September 15, 2025 • 45 mins
This week, geopolitical red lines are crossed, throwing decades of established rules into question. We break down Israel's unprecedented and failed strike inside Qatar that has shattered regional alliances, and we analyze the moment NATO forces fired on Russian drones over Poland for the first time.Episode Highlights
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/this-week-explained--6199515/support.
- Israel's Doha Gamble: The anatomy of the failed assassination attempt in Doha , how the mission was pushed by Prime Minister Netanyahu against the advice of his own intelligence and military chiefs , and the diplomatic firestorm it created with the U.S. and a betrayed Gulf.
- NATO's Red Line: For the first time, a NATO member has fired shots in an incident related to the war in Ukraine after Russian drones violated Polish airspace. We explore the competing narratives—deliberate provocation or accident—and NATO's new 'Eastern Sentry' mission.
- The War on Four Fronts: An inside look at the escalating conflict in Ukraine, from Russia’s heaviest aerial bombardment of Kyiv and Ukraine’s asymmetric drone strikes on Russian oil terminals to the hidden war over foreign-made microchips found in Russian missiles.
- Nepal's Digital Revolution: How a government's attempt to ban 26 social media platforms backfired , igniting a powder keg of youth-led anger over corruption that toppled the government in a matter of days.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/this-week-explained--6199515/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is the paid advertisement from Betterhelp. Let's pause and
take a moment to talk about something very important. Life
has its pressures for everyone, and we often carry the
immense weight of expectation to never show weakness, to hide
our true feelings, and believe that asking for support somehow
makes us less of a person. But bottling things up
isn't the answer. It can often lead to feeling down, burnout,
(00:23):
or other unhealthy habits. We want to normalize the idea
that it's okay to struggle. Real strength actually comes from
opening up about what you are carrying and doing something
about it so that you can be at your best
for yourself and everyone in your life. If you're feeling
the way of the world, or even if things just
feel a bit off. I can't stress enough the value
of talking to someone. It could be a friend, a
(00:46):
loved one, or a therapist. We here this week explained
believe that therapy can be incredibly valuable. Whether you've been
in therapy personally or not, the broader benefits are clear.
It's so helpful for learning positive coping skills, understanding how
to set healthy boundaries, and it really empowers you to
be the best version of yourself, and it's so important
(01:07):
to remember that therapy isn't just for those who've experienced
combat or major trauma. It's a tool for anyone looking
to improve their mental well being and navigate life's challenges.
That's why we're thrilled to talk about better Help. With
over five thousand therapists in the UK. Better Help is
the world's largest online therapy platform, having served over five
million people globally, and it clearly resonates with users, boasting
(01:31):
an app store rating of four point nine out of
five stars based on over one point seven million client
review it's also incredibly convenient. You can connect with a
therapist at the click of a button, helping you fit
therapy into your busy schedule, and you can even switch
therapists at any time if you feel it's not the
right fit. And here's something special for our listeners. As
(01:51):
the largest online therapy provider in the world, better Help
is offering our listeners ten percent off their first month.
What are you waiting for? Talk it out with better
help once again. Our listeners get tempercent off their first
month by going to betterhelp dot com slash this week.
That's b E T T E r H e l
P dot com slash this week.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Tired of feeling overwhelmed by the headlines, want to truly
understand the why behind the global chaos and you are
in the right place. Welcome to this week Explained, your
weekly deep diving in the most complex and impactful stories
shaping our world. I'm Tianna and joining me as always
is Curvin. Before we jump into the crucial developments of
the week, a quick favor.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
If you want to ensure you never miss an episode,
make sure you're following or subscribed on your podcast platform.
It literally takes two seconds and keeps you instantly updated.
And if you are getting value from what we are
doing here, a simple rating or review on Apple Podcasts
or Spotify helps us reach more curious minds like yours.
And don't forget the new interactive comments on Spotify. It's
(02:59):
a fantastic equato engaged directly with the show and other listeners,
extending the conversation beyond the broadcast. You can also find
more fantastic podcasts like ours by visiting leonmedianetwork dot com,
part of the awesome Lyon media network. This week, we're
diving into the latest from Ukraine and Gaza escalation between
(03:20):
Russia and NATO and AD it dive into what is
happening in Nepal.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
Let's start, as always with the war in Ukraine. It
has been a very active period with significant developments on
multiple fronts that seem to be pulling the conflict in
different directions. We've seen major military escalations, installed diplomacy, and
a fascinating look inside the machinery that fuels it all.
I want to start with the most direct escalation. Last weekend,
(03:48):
Russia launched what has been described as its heaviest aerial
bombardment on Ukraine since the war began. For the first time,
a major government building in central Kiov was hit.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
So what does this attack.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Symbolize and signal at this stage in the conflict.
Speaker 4 (04:05):
I think it serves several purposes here For Russia. First,
it's a clear message of their capability. They have the
capability to hit these buildings in Kiev. Also demonstrates that
despite a long and costly war, Russia retains the ability
to project significant force anywhere in Ukraine. And also it's
an act of political signaling. At this point, it's aimed
(04:29):
as much at Washington, d C and other European capitals
as it is the capital of Ukraine in Kiev. I
think it's a forceful rejection of external pressure. It's a
statement that Moscow will not be deterred by sanctions or
by threats, and it aims to undermined morale. That's morale
from both military perspective, but also civilian and political perspectives
(04:54):
as well.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
And that attack prompted a swift and long rebel response
from the United States. President Trump threatened tougher sanctions, and
he spoke of moving to a quote second phase, end
quote of punishment against Moscow. Whatever that means.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
Yeah, that's what he said. Hyperbole as always Trump purply
if you will, as part of his pattern there. Now,
the threat of sanctions is a primary tool in the
playbook of the US government. The US Treasury Secretary elaborated
a little bit on this. He suggested that with stronger
(05:32):
European backing on secondary sanctions, specifically targeting countries that by
Russian oil, the US believes Russia's economy could face a
total collapse. Now, this frings the conflict as an economic
endurance race. So everyone's wondering can the Ukrainian military hold
out long enough to collapse the Russian economy.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
I mean, it's a compelling idea, but the threat of
sanctions has been on the table for years, and it
seems to be happening at the exact same time. The
diplomatic track is completely breaking down. Just this past Friday,
the Kremlin itself stated that peace talks are quote more
on pause end quote than active. So how do you
interpret that specific language coming directly from.
Speaker 4 (06:17):
Them, Yeah, like it's it's a very deliberate diplomatic maneuver.
For months, we've talked about it here. Ukraine has been
saying that Russia's not negotiating in good faith and is
only using the talks to buy time. Now, Russia's response
to that had been that it was Ukraine who was unreal,
unwilling to negotiate in good faith. They were trying to
control the narrative of who is at faults in these
(06:40):
what I call non negotiation negotiations. For the Kremlin to
now come out and essentially shift that narrative saying things
are on their end on pause, as you stated, it's
another way for them to control the narrative, formalizes the
stalemate without accepting blame in the situation, so they can
(07:02):
simultaneously claim to be committed to peaceful dialogue while also
pointing to President Trump's own admission that a deal is
going to take some time here, So it shifts this
perceived pressure off of them once again.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
So they are acknowledging the reality that everyone already knew.
Speaker 4 (07:22):
Yeah, finally, but they're they're acknowledging that while also putting
the ball back in Washington, in Washington d C's court.
So we heard from the administration officials and senators that
President Trump's patients is running out, but like Moscow is
observing that threats of these quote unquote very hard sanctions
(07:44):
have not yet materialized into debilitating action. The Russia's going
to keep doing this. They're going to test the West resolve.
They're going to test these red lines, all while being received,
you know, by world leaders as Putin has been.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
While that diplomatic front seems frozen, Ukraine appears to be
escalating on another front entirely, which is economic warfare. They
conducted a massive drone attack of their own, hitting Russia's
largest oil terminal on the Baltic Sea. So what is
the strategic value of a move like this?
Speaker 4 (08:18):
It's a perfect example of asymmetric strategy here by Ukraine.
So Ukraine can't match Russia's military scale, so they have
to attack strategic choke points, and so hitting a major
oil port like Promorse accomplishes I think a few things here. First, Obviously,
(08:38):
it directly attacks Russia's revenue stream with their oil, the
money that funds this war. It also aims to create
domestic problems for Russia. Right now we're seeing reports of
fuel shortages, rising prices internally. And finally, here I think
this is a significant psychological blow. It demitry. It's a
(09:00):
sophisticated capability to strike deep into Russian territory at a
highly sensitive and quite honestly well defended economic asset.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
The report also mentioned that this specific port is central
to Russia's shadow fleet of tankers used to get around
international sanctions.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
Yeah, and I think that's crucial to Ukraine's plans with
this attack. So it's not just about stopping the flow
of oil, it's about disrupting this clandestine network Russia has
built to sustain its economy, all of this in the
face of these terrible, terrible sanctions that have been put
on Russia. So by targeting the infrastructure that supports this
(09:43):
shadow economy. Ukraine is trying to make the circumvention of
these sanctions more difficult but also more costly for Moscow.
