a critical time for Ukraine. If you think Ukraine is falling or collapsing, that's a good time. either you have to step in and uh yeah put yourself on the front line against Russia or you have to start backing off. It it could be strategic just a way of possibly backing off when things go very wrong. Um and uh well yeah regarding Finland uh you know you can't really overstate what a horrible horrible decision making there's been over the past few years. Uh Finland used to be the main success story of uh or one of the main success stories of neutrality. You know, they fought the Russians or the Soviets, then they were defeated. Now they have the then they got the deal for for for neutrality. And again, they didn't need the tren as long as they didn't threaten the Soviets. They had no problems with them. They didn't threaten the Russians. They never had any problems. So for this reason um yeah neutrality was a source of security. It essentially eliminated the security dilemma. Uh Finland isn't threatening as a front line the the Russians. Russians isn't threatening them back again. And then of course they join NATO and now they changed their laws so they can transport and accommodate nuclear weapons. So yeah. Well, if you're sitting in the Kremlin now, you're going to have a neighboring state uh this close to St. Petersburg hosting possibly American or French nuclear weapons. Of course, they would be among the first one to be hit. So, you know, this is common sense. This is more weapons does not always give you more security. But again, there's not much common sense in Europe anymore. It's uh there, you know, we always try to balance uh deterrence with reassurance, but there is no reassurance anymore. It's considered to be pro-Russian. So you can't even argue that perhaps we should offer some reassurance. It's it's politically yeah impossible at this time in Europe. So the only thing they know how to do is to increase what they consider to be deterrence and uh and then assume that the Russians will buy into the idea that they're only having defensive intentions. But um yeah, so I think uh things will spiral out of control at some point and even after the war against uh with Ukraine is over uh Finland's going to find itself in a very dangerous position because now it's been it's become the largest front line against Russia that is on the border and uh well doesn't mean there has to be war but the Russians are already building rebuilding the the Leningrad military district there and uh so there's going to be a lot of artillery pointing into all military assets and probably cities as well in Finland. So this is you know usually peace you would look for demilitarization you know removing military assets from each other's borders. This has set them back decades and will cause trouble you know decades coming.
>> Um, last question, Glenn, is maybe a good overview of your thoughts on the latest developments in that in that front in that war. You've got Ukraine striking deeper into Russia, changing their strategy to focus more on the refineries. Russia's importing uh refined oil, excuse me, refined products and ex it's in a very interesting position. It's a position it's never been before where it exports crude and imports refined products. So, um, do you think that strategy would work? And what do you make of Russia's progress on the front line? Still very slow, but progress nonetheless. Maybe a good overview would be would be good.
>> Well, about the oil, I I don't know. I haven't made up my mind yet. I'm still thinking about that one. But on the front lines, uh I think there's a lot of um yeah, a lot of critical development at the moment. That is the Ukrainians are going from bad to worse. And I think uh yeah across the west many people would be you know would dismiss that as well obviously that's not true because all our media all our politicians are now saying that the tide has turned the Ukrainians are winning yet for some reason they they keep saying that the Russians are taking massive casualties. They're saying that the Ukrainians are retaking their territory. But that doesn't really make any sense. Again if you look at the maps how they change from day to day you see that this isn't true. And second of all, if you look at the uh the exchange of uh of uh fallen soldiers, uh you know, the ratio is always extreme. It's, you know, you get like 30 or 40 dead Russian soldiers traded for a thousand dead Ukrainian soldiers. So, it's huge, huge disparities. Often 1 to 20, 1 to 40. I'm not sure that's how the casualties are on the ground because often, you know, you would have more of the enemy soldiers uh in your stoages, you know, the the deceased ones if you're the one advancing. Uh but again, we we are claiming that it's NATO is claiming now that the Russians are taking more casualties than the Ukrainians and they're claiming that the Ukrainians are taking territories, but they can't explain a lot of these numbers. So um so no I I think that things are going very bad very quickly and uh yeah on the front lines you see Saporia becoming more and more exposed the Russians are coming in they have a very long front line now in the east where they yeah where they're now making very vulnerable and after that they they can reach uh the main city Saparia on on the Neper River so that would you know cut a big hole in the in uh supply lines of the Ukrainians. And and also importantly, I mean, this special military operation was the initially defined as by the objective of uh taking back or taking, liberating, conquering, whatever word we want to use, uh Donbas. And now you see uh two important cities have fallen, which is Constantinoka and Kasil Leman in the north. And this will allow the Russians to begin to develop a huge pinser that is to essentially begin to cut off Slavansk and Krematurk. Those are the main two cities left in uh Donetsk. Once this falls, not only is Donbas under Russian control, but this has been the main defensive line. After this, the Russians can uh more or less just uh push any direction they want. And at the same time, they're very close to Sumi now. And the Russians are talking about needing an even bigger buffer zone because they don't believe that, you know, much like the Iranians, they will ever get any peace which they can rely on. So they will just seek territorial conquest as a way of ensuring this peace. And they're also having possibilities of getting even closer now to Karakov. So there's a lot of concerns. You have reports that they might go now in the north enter going to Cherov and even make an attempt for Kiev. I'm not so sure about that. And then of course you had Putin very recently make the the comment that uh that uh well uh after we're done with Donbas we're going to also liberate Novarasia which is the historical southern lands of what is today Ukraine. So that means Nikolai and Odessa as well and this is going to put make if the Russians succeed this is essentially going to make uh Ukraine a landlocked rump state. And I know the common arguments in the western media. So, well, look how long time it took them to get to the to to Slavansk, but but this is a war of attrition. So, so all of Ukraine's manpower has been expanded. They are deep lacking air defenses, key military equipment. They have troop shortages. all their heavy defensive lines which NATO helped them build since 2014 are now behind the Russians. So it doesn't matter how long it took them to take this heavily fortified also industrial region where there's a lot of natural uh barriers and defensive positions uh you know in the world of attrition once bled white and begin to collapse then this is the time when you snatch whatever territory you want. So so the idea that this you know measure only by how fast the front lines have moved so fast it doesn't really make any sense. But uh again most of our media and politicians are trying to sell a long war. They want to commit the public to to yeah to continue fighting and continue believing that um yeah this a good idea not to talk to the opponent. So no anyways that's how I see the front lines. But making matters worse the Russians are also hitting behind the front lines. not only destroying all the energy infrastructure, now they're even going after the gas stations, which has some has its effect. I mean, I think there's like 6,000 gas stations across Ukraine. They knocked out not that much. I think 250 or something, but overall, it's concentrated in the east of Ukraine and they're they're they're targeting the ones on key roads. So everything is about shutting down the logistics and transportation in Ukraine. So, a lot of this has uh impact. So, no, I I think uh things well, I don't see the collapse coming yet in Ukraine, but once it begins to unravel, it could happen fairly quickly.
>> Glenn, thanks for jumping on. Always a pleasure. Congratulations on the pet parrot. It's uh it's nice for you to have company in the office. >> I will either kill the parrot or buy a new mic. Now the mic got better the last 10 10 or so minutes >> but congratulations on the par. All right guys um so not guys Glenn absolute pleasure thank you so much and guys I'll be back live in uh 19 minutes to continue the conversation with I think it's s to look at what's happening the straight of homos. Yep. Sal Marco to have a discussion on the straight of homos. See you guys in 19 minutes. Bye-bye.