Speaker 2 (09:53):
This brings us to a really critical piece of the
puzzle and something that connects both the military and fronts
the weapons themselves. This week, Ukrainian officials were able to
analyze a Russian cruise missile that hit Kiev but did
not explode, and they found that it was filled with
dozens of foreign made electronic components, many from American companies.
(10:16):
So how is this possible years into a conflict with
such heavy sanction.
Speaker 4 (10:21):
This is the hidden front of the war. These are
all part of a global supply chain. Now the issue
lies with what are called dual use components. We've talked
about this with Chinese components. It's the chips and processors
found in these missiles. They're not designed as military hardware.
They're designed for commercial products. You know, household electronics are smartphones,
(10:45):
all those things. They are small, ubiquitous and produced in
the billions.
Speaker 2 (10:51):
So they're not shipping them something that is obviously a
missile part like they're probably electronic, and then stripping them
down to get the pieces they need.
Speaker 4 (11:03):
Yeah. Absolutely. Western companies have for the most part officially
stopped all sales to Russia. But what happens is that
Russia uses a global network of intermediaries, so companies in
third party countries can purchase these components legally for supposed
civilian use, and then they re route them to the
Russian military industrial complex. It's incredibly difficult to police the
(11:27):
end use of all of these, you know, every single
micro chip that is sold globally.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
So when we pull back and look at the entire
picture from this week, we have a war being fought
on at least four fronts. The conventional military front with
major aerial attacks, a frozen diplomatic front where talks are
on pause, and economic front where Ukraine is now striking
critical Russian infrastructure. And this hidden supply chain front where
(11:56):
a global cat and mouse game is being played out
over a tiny electronic parts.
Speaker 4 (12:01):
Yeah, very accurate what's been happening over the last few months.
The conflict is not just advancing on one linear path.
It is a dynamic system where pressure on one front
causes a reaction on another front. So Russia escalates militarily,
the rest the West threatens economically. Ukraine honestly cannot win
(12:21):
a conventional war of attrition. We've talked about that before.
I think we had an old episode that we use
the word attrition, or at least I did about a
thousand times.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
Yeah, so, yeah, I do remember that.
Speaker 4 (12:32):
Because so, because Ukraine cannot do that, it attacks Russia's
ability to fund the war. And underneath it all is
this constant, quiet struggle over the technological components that make
modern warfare possible. Understanding the complexity of all this is
key to understanding where this conflict might be headed. And
(12:54):
that's exactly why our analysis centers on the strategic calculus,
the overarching why, rather than just talking about the purely
tactical engagements that define the day to day battles.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
And while so much of the world's strategic focus remains
locked on Eastern Europe and the grinding war in Ukraine,
another long simmering I am talking about an event that
feels like a foundational crack in the geopolitical landscape of
the Middle East. For the first time, Israel conducted a
direct acknowledged strike inside a Gulf Arab state, targeting the
(13:29):
Hamas leadership in the heart of Doha, Qatar. But this
story is so much more than just the strike itself.
It is about its apparent failure, the deep divisions it
is exposed within Israel, and a diplomatic fallout that is
sending shock waves from Washington, DC to every capital in
the Gulf. So let's start at the beginning. For our listeners, Gartman,
(13:51):
walk us through what happened this week and crucially, what
was the intended goal.
Speaker 4 (13:57):
Yeah, what you're referring to here is the air strike
targeting a residential compound where senior members of Hamas's political
bureau were meeting in Cutter. Now, the explicit goal was
assassination to eliminate the top leadership of the group, including
their chief negotiator. That's Hlil al Haya, and he was
(14:18):
believed to be present in that residential building. Now, this
was framed as a strike against the masterminds of the
attacks on Israel, and the crucial.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Follow up to that is was it successful, Because the
reports that have come out since Tuesday paint a very
different picture.
Speaker 4 (14:35):
Yeah, they do. By all public accounts, the operation was
a failure. The primary target has since appeared in gutter,
even performing funeral rites for his son, who actually was
killed in the attack. Now, the Israeli security establishment widely
assesses that none of the top tier leadership were killed
(14:56):
in the strike. There is speculation that some have been injured,
but the primary objective was not met. Now the focus
inside Israel has shifted to an investigation of why it failed.
Was it flawed intelligence or perhaps the type of munitions
that was used to because they wanted to limit collateral
damage because it was happening in a golf Arab state,
(15:18):
not just in Gaza. As we know, they don't care
what the munitions do in Gaza, but they used the
specific type of munition to prevent that collateral damage. So
was that insufficient to destroy the entire structure?
Speaker 2 (15:36):
The lack of success is stunning given the risks involved.
And what I find justice stunning are the reports emerging
now about the deep divisions within Israel's own security services
before the strike was even launched. This was not a
unified decision, was it.
Speaker 4 (15:53):
No, it was not at all. This is a very
interesting part of all of this and perhaps is the
most critical internal dynamic. The reporting indicates that this operation
was pushed through by a very small political circle. That
small political circle around Prime Minister Net and Yahoo. It
was actively opposed by the heads of the Israeli defense Forces,
(16:15):
the National Security Advisor, and I would say most notably
the head of the Masad.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
So the Masade, Israel's own foreign intelligence agency, the one
best suited for an operation abroad, was against this.
Speaker 4 (16:29):
Yeah, The Massad, an agency renowned for its sophisticated and
often audacious foreign operations, determined that the proposed mission in
Doha was strategically untenable.
Speaker 3 (16:41):
Now.
Speaker 4 (16:41):
Their assessment was rooted in two core concerns. The first
one that a lethal operation would collapse the delicate hostage
ceasefire negotiations, but also that it would permanently rupture the
agency's vital working relationship with Gutter. They are the key
mediator here in the negotiations. Consequently, the agency refused to
(17:03):
execute a ground operation. That ground operation was when they
had designed themselves, and it led to a pivotal and
highly unorthodox decision here by the Masad. Now the mission
was reconfigured as an airstrike and operational oversight was then
transferred to the Shinvett, that's Israel's domestic security service. This
(17:25):
internal dissent and the subsequent operational failure have profound implications
for Prime Minister Netyaho's political future. His entire political brand
is predicated on being Mister Security, a leader with unparalleled
judgment in matters of national defense. So by overruling the
professional assessments of his Masad, the Idea and national security chiefs,
(17:48):
he took a high stake scamble and lost. The failure
not only exposes him to accusations of recklessness but also
politically isolates him. This makes him the sole architect of
a mission that yielded immense diplomatic damage for no strategic gain,
and at YAHOO may have severely undermined the very foundation
(18:10):
of political legitimacy.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
That's an incredible internal dynamic. So let's pivot to another
key relationship. The United States Israel's closest ally but also
a close ally of Cutter which hosts the largest American
air base in the region. You've been there several times, yes,
So where was the United States in all of this?
Speaker 4 (18:34):
Look? I can say honestly that they were effectively and
appears deliberately sidelined in this. I can tell you that
command centers at multiple US combatant commands were left in
the dark. The Israeli jets were poortedly flew south over
the Red Sea to launch their missiles from the other
side of the Arabian Peninsula, and this route was chosen
(18:56):
specifically to try to avoid Saudi airspace and then crucially
to minimize the warning time for the United States. Had
these jets flown over Saudi airspace, the Saudis would have
alerted the US, who would have alerted Katari forces and
diplomats and government officials. The White House was not notified
(19:20):
until the missiles were minutes from impact, and from what
I have heard, in those minutes, they did reach out
to Katari officials about this, but it was far too
late to stop the attack.
Speaker 2 (19:32):
I have to say, I'm not shocked that the UNITEDS
until it was too late. I mean, if they're ignoring
the massade their own people, why would they give a
crap what the United States has to say about this mission.
Speaker 4 (19:46):
But it's very interesting because, like the Massad should have
told someone within the CIA and that could have trickled up,
but that did not happen. So there's a lot more
to dig into about this to figure out what really
happened here.
Speaker 2 (20:04):
So how does the White House respond when it is
so publicly bypassed by its closest ally on an action
against another one.
Speaker 4 (20:12):
Of its own. Yeah, look, it's I would say it
with great difficulty. So we're seeing them perform this very
delicate tight rope walk right now. President Trump has publicly
stated he's very unhappy with the strike. He said it
does not advance American or Israeli goals. Now, at the
same time, he's called the elimination of Hamas a worthy goal.
(20:34):
This diplomatic contradiction that you're hearing from President Trump was
on full display at the United Nations because the US
actually allowed a Security Council statement condemning the attack to
pass unanimously. This is a very rare move. The US
typically blocks any statement critical of Israel. I think Israel
(20:55):
made a complete miscalculation with this one. My assessment is
that even if the target had been eliminated, the resulting
diplomatic and political fallout would have ensured the mission was
a net failure.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
It sounds like a signal that is being read loud
and clear in the golf. For decades, these wealthy Arab
states have operated under a core assumption, if you are
useful to the United States, it will protect you that
assumption seems to have been shattered.
Speaker 4 (21:22):
Yeah, look, that's I think the what you just said
is the fundamental takeaway for the entire region. The perception
in the Golf is not that the United States could
not stop the strike. It's that they chose not to
stop the strike. So they point to past instances where
DC did intervene to call off Israeli actions, most notably
(21:47):
against Iran, and they see that as proof that the
capability there exists. So the conclusion they are drawing is
that the US either gave Israel a green light or
it simply does not care about the sovereignty of its
Golf allies. As I said, if the masade knew this
was going on, someone had to have mentioned that to
(22:07):
the US Intelligence agency, the CIA. So, like I said,
I've got to dig deep. We're deeper into this. Maybe
the Gulf States are right the US chose not to.
We'll do that in a later episode. But that feeling
of betrayal is very profound. The Katari Emir himself called
this strike a state terror. He said, quote, we are
(22:30):
betrayed end quote.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
And we are already seeing a realle This is not
just anger. It seems to be translating into courtination.
Speaker 4 (22:39):
Yeah, it is. The attack is acting as a powerful
unifying force. That's why I call it a net negative
or a net failure. The president of the UAE, a
nation that had its own rifts with Cutter, was the
first leader to arrive in Doha less than twenty four
hours after the strike. Right now, we are seeing a
flurry of high level diplomacy across the Golf region, across
(23:03):
the Middle East. This is culminating in an emergency Arab
Islamic summit which is going to happen, which is happening
in Doha this weekend. Now, the goal, as they have stated,
is to move from solidarity to action. The uae has
already summoned the Israeli ambassador in protest, and that puts
(23:24):
the US broker Abraham Accords under severe strain.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
So that brings us to the biggest question, what happens
next if the old quid pro quo with the US
is broken? What are the real options for hill?
Speaker 4 (23:39):
They're weighing a spectrum of responses. Reporting is even coming
out that a similar attack within the borders of Egypt
had been planned by Israel. Egyptian intelligence identified these plans
At that point, they threatened action against Israel had they
pursued it. We saw that Israel did not pursue that.
But right now, for the Golf States, their options for
(24:00):
or direct retaliation that's going to be very limited. But
diplomatically and economically they have significant leverage. Right now, I
think we could see a formal downgrading of relations with
Israel by the UAE. We may see Gulf States begin
to financially and politically support legal cases against Israel in
the international courts. That's something that they've largely avoided before.
(24:24):
Now not economically, they could use their massive sovereign wealth
funds to boycott companies with stakes in the Israeli economy.
They could also begin to quietly turn down American requests
and reevaluate the trillions of dollars they have pledged to
invest in the US economy. The thinking right now is
(24:45):
if American partnership does not provide security, then perhaps that
money is better spimped elsewhere.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
And with all of this chaos and realignment, you have
to imagine that a run is watching very closely.
Speaker 4 (24:59):
Yeah, I think that's I think they are the primary
beneficiary of this crisis. So Iran sees a deep public
rift between the US and its key regional ally happening
right now. It sees a divided Israeli leadership, a unified
era block forming an opposition to an Israeli action. So
(25:20):
for Iran, this turmoil creates a permissive environment. This reduces
the credibility of American deterrence. It creates a window of
opportunity to advance Iranian agendas, whether that's with its nuclear
program or through those regional proxies Hamas has belah all
while the US is preoccupied with this diplomatic firestorm now,
(25:45):
the long term consequences are still unknown, but what is
clear is that the fundamental rules that have governed the
region's security for decades have been thrown into question. The
fallout from this Doha gamble this is going to be
felt for a very long time time.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Clearly, the fundamental rules leaving a power vacuum in a
permissive environment is instability. However, isn't confined to the Middle East.
A different kind of threat is escalating tensions on NATO's
eastern flank. We'll discuss the alarming reports of drones being
shot down over Poland after a quick ad break, So
please stay with us. We'll be right back. Welcome back listeners.
(26:23):
Before the break, we were discussing the profound GEO police
following the recent crisis. Now we turn our attention to
Europe and a story that brings their directly to NATO's doorstep.
Polish authorities have confirmed that air defense systems were activated
to shoot down several unidentified drones that violated their airspace. So, Curvin,
can you start by walking us through the initial incident.
Speaker 4 (26:46):
Yeah, absolutely, so. What we saw was an incursion of
a significant number of suspected Russian drones into Polish air space. Now,
there have been occasional strain missiles or drones that have
crossed borders before even into Polish, but this was different.
This was different in both scale and response. Now, the
key development here is that Poland, with air support from
(27:08):
its NATO allies, engaged and shot some of those drones down.
This marks the first time a NATO member is known
to have fired shots in a situation directly related to
the russou Ukrainian War.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
That is a major threshold across I imagine the response
from the alliance was immediate and went beyond just that
initial aerial engagement.
Speaker 4 (27:30):
Yeah, it was almost immediately NATO announced the new mission.
They named it Eastern Century. And it's not just a statement.
This is a tangible reinforcement of the eastern flank of Europe.
We're seeing countries like the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, also France,
of all people, of all countries to commit troops to
(27:51):
the Eastern Front. They're committing those troops, the helicopters, air
defense systems, advanced fighter jets. What they're trying to do
is bolster Poland's security. Now, the Polish Defense Minister made
a point of calling these quote concrete declarations end quote,
not the quote empty gestures end quote. He said his
(28:11):
country has seen in the past, and where.
Speaker 2 (28:14):
Does the good old US a very stand on this.
The President's response seemed quite measured in comparison to some
European leaders.
Speaker 4 (28:23):
Yeah, it did. For Once President Trump was measured, he
publicly suggested it could have been a mistake. That's a
much more cautious tone than we are used to from him. Now. Officially,
NATO's top military commander has said the intent is still
under investigation. So what we're seeing here three distinct narratives
(28:46):
playing out. We have a Poland saying it's a deliberate provocation,
Russia saying or Belarus saying in support of Russia. This
was just a technical accident, and then we have a
much more reserved wait and see approach from Washington, DC.
Speaker 2 (29:06):
But honestly, this seemed to be a coincidence. Could you
connect this drone incursion to the other geopolitical pressures that
were building in the region, like what was happening that
might have served as a catalyst for this, or maybe
they were taking advantage of the fact that everyone was
just structed failure in Cutter.
Speaker 4 (29:25):
Yeah, you know, yeah, you make a great point, honestly,
and I think the context is absolutely critical to understanding
the severity of this. Also, you mentioned it Israel's strike
within Cutter is one part of this. There's also this
incursion happened during one of the most intense and large
(29:49):
scale Russian aerial assaults on Ukraine. Hundreds of drones were launched.
Maybe they thought if they could squeeze a couple of
through they could test NATO's resolve. Another thing, and perhaps
more importantly, this also coincided almost exactly with the start
of the twenty twenty five joint military exercise between Russian
(30:11):
and Belarus. Now, these exercises always cause anxiety on NATO's
eastern flank, and Poland has even closed its land border
in response.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
Sometimes is there anything else.
Speaker 4 (30:25):
Yeah, So there has been recent very public discussion among
European nations, led by France of all countries, about potentially
sending troops to Ukraine as part of a post war
security guarantee. Now Russian leadership has responded very strongly to this.
They warned that any foreign troops are going to be
considered legitimate targets within this war. So when you combined
(30:49):
this intensified era war, the Zabad exercises, the rhetoric around
foreign intervention, you get an incredibly tense and volatileronment where
an incident like this is naturally interpreted much more seriously with.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
The military flexing its muscles. What is happening on the
diplomatic front, I know Poland took this straight to the
United Nations.
Speaker 4 (31:15):
Yeah, they did, and Poland requested an emergency session of
the UN Security Council and that took place immediately. As
you would expect, it became a forum for these competing
narratives to be presented on the world on the world
stage because Russia is there as well. Poland and its
European allies condemned Russia's actions as a dangerous escalation. They
(31:37):
said it undermines any prospect for peace. Russia in turn
rejected all allegations. They accused NATO and the West of
aggravating the crisis and obstructing a peaceful resolution.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
So the diplomatic channels are reflecting the same deep divisions
that we're seeing.
Speaker 4 (31:56):
On the ground. Yeah, you're exactly right. Now the UN
serves as a venue to formalize these positions, but it's
unlikely to produce a resolution. The core of the issue
remains the same. Whether by accident or by design, The
conflict in Ukraine created a direct military confrontation between Russia
(32:16):
and a NATO member. This is a line that has
now been crossed.
Speaker 2 (32:21):
It really feels like the situation is more precarious than ever,
a significant militariation on all fronts.
Speaker 4 (32:27):
Yeah, look, we have warned of this from the very start.
This very podcast explained that this is quite possible for
this conflict. It's quite possible for this conflict to spill
over into NATO borders. Now, the key thing I think
to watch for is going to be the official findings
of NATO's investigation. There they'll present what the intent was
(32:52):
for these drones. Also the continued military posturing on both
sides of that border. Poland did invoke our four So
could Article five be next?
Speaker 2 (33:04):
And that question four now we'll have to remain unanswered.
Is this we will leave Eastern Europe here and turn
our attention to South Asia, specifically Nepal. Over the past week,
we have witnessed a political earthquake. A government that seemed
stable just one month ago has completely collapsed in a
matter of days. It is a stunning series of events,
(33:27):
and it happened with a speed that I think caught
many observers and certainly the government there completely by surprised.
So let's start at the beginning. For our listeners, What
was the specific spark that lit this fire? It seems
to have come out of nowhere.
Speaker 4 (33:44):
Yeah, I think the immediate trigger was a government decision
that in hindsight, was a profound miscalculation. The government of
Prime Minister KP. Charma Ali announced a ban on twenty
six social media platforms. That's some of these are the
ones we all use, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, WhatsApp. The stated
(34:10):
reason was to control misinformation and hate speech by forcing
these companies to register locally, a.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Move we have seen other governments attempt. But the reaction
to Paul was not just criticism. It was explosive.
Speaker 4 (34:26):
Yeah, you'rebe absolutely right here. For the population, especially the
younger generation, this was not a simple regulatory issue. It
was seen as a direct assault on their freedom of
expression and their primary space for connection and political discourse.
This frustration that had been simmering online, it did not
(34:49):
just stay online. It spilled out onto the streets, and
it did so almost immediately.
Speaker 2 (34:55):
Which brings up the crucial point. This could not have
just been about a social media ban. Those kinds of
protests flare up and often died down, like with X
here in America whenever they tried to what's that? No,
not X, sorry, TikTok, dang I I'm not on like anything.
Speaker 1 (35:14):
Also, I can't.
Speaker 4 (35:15):
Rever No, you're absolutely but you're absolutely right with TikTok.
When when Musk bought Twitter, we saw the same kind
of things happen.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
Yeah, so this one toppled the entire government, though, So
what were the deeper currents at play here? Yeah?
Speaker 4 (35:31):
Once again, absolutely correct on this one. You're you're actually
digging deeper, Tienna, Uh, because the band was this social
media ban was merely the spark that ignited a much
larger powder keg of public grievance. For years, there's been
a deep and growing frustration in Nepal with systemic issues.
(35:54):
We touched on this very topic about a year ago. UH,
with the fact that within Nepal there is demic political corruption,
there's rampant nepotism, a stagnant economy that offers very little hope,
particularly for the youth. The youth unemployment rate that is
over twenty percent right now.
Speaker 2 (36:14):
I saw reports about a hashtag which was hashtag Nepo kids.
Can you explain that?
Speaker 4 (36:21):
Yeah? I think that this is the central to understanding
the anger. Social media was the very place where young
Nepalis could could see the stark contrast between their own
struggles and the lives of the political elite. So the
hashtag Nepo kids trend involved users sharing posts from the
children of politicians showcased their luxurious lifestyles. These designer clothes,
(36:45):
expensive holidays, the luxury cars that they had access to.
This was not just envy. It was seen as flaunting
the proceeds of corruption while millions of their peers were struggling,
or millions of their peers were forced to seek work
abroad outside of Nepal. The band the social media ban
(37:08):
was an attempt to shut down the very platform that
was exposing this reality.
Speaker 2 (37:12):
So you have this deep well of public anger and
the government essentially puts a lid on the primary release valve.
So what happened next? How did it go from street
protests to them burning all these buildings down and the
Prime minister resigning and like the family I saw videans.
Speaker 4 (37:30):
Of the families.
Speaker 2 (37:32):
It's not funny.
Speaker 4 (37:34):
But right being lifted by helicopter.
Speaker 2 (37:37):
Just dangling from the bottom of the helicopter, and I would.
Speaker 4 (37:41):
Have been white sped, yeah, I mean it was the
only way out. It was for them.
Speaker 2 (37:45):
Wild seeing them all strapped to this table like the
roof yikes.
Speaker 4 (37:51):
What like Saigon? Right, Yeah, that's true then, And it's
the same feeling there, Like if they would have stepped
out of their residences or their government buildings, they might
it is at approbable they would have either been killed
tragically and unfortunately, or you know, harmed very much. So,
(38:18):
so that was the only way out, and it really
escalated tragically. Now, during the initial protests in Kathmandu, police
cracked down on the protest. Nineteen protesters were killed. That
was the point of no return. The anger over the
ban was transformed into outrage over the government's violence against
(38:41):
its own citizens. So the protests widened, they became more intense,
and then, just as you said, demonstrators set fire to
the Parliament building and other government offices. If you are
on our our Instagram page, you will notice we have
one of those pictures of the Parliament building on fire
(39:02):
and it just went across all of social media. Now,
faced with a complete loss of control and public legitimacy,
Prime Minister Ali and his entire cabinet had no choice.
They had to step down.
Speaker 2 (39:15):
And your statement Reuters confirmed that actually were killed.
Speaker 1 (39:19):
In the protests.
Speaker 2 (39:20):
Oh yeah, thank you, It was only updated. I just
want to say seventy two people who were because I
heard like fifty two yesterday, so the number has gone
up to So obviously this was a complete collapse of
state authority. And throughout this technology played a central role,
not just in fueling the anger but in organizing. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (39:42):
Look, technology played a decisive role here. When the end,
when the government initiated the ban, users immediately pivoted. There
was a reported six thousand percent searche in sign ups
for VPN services, and that was because they wanted to
circumvent the On the various social media platforms, people downloaded
(40:04):
offline messaging apps. Also, when the government fail, the movement
did not dissipate. The movement migrated to platforms like Discord,
where massive servers with over one hundred thousand members are
now hosting debates and planning the next steps, including who
should lead an interim government.
Speaker 2 (40:25):
Which is fascinating. A decentralized leaderless movement is now attempting
to shape the country's political future from a chat server.
So where does that leave Nepal?
Speaker 4 (40:35):
Now lose the country in a very delicate and uncertain position.
The Nepal army has on the streets. That's primarily to
maintain order to prevent a total breakdown here. They're not
taking power in a coup, so it's not the military
that's taking power here, they're just holding the space. Meanwhile,
these networks of young activists are coordinating to form a
(40:57):
civilian interim government. Now I think they've just finally put
someone in place. This is the former Chief Justice, Sushila
khark She's seen as an anti corruption figure. So with
the youth movement putting in a new form of government,
(41:19):
they've even announced a tentative date for new elections that's
going to be March fifth of next year.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
All right, let's zoom out, Curvin, as you typically like
to do. So why should someone listening in another part
of the world pay close attention to what just happen?
Speaker 4 (41:33):
Yeah, this is not an isolated event. That's why this
is a potent case for study and perhaps a blueprint
for a global trend. At this moment in history, we
are witnessing a pattern of digitally fueled, youth led movements
that can challenge and even dismantle established power structures with
(41:56):
incredible speed. We saw similar dynamics to this in in
Sri Lanka. We also saw it in Bangladesh.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
So this is about more than just.
Speaker 4 (42:06):
A pall it is it's about a generational shift in
how political power is contested. The trajectory is one where
younger citizens, feeling disenfranchised by legacy systems they view as
corrupt and unresponsive, are using the tools at their disposal
to take direct action. These events do not happen in
(42:26):
a vacuum. When you place this kind of potent domestic
instability into the current global landscape, which is already tense,
this adds another layer of volatility, highlights a broader global
concern about the nature of power and of influence in
the twenty first century. I am very confident this is
(42:47):
not a blip. This is a signal.
Speaker 2 (42:51):
I mean, it's a fascinating dynamic to watch the idea
that a government stability may now be inversely proportional to
its youth, unemployment and corruption, especially when that corruption can
be broadcast in near real time from a smartphone in
the hands of almost every single individual. So, as always,
thank you Curvin for your analysis. Is there anything else
(43:13):
you want to discuss? Uh?
Speaker 4 (43:14):
No, that's all I have. Do you have anything you
want to talk about?
Speaker 2 (43:17):
I just want to say next week we will have
an episode on Yeah, but the following week probably not
to be honest.
Speaker 4 (43:28):
I'm actually working with Cole to try to get a
podcast out as an interview podcast for that weekend.
Speaker 2 (43:34):
That's something you could mention, dude.
Speaker 4 (43:38):
She could have mentioned it to you before we started this. Yeah,
it was something I was thinking about today in getting
one done before that day, or we might not have one, so.
Speaker 2 (43:49):
Yeah, I mean, I haven't figured it out yet. Just
be ready. You might not get your regular news updates
from US twenty twenty two twins.
Speaker 4 (44:01):
Hold up, let me let me look at the case.
Speaker 2 (44:03):
It'll be the twenty twenty ninth, not that, Yeah, the
twenty ninth, it would be the episode. The twenty ninth
might not you know, be there, but we'll we'll try
our darnedst and since Kravin is talking to col it
might happen. So that's cool, good, good, a little.
Speaker 4 (44:21):
Wit I gotta handle it. We'll see if we can,
we can schedule it. Yeah, we'll see about that, and
then maybe on the sixth as well. We'll see or
we might have really nice audio on the sixth, Not
to get ahead of ourselves.
Speaker 2 (44:34):
Really nice audio on the sixth.
Speaker 4 (44:37):
Because we'll be on the same run in our studio,
so big things can out well over the next two.
Speaker 2 (44:47):
Weeks at the very least fun stuff. So anyway, is
got it? Is that all?
Speaker 4 (44:55):
Yeah, it's been a tough week. Uh, lots lots of
events going on that happened this past week.
Speaker 2 (45:03):
So well, thank you so much for listening to this
week explained, we hope that you found it both informative
and engaging. If you have any feedback or suggestions for
future episodes, we'd love to hear from you. For more
in depth coverage of these stories and more, be sure
to follow us on social media. This week explained
Speaker 4 (45:22):
Tianna, thank you so much,
This is the paid advertisement from Betterhelp. Let's pause and
take a moment to talk about something very important. Life
has its pressures for everyone, and we often carry the
immense weight of expectation to never show weakness, to hide
our true feelings, and believe that asking for support somehow
makes us less of a person. But bottling things up
isn't the answer. It can often lead to feeling down, burnout,
(00:23):
or other unhealthy habits. We want to normalize the idea
that it's okay to struggle. Real strength actually comes from
opening up about what you are carrying and doing something
about it so that you can be at your best
for yourself and everyone in your life. If you're feeling
the way of the world, or even if things just
feel a bit off. I can't stress enough the value
of talking to someone. It could be a friend, a
(00:46):
loved one, or a therapist. We here this week explained
believe that therapy can be incredibly valuable. Whether you've been
in therapy personally or not, the broader benefits are clear.
It's so helpful for learning positive coping skills, understanding how
to set healthy boundaries, and it really empowers you to
be the best version of yourself, and it's so important
(01:07):
to remember that therapy isn't just for those who've experienced
combat or major trauma. It's a tool for anyone looking
to improve their mental well being and navigate life's challenges.
That's why we're thrilled to talk about better Help. With
over five thousand therapists in the UK. Better Help is
the world's largest online therapy platform, having served over five
million people globally, and it clearly resonates with users, boasting
(01:31):
an app store rating of four point nine out of
five stars based on over one point seven million client
review it's also incredibly convenient. You can connect with a
therapist at the click of a button, helping you fit
therapy into your busy schedule, and you can even switch
therapists at any time if you feel it's not the
right fit. And here's something special for our listeners. As
(01:51):
the largest online therapy provider in the world, better Help
is offering our listeners ten percent off their first month.
What are you waiting for? Talk it out with better
help once again. Our listeners get tempercent off their first
month by going to betterhelp dot com slash this week.
That's b E T T E r H e l
P dot com slash this week.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Tired of feeling overwhelmed by the headlines, want to truly
understand the why behind the global chaos and you are
in the right place. Welcome to this week Explained, your
weekly deep diving in the most complex and impactful stories
shaping our world. I'm Tianna and joining me as always
is Curvin. Before we jump into the crucial developments of
the week, a quick favor.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
If you want to ensure you never miss an episode,
make sure you're following or subscribed on your podcast platform.
It literally takes two seconds and keeps you instantly updated.
And if you are getting value from what we are
doing here, a simple rating or review on Apple Podcasts
or Spotify helps us reach more curious minds like yours.
And don't forget the new interactive comments on Spotify. It's
(02:59):
a fantastic equato engaged directly with the show and other listeners,
extending the conversation beyond the broadcast. You can also find
more fantastic podcasts like ours by visiting leonmedianetwork dot com,
part of the awesome Lyon media network. This week, we're
diving into the latest from Ukraine and Gaza escalation between
(03:20):
Russia and NATO and AD it dive into what is
happening in Nepal.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
Let's start, as always with the war in Ukraine. It
has been a very active period with significant developments on
multiple fronts that seem to be pulling the conflict in
different directions. We've seen major military escalations, installed diplomacy, and
a fascinating look inside the machinery that fuels it all.
I want to start with the most direct escalation. Last weekend,
(03:48):
Russia launched what has been described as its heaviest aerial
bombardment on Ukraine since the war began. For the first time,
a major government building in central Kiov was hit.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
So what does this attack.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Symbolize and signal at this stage in the conflict.
Speaker 4 (04:05):
I think it serves several purposes here For Russia. First,
it's a clear message of their capability. They have the
capability to hit these buildings in Kiev. Also demonstrates that
despite a long and costly war, Russia retains the ability
to project significant force anywhere in Ukraine. And also it's
an act of political signaling. At this point, it's aimed
(04:29):
as much at Washington, d C and other European capitals
as it is the capital of Ukraine in Kiev. I
think it's a forceful rejection of external pressure. It's a
statement that Moscow will not be deterred by sanctions or
by threats, and it aims to undermined morale. That's morale
from both military perspective, but also civilian and political perspectives
(04:54):
as well.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
And that attack prompted a swift and long rebel response
from the United States. President Trump threatened tougher sanctions, and
he spoke of moving to a quote second phase, end
quote of punishment against Moscow. Whatever that means.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
Yeah, that's what he said. Hyperbole as always Trump purply
if you will, as part of his pattern there. Now,
the threat of sanctions is a primary tool in the
playbook of the US government. The US Treasury Secretary elaborated
a little bit on this. He suggested that with stronger
(05:32):
European backing on secondary sanctions, specifically targeting countries that by
Russian oil, the US believes Russia's economy could face a
total collapse. Now, this frings the conflict as an economic
endurance race. So everyone's wondering can the Ukrainian military hold
out long enough to collapse the Russian economy.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
I mean, it's a compelling idea, but the threat of
sanctions has been on the table for years, and it
seems to be happening at the exact same time. The
diplomatic track is completely breaking down. Just this past Friday,
the Kremlin itself stated that peace talks are quote more
on pause end quote than active. So how do you
interpret that specific language coming directly from.
Speaker 4 (06:17):
Them, Yeah, like it's it's a very deliberate diplomatic maneuver.
For months, we've talked about it here. Ukraine has been
saying that Russia's not negotiating in good faith and is
only using the talks to buy time. Now, Russia's response
to that had been that it was Ukraine who was unreal,
unwilling to negotiate in good faith. They were trying to
control the narrative of who is at faults in these
(06:40):
what I call non negotiation negotiations. For the Kremlin to
now come out and essentially shift that narrative saying things
are on their end on pause, as you stated, it's
another way for them to control the narrative, formalizes the
stalemate without accepting blame in the situation, so they can
(07:02):
simultaneously claim to be committed to peaceful dialogue while also
pointing to President Trump's own admission that a deal is
going to take some time here, So it shifts this
perceived pressure off of them once again.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
So they are acknowledging the reality that everyone already knew.
Speaker 4 (07:22):
Yeah, finally, but they're they're acknowledging that while also putting
the ball back in Washington, in Washington d C's court.
So we heard from the administration officials and senators that
President Trump's patients is running out, but like Moscow is
observing that threats of these quote unquote very hard sanctions
(07:44):
have not yet materialized into debilitating action. The Russia's going
to keep doing this. They're going to test the West resolve.
They're going to test these red lines, all while being received,
you know, by world leaders as Putin has been.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
While that diplomatic front seems frozen, Ukraine appears to be
escalating on another front entirely, which is economic warfare. They
conducted a massive drone attack of their own, hitting Russia's
largest oil terminal on the Baltic Sea. So what is
the strategic value of a move like this?
Speaker 4 (08:18):
It's a perfect example of asymmetric strategy here by Ukraine.
So Ukraine can't match Russia's military scale, so they have
to attack strategic choke points, and so hitting a major
oil port like Promorse accomplishes I think a few things here. First, Obviously,
(08:38):
it directly attacks Russia's revenue stream with their oil, the
money that funds this war. It also aims to create
domestic problems for Russia. Right now we're seeing reports of
fuel shortages, rising prices internally. And finally, here I think
this is a significant psychological blow. It demitry. It's a
(09:00):
sophisticated capability to strike deep into Russian territory at a
highly sensitive and quite honestly well defended economic asset.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
The report also mentioned that this specific port is central
to Russia's shadow fleet of tankers used to get around
international sanctions.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
Yeah, and I think that's crucial to Ukraine's plans with
this attack. So it's not just about stopping the flow
of oil, it's about disrupting this clandestine network Russia has
built to sustain its economy, all of this in the
face of these terrible, terrible sanctions that have been put
on Russia. So by targeting the infrastructure that supports this
(09:43):
shadow economy. Ukraine is trying to make the circumvention of
these sanctions more difficult but also more costly for Moscow.
Speaker 2 (09:53):
This brings us to a really critical piece of the
puzzle and something that connects both the military and fronts
the weapons themselves. This week, Ukrainian officials were able to
analyze a Russian cruise missile that hit Kiev but did
not explode, and they found that it was filled with
dozens of foreign made electronic components, many from American companies.
(10:16):
So how is this possible years into a conflict with
such heavy sanction.
Speaker 4 (10:21):
This is the hidden front of the war. These are
all part of a global supply chain. Now the issue
lies with what are called dual use components. We've talked
about this with Chinese components. It's the chips and processors
found in these missiles. They're not designed as military hardware.
They're designed for commercial products. You know, household electronics are smartphones,
(10:45):
all those things. They are small, ubiquitous and produced in
the billions.
Speaker 2 (10:51):
So they're not shipping them something that is obviously a
missile part like they're probably electronic, and then stripping them
down to get the pieces they need.
Speaker 4 (11:03):
Yeah. Absolutely. Western companies have for the most part officially
stopped all sales to Russia. But what happens is that
Russia uses a global network of intermediaries, so companies in
third party countries can purchase these components legally for supposed
civilian use, and then they re route them to the
Russian military industrial complex. It's incredibly difficult to police the
(11:27):
end use of all of these, you know, every single
micro chip that is sold globally.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
So when we pull back and look at the entire
picture from this week, we have a war being fought
on at least four fronts. The conventional military front with
major aerial attacks, a frozen diplomatic front where talks are
on pause, and economic front where Ukraine is now striking
critical Russian infrastructure. And this hidden supply chain front where
(11:56):
a global cat and mouse game is being played out
over a tiny electronic parts.
Speaker 4 (12:01):
Yeah, very accurate what's been happening over the last few months.
The conflict is not just advancing on one linear path.
It is a dynamic system where pressure on one front
causes a reaction on another front. So Russia escalates militarily,
the rest the West threatens economically. Ukraine honestly cannot win
(12:21):
a conventional war of attrition. We've talked about that before.
I think we had an old episode that we use
the word attrition, or at least I did about a
thousand times.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
Yeah, so, yeah, I do remember that.
Speaker 4 (12:32):
Because so, because Ukraine cannot do that, it attacks Russia's
ability to fund the war. And underneath it all is
this constant, quiet struggle over the technological components that make
modern warfare possible. Understanding the complexity of all this is
key to understanding where this conflict might be headed. And
(12:54):
that's exactly why our analysis centers on the strategic calculus,
the overarching why, rather than just talking about the purely
tactical engagements that define the day to day battles.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
And while so much of the world's strategic focus remains
locked on Eastern Europe and the grinding war in Ukraine,
another long simmering I am talking about an event that
feels like a foundational crack in the geopolitical landscape of
the Middle East. For the first time, Israel conducted a
direct acknowledged strike inside a Gulf Arab state, targeting the
(13:29):
Hamas leadership in the heart of Doha, Qatar. But this
story is so much more than just the strike itself.
It is about its apparent failure, the deep divisions it
is exposed within Israel, and a diplomatic fallout that is
sending shock waves from Washington, DC to every capital in
the Gulf. So let's start at the beginning. For our listeners, Gartman,
(13:51):
walk us through what happened this week and crucially, what
was the intended goal.
Speaker 4 (13:57):
Yeah, what you're referring to here is the air strike
targeting a residential compound where senior members of Hamas's political
bureau were meeting in Cutter. Now, the explicit goal was
assassination to eliminate the top leadership of the group, including
their chief negotiator. That's Hlil al Haya, and he was
(14:18):
believed to be present in that residential building. Now, this
was framed as a strike against the masterminds of the
attacks on Israel, and the crucial.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Follow up to that is was it successful, Because the
reports that have come out since Tuesday paint a very
different picture.
Speaker 4 (14:35):
Yeah, they do. By all public accounts, the operation was
a failure. The primary target has since appeared in gutter,
even performing funeral rites for his son, who actually was
killed in the attack. Now, the Israeli security establishment widely
assesses that none of the top tier leadership were killed
(14:56):
in the strike. There is speculation that some have been injured,
but the primary objective was not met. Now the focus
inside Israel has shifted to an investigation of why it failed.
Was it flawed intelligence or perhaps the type of munitions
that was used to because they wanted to limit collateral
damage because it was happening in a golf Arab state,
(15:18):
not just in Gaza. As we know, they don't care
what the munitions do in Gaza, but they used the
specific type of munition to prevent that collateral damage. So
was that insufficient to destroy the entire structure?
Speaker 2 (15:36):
The lack of success is stunning given the risks involved.
And what I find justice stunning are the reports emerging
now about the deep divisions within Israel's own security services
before the strike was even launched. This was not a
unified decision, was it.
Speaker 4 (15:53):
No, it was not at all. This is a very
interesting part of all of this and perhaps is the
most critical internal dynamic. The reporting indicates that this operation
was pushed through by a very small political circle. That
small political circle around Prime Minister Net and Yahoo. It
was actively opposed by the heads of the Israeli defense Forces,
(16:15):
the National Security Advisor, and I would say most notably
the head of the Masad.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
So the Masade, Israel's own foreign intelligence agency, the one
best suited for an operation abroad, was against this.
Speaker 4 (16:29):
Yeah, The Massad, an agency renowned for its sophisticated and
often audacious foreign operations, determined that the proposed mission in
Doha was strategically untenable.
Speaker 3 (16:41):
Now.
Speaker 4 (16:41):
Their assessment was rooted in two core concerns. The first
one that a lethal operation would collapse the delicate hostage
ceasefire negotiations, but also that it would permanently rupture the
agency's vital working relationship with Gutter. They are the key
mediator here in the negotiations. Consequently, the agency refused to
(17:03):
execute a ground operation. That ground operation was when they
had designed themselves, and it led to a pivotal and
highly unorthodox decision here by the Masad. Now the mission
was reconfigured as an airstrike and operational oversight was then
transferred to the Shinvett, that's Israel's domestic security service. This
(17:25):
internal dissent and the subsequent operational failure have profound implications
for Prime Minister Netyaho's political future. His entire political brand
is predicated on being Mister Security, a leader with unparalleled
judgment in matters of national defense. So by overruling the
professional assessments of his Masad, the Idea and national security chiefs,
(17:48):
he took a high stake scamble and lost. The failure
not only exposes him to accusations of recklessness but also
politically isolates him. This makes him the sole architect of
a mission that yielded immense diplomatic damage for no strategic gain,
and at YAHOO may have severely undermined the very foundation
(18:10):
of political legitimacy.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
That's an incredible internal dynamic. So let's pivot to another
key relationship. The United States Israel's closest ally but also
a close ally of Cutter which hosts the largest American
air base in the region. You've been there several times, yes,
So where was the United States in all of this?
Speaker 4 (18:34):
Look? I can say honestly that they were effectively and
appears deliberately sidelined in this. I can tell you that
command centers at multiple US combatant commands were left in
the dark. The Israeli jets were poortedly flew south over
the Red Sea to launch their missiles from the other
side of the Arabian Peninsula, and this route was chosen
(18:56):
specifically to try to avoid Saudi airspace and then crucially
to minimize the warning time for the United States. Had
these jets flown over Saudi airspace, the Saudis would have
alerted the US, who would have alerted Katari forces and
diplomats and government officials. The White House was not notified
(19:20):
until the missiles were minutes from impact, and from what
I have heard, in those minutes, they did reach out
to Katari officials about this, but it was far too
late to stop the attack.
Speaker 2 (19:32):
I have to say, I'm not shocked that the UNITEDS
until it was too late. I mean, if they're ignoring
the massade their own people, why would they give a
crap what the United States has to say about this mission.
Speaker 4 (19:46):
But it's very interesting because, like the Massad should have
told someone within the CIA and that could have trickled up,
but that did not happen. So there's a lot more
to dig into about this to figure out what really
happened here.
Speaker 2 (20:04):
So how does the White House respond when it is
so publicly bypassed by its closest ally on an action
against another one.
Speaker 4 (20:12):
Of its own. Yeah, look, it's I would say it
with great difficulty. So we're seeing them perform this very
delicate tight rope walk right now. President Trump has publicly
stated he's very unhappy with the strike. He said it
does not advance American or Israeli goals. Now, at the
same time, he's called the elimination of Hamas a worthy goal.
(20:34):
This diplomatic contradiction that you're hearing from President Trump was
on full display at the United Nations because the US
actually allowed a Security Council statement condemning the attack to
pass unanimously. This is a very rare move. The US
typically blocks any statement critical of Israel. I think Israel
(20:55):
made a complete miscalculation with this one. My assessment is
that even if the target had been eliminated, the resulting
diplomatic and political fallout would have ensured the mission was
a net failure.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
It sounds like a signal that is being read loud
and clear in the golf. For decades, these wealthy Arab
states have operated under a core assumption, if you are
useful to the United States, it will protect you that
assumption seems to have been shattered.
Speaker 4 (21:22):
Yeah, look, that's I think the what you just said
is the fundamental takeaway for the entire region. The perception
in the Golf is not that the United States could
not stop the strike. It's that they chose not to
stop the strike. So they point to past instances where
DC did intervene to call off Israeli actions, most notably
(21:47):
against Iran, and they see that as proof that the
capability there exists. So the conclusion they are drawing is
that the US either gave Israel a green light or
it simply does not care about the sovereignty of its
Golf allies. As I said, if the masade knew this
was going on, someone had to have mentioned that to
(22:07):
the US Intelligence agency, the CIA. So, like I said,
I've got to dig deep. We're deeper into this. Maybe
the Gulf States are right the US chose not to.
We'll do that in a later episode. But that feeling
of betrayal is very profound. The Katari Emir himself called
this strike a state terror. He said, quote, we are
(22:30):
betrayed end quote.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
And we are already seeing a realle This is not
just anger. It seems to be translating into courtination.
Speaker 4 (22:39):
Yeah, it is. The attack is acting as a powerful
unifying force. That's why I call it a net negative
or a net failure. The president of the UAE, a
nation that had its own rifts with Cutter, was the
first leader to arrive in Doha less than twenty four
hours after the strike. Right now, we are seeing a
flurry of high level diplomacy across the Golf region, across
(23:03):
the Middle East. This is culminating in an emergency Arab
Islamic summit which is going to happen, which is happening
in Doha this weekend. Now, the goal, as they have stated,
is to move from solidarity to action. The uae has
already summoned the Israeli ambassador in protest, and that puts
(23:24):
the US broker Abraham Accords under severe strain.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
So that brings us to the biggest question, what happens
next if the old quid pro quo with the US
is broken? What are the real options for hill?
Speaker 4 (23:39):
They're weighing a spectrum of responses. Reporting is even coming
out that a similar attack within the borders of Egypt
had been planned by Israel. Egyptian intelligence identified these plans
At that point, they threatened action against Israel had they
pursued it. We saw that Israel did not pursue that.
But right now, for the Golf States, their options for
(24:00):
or direct retaliation that's going to be very limited. But
diplomatically and economically they have significant leverage. Right now, I
think we could see a formal downgrading of relations with
Israel by the UAE. We may see Gulf States begin
to financially and politically support legal cases against Israel in
the international courts. That's something that they've largely avoided before.
(24:24):
Now not economically, they could use their massive sovereign wealth
funds to boycott companies with stakes in the Israeli economy.
They could also begin to quietly turn down American requests
and reevaluate the trillions of dollars they have pledged to
invest in the US economy. The thinking right now is
(24:45):
if American partnership does not provide security, then perhaps that
money is better spimped elsewhere.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
And with all of this chaos and realignment, you have
to imagine that a run is watching very closely.
Speaker 4 (24:59):
Yeah, I think that's I think they are the primary
beneficiary of this crisis. So Iran sees a deep public
rift between the US and its key regional ally happening
right now. It sees a divided Israeli leadership, a unified
era block forming an opposition to an Israeli action. So
(25:20):
for Iran, this turmoil creates a permissive environment. This reduces
the credibility of American deterrence. It creates a window of
opportunity to advance Iranian agendas, whether that's with its nuclear
program or through those regional proxies Hamas has belah all
while the US is preoccupied with this diplomatic firestorm now,
(25:45):
the long term consequences are still unknown, but what is
clear is that the fundamental rules that have governed the
region's security for decades have been thrown into question. The
fallout from this Doha gamble this is going to be
felt for a very long time time.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Clearly, the fundamental rules leaving a power vacuum in a
permissive environment is instability. However, isn't confined to the Middle East.
A different kind of threat is escalating tensions on NATO's
eastern flank. We'll discuss the alarming reports of drones being
shot down over Poland after a quick ad break, So
please stay with us. We'll be right back. Welcome back listeners.
(26:23):
Before the break, we were discussing the profound GEO police
following the recent crisis. Now we turn our attention to
Europe and a story that brings their directly to NATO's doorstep.
Polish authorities have confirmed that air defense systems were activated
to shoot down several unidentified drones that violated their airspace. So, Curvin,
can you start by walking us through the initial incident.
Speaker 4 (26:46):
Yeah, absolutely, so. What we saw was an incursion of
a significant number of suspected Russian drones into Polish air space. Now,
there have been occasional strain missiles or drones that have
crossed borders before even into Polish, but this was different.
This was different in both scale and response. Now, the
key development here is that Poland, with air support from
(27:08):
its NATO allies, engaged and shot some of those drones down.
This marks the first time a NATO member is known
to have fired shots in a situation directly related to
the russou Ukrainian War.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
That is a major threshold across I imagine the response
from the alliance was immediate and went beyond just that
initial aerial engagement.
Speaker 4 (27:30):
Yeah, it was almost immediately NATO announced the new mission.
They named it Eastern Century. And it's not just a statement.
This is a tangible reinforcement of the eastern flank of Europe.
We're seeing countries like the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, also France,
of all people, of all countries to commit troops to
(27:51):
the Eastern Front. They're committing those troops, the helicopters, air
defense systems, advanced fighter jets. What they're trying to do
is bolster Poland's security. Now, the Polish Defense Minister made
a point of calling these quote concrete declarations end quote,
not the quote empty gestures end quote. He said his
(28:11):
country has seen in the past, and where.
Speaker 2 (28:14):
Does the good old US a very stand on this.
The President's response seemed quite measured in comparison to some
European leaders.
Speaker 4 (28:23):
Yeah, it did. For Once President Trump was measured, he
publicly suggested it could have been a mistake. That's a
much more cautious tone than we are used to from him. Now. Officially,
NATO's top military commander has said the intent is still
under investigation. So what we're seeing here three distinct narratives
(28:46):
playing out. We have a Poland saying it's a deliberate provocation,
Russia saying or Belarus saying in support of Russia. This
was just a technical accident, and then we have a
much more reserved wait and see approach from Washington, DC.
Speaker 2 (29:06):
But honestly, this seemed to be a coincidence. Could you
connect this drone incursion to the other geopolitical pressures that
were building in the region, like what was happening that
might have served as a catalyst for this, or maybe
they were taking advantage of the fact that everyone was
just structed failure in Cutter.
Speaker 4 (29:25):
Yeah, you know, yeah, you make a great point, honestly,
and I think the context is absolutely critical to understanding
the severity of this. Also, you mentioned it Israel's strike
within Cutter is one part of this. There's also this
incursion happened during one of the most intense and large
(29:49):
scale Russian aerial assaults on Ukraine. Hundreds of drones were launched.
Maybe they thought if they could squeeze a couple of
through they could test NATO's resolve. Another thing, and perhaps
more importantly, this also coincided almost exactly with the start
of the twenty twenty five joint military exercise between Russian
(30:11):
and Belarus. Now, these exercises always cause anxiety on NATO's
eastern flank, and Poland has even closed its land border
in response.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
Sometimes is there anything else.
Speaker 4 (30:25):
Yeah, So there has been recent very public discussion among
European nations, led by France of all countries, about potentially
sending troops to Ukraine as part of a post war
security guarantee. Now Russian leadership has responded very strongly to this.
They warned that any foreign troops are going to be
considered legitimate targets within this war. So when you combined
(30:49):
this intensified era war, the Zabad exercises, the rhetoric around
foreign intervention, you get an incredibly tense and volatileronment where
an incident like this is naturally interpreted much more seriously with.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
The military flexing its muscles. What is happening on the
diplomatic front, I know Poland took this straight to the
United Nations.
Speaker 4 (31:15):
Yeah, they did, and Poland requested an emergency session of
the UN Security Council and that took place immediately. As
you would expect, it became a forum for these competing
narratives to be presented on the world on the world
stage because Russia is there as well. Poland and its
European allies condemned Russia's actions as a dangerous escalation. They
(31:37):
said it undermines any prospect for peace. Russia in turn
rejected all allegations. They accused NATO and the West of
aggravating the crisis and obstructing a peaceful resolution.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
So the diplomatic channels are reflecting the same deep divisions
that we're seeing.
Speaker 4 (31:56):
On the ground. Yeah, you're exactly right. Now the UN
serves as a venue to formalize these positions, but it's
unlikely to produce a resolution. The core of the issue
remains the same. Whether by accident or by design, The
conflict in Ukraine created a direct military confrontation between Russia
(32:16):
and a NATO member. This is a line that has
now been crossed.
Speaker 2 (32:21):
It really feels like the situation is more precarious than ever,
a significant militariation on all fronts.
Speaker 4 (32:27):
Yeah, look, we have warned of this from the very start.
This very podcast explained that this is quite possible for
this conflict. It's quite possible for this conflict to spill
over into NATO borders. Now, the key thing I think
to watch for is going to be the official findings
of NATO's investigation. There they'll present what the intent was
(32:52):
for these drones. Also the continued military posturing on both
sides of that border. Poland did invoke our four So
could Article five be next?
Speaker 2 (33:04):
And that question four now we'll have to remain unanswered.
Is this we will leave Eastern Europe here and turn
our attention to South Asia, specifically Nepal. Over the past week,
we have witnessed a political earthquake. A government that seemed
stable just one month ago has completely collapsed in a
matter of days. It is a stunning series of events,
(33:27):
and it happened with a speed that I think caught
many observers and certainly the government there completely by surprised.
So let's start at the beginning. For our listeners, What
was the specific spark that lit this fire? It seems
to have come out of nowhere.
Speaker 4 (33:44):
Yeah, I think the immediate trigger was a government decision
that in hindsight, was a profound miscalculation. The government of
Prime Minister KP. Charma Ali announced a ban on twenty
six social media platforms. That's some of these are the
ones we all use, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, WhatsApp. The stated
(34:10):
reason was to control misinformation and hate speech by forcing
these companies to register locally, a.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Move we have seen other governments attempt. But the reaction
to Paul was not just criticism. It was explosive.
Speaker 4 (34:26):
Yeah, you'rebe absolutely right here. For the population, especially the
younger generation, this was not a simple regulatory issue. It
was seen as a direct assault on their freedom of
expression and their primary space for connection and political discourse.
This frustration that had been simmering online, it did not
(34:49):
just stay online. It spilled out onto the streets, and
it did so almost immediately.
Speaker 2 (34:55):
Which brings up the crucial point. This could not have
just been about a social media ban. Those kinds of
protests flare up and often died down, like with X
here in America whenever they tried to what's that? No,
not X, sorry, TikTok, dang I I'm not on like anything.
Speaker 1 (35:14):
Also, I can't.
Speaker 4 (35:15):
Rever No, you're absolutely but you're absolutely right with TikTok.
When when Musk bought Twitter, we saw the same kind
of things happen.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
Yeah, so this one toppled the entire government, though, So
what were the deeper currents at play here? Yeah?
Speaker 4 (35:31):
Once again, absolutely correct on this one. You're you're actually
digging deeper, Tienna, Uh, because the band was this social
media ban was merely the spark that ignited a much
larger powder keg of public grievance. For years, there's been
a deep and growing frustration in Nepal with systemic issues.
(35:54):
We touched on this very topic about a year ago. UH,
with the fact that within Nepal there is demic political corruption,
there's rampant nepotism, a stagnant economy that offers very little hope,
particularly for the youth. The youth unemployment rate that is
over twenty percent right now.
Speaker 2 (36:14):
I saw reports about a hashtag which was hashtag Nepo kids.
Can you explain that?
Speaker 4 (36:21):
Yeah? I think that this is the central to understanding
the anger. Social media was the very place where young
Nepalis could could see the stark contrast between their own
struggles and the lives of the political elite. So the
hashtag Nepo kids trend involved users sharing posts from the
children of politicians showcased their luxurious lifestyles. These designer clothes,
(36:45):
expensive holidays, the luxury cars that they had access to.
This was not just envy. It was seen as flaunting
the proceeds of corruption while millions of their peers were struggling,
or millions of their peers were forced to seek work
abroad outside of Nepal. The band the social media ban
(37:08):
was an attempt to shut down the very platform that
was exposing this reality.
Speaker 2 (37:12):
So you have this deep well of public anger and
the government essentially puts a lid on the primary release valve.
So what happened next? How did it go from street
protests to them burning all these buildings down and the
Prime minister resigning and like the family I saw videans.
Speaker 4 (37:30):
Of the families.
Speaker 2 (37:32):
It's not funny.
Speaker 4 (37:34):
But right being lifted by helicopter.
Speaker 2 (37:37):
Just dangling from the bottom of the helicopter, and I would.
Speaker 4 (37:41):
Have been white sped, yeah, I mean it was the
only way out. It was for them.
Speaker 2 (37:45):
Wild seeing them all strapped to this table like the
roof yikes.
Speaker 4 (37:51):
What like Saigon? Right, Yeah, that's true then, And it's
the same feeling there, Like if they would have stepped
out of their residences or their government buildings, they might
it is at approbable they would have either been killed
tragically and unfortunately, or you know, harmed very much. So,
(38:18):
so that was the only way out, and it really
escalated tragically. Now, during the initial protests in Kathmandu, police
cracked down on the protest. Nineteen protesters were killed. That
was the point of no return. The anger over the
ban was transformed into outrage over the government's violence against
(38:41):
its own citizens. So the protests widened, they became more intense,
and then, just as you said, demonstrators set fire to
the Parliament building and other government offices. If you are
on our our Instagram page, you will notice we have
one of those pictures of the Parliament building on fire
(39:02):
and it just went across all of social media. Now,
faced with a complete loss of control and public legitimacy,
Prime Minister Ali and his entire cabinet had no choice.
They had to step down.
Speaker 2 (39:15):
And your statement Reuters confirmed that actually were killed.
Speaker 1 (39:19):
In the protests.
Speaker 2 (39:20):
Oh yeah, thank you, It was only updated. I just
want to say seventy two people who were because I
heard like fifty two yesterday, so the number has gone
up to So obviously this was a complete collapse of
state authority. And throughout this technology played a central role,
not just in fueling the anger but in organizing. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (39:42):
Look, technology played a decisive role here. When the end,
when the government initiated the ban, users immediately pivoted. There
was a reported six thousand percent searche in sign ups
for VPN services, and that was because they wanted to
circumvent the On the various social media platforms, people downloaded
(40:04):
offline messaging apps. Also, when the government fail, the movement
did not dissipate. The movement migrated to platforms like Discord,
where massive servers with over one hundred thousand members are
now hosting debates and planning the next steps, including who
should lead an interim government.
Speaker 2 (40:25):
Which is fascinating. A decentralized leaderless movement is now attempting
to shape the country's political future from a chat server.
So where does that leave Nepal?
Speaker 4 (40:35):
Now lose the country in a very delicate and uncertain position.
The Nepal army has on the streets. That's primarily to
maintain order to prevent a total breakdown here. They're not
taking power in a coup, so it's not the military
that's taking power here, they're just holding the space. Meanwhile,
these networks of young activists are coordinating to form a
(40:57):
civilian interim government. Now I think they've just finally put
someone in place. This is the former Chief Justice, Sushila
khark She's seen as an anti corruption figure. So with
the youth movement putting in a new form of government,
(41:19):
they've even announced a tentative date for new elections that's
going to be March fifth of next year.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
All right, let's zoom out, Curvin, as you typically like
to do. So why should someone listening in another part
of the world pay close attention to what just happen?
Speaker 4 (41:33):
Yeah, this is not an isolated event. That's why this
is a potent case for study and perhaps a blueprint
for a global trend. At this moment in history, we
are witnessing a pattern of digitally fueled, youth led movements
that can challenge and even dismantle established power structures with
(41:56):
incredible speed. We saw similar dynamics to this in in
Sri Lanka. We also saw it in Bangladesh.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
So this is about more than just.
Speaker 4 (42:06):
A pall it is it's about a generational shift in
how political power is contested. The trajectory is one where
younger citizens, feeling disenfranchised by legacy systems they view as
corrupt and unresponsive, are using the tools at their disposal
to take direct action. These events do not happen in
(42:26):
a vacuum. When you place this kind of potent domestic
instability into the current global landscape, which is already tense,
this adds another layer of volatility, highlights a broader global
concern about the nature of power and of influence in
the twenty first century. I am very confident this is
(42:47):
not a blip. This is a signal.
Speaker 2 (42:51):
I mean, it's a fascinating dynamic to watch the idea
that a government stability may now be inversely proportional to
its youth, unemployment and corruption, especially when that corruption can
be broadcast in near real time from a smartphone in
the hands of almost every single individual. So, as always,
thank you Curvin for your analysis. Is there anything else
(43:13):
you want to discuss? Uh?
Speaker 4 (43:14):
No, that's all I have. Do you have anything you
want to talk about?
Speaker 2 (43:17):
I just want to say next week we will have
an episode on Yeah, but the following week probably not
to be honest.
Speaker 4 (43:28):
I'm actually working with Cole to try to get a
podcast out as an interview podcast for that weekend.
Speaker 2 (43:34):
That's something you could mention, dude.
Speaker 4 (43:38):
She could have mentioned it to you before we started this. Yeah,
it was something I was thinking about today in getting
one done before that day, or we might not have one, so.
Speaker 2 (43:49):
Yeah, I mean, I haven't figured it out yet. Just
be ready. You might not get your regular news updates
from US twenty twenty two twins.
Speaker 4 (44:01):
Hold up, let me let me look at the case.
Speaker 2 (44:03):
It'll be the twenty twenty ninth, not that, Yeah, the
twenty ninth, it would be the episode. The twenty ninth
might not you know, be there, but we'll we'll try
our darnedst and since Kravin is talking to col it
might happen. So that's cool, good, good, a little.
Speaker 4 (44:21):
Wit I gotta handle it. We'll see if we can,
we can schedule it. Yeah, we'll see about that, and
then maybe on the sixth as well. We'll see or
we might have really nice audio on the sixth, Not
to get ahead of ourselves.
Speaker 2 (44:34):
Really nice audio on the sixth.
Speaker 4 (44:37):
Because we'll be on the same run in our studio,
so big things can out well over the next two.
Speaker 2 (44:47):
Weeks at the very least fun stuff. So anyway, is
got it? Is that all?
Speaker 4 (44:55):
Yeah, it's been a tough week. Uh, lots lots of
events going on that happened this past week.
Speaker 2 (45:03):
So well, thank you so much for listening to this
week explained, we hope that you found it both informative
and engaging. If you have any feedback or suggestions for
future episodes, we'd love to hear from you. For more
in depth coverage of these stories and more, be sure
to follow us on social media. This week explained
Speaker 4 (45:22):
Tianna, thank you so much,
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.