September 22, 2025 • 44 mins
This week, we unpack a world on the brink. From Ukraine's daring counteroffensive striking deep inside Russia to Israel's high-stakes ground invasion of Gaza, we analyze the critical decisions and their devastating consequences. Is Russia's escalating pressure on NATO a distraction, or part of a larger, more dangerous game?
Episode Highlights
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/this-week-explained--6199515/support.
Episode Highlights
- Ukraine's Two-Front Strategy: Ukrainian forces are not only reclaiming territory in the east but are also crippling Russia's war economy by targeting critical oil facilities deep inside the country.
- Israel's Gaza Offensive: We break down why the Israeli government initiated a major ground offensive against the advice of its own security chiefs, sparking a humanitarian catastrophe and a chilling ultimatum from Hamas regarding the remaining hostages.
- The New Nuclear Axis: Intelligence reports allege that Russia has supplied North Korea with a nuclear reactor and other key components for a submarine, a payment for munitions that could fundamentally alter the security landscape in Asia.
- US vs. Venezuela: Tensions in the Caribbean are reaching a boiling point as the U.S. conducts lethal strikes against alleged "narcoterrorists," prompting a confrontational military response from Venezuela and bringing the two nations closer to direct conflict
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.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
What are you waiting for?
Speaker 1 (01:59):
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 t l P dot com slash this week.
Speaker 3 (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. If you want to ensure
(02:37):
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 a fantastic equato engaged directly
(03:01):
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 Ukrainian Gaza, more escalation between Russia and NATO, Russia
and North Korea's Nuclear Pact, and the US war on cartels.
(03:25):
So let's start on the battlefield of Putin's special military operation.
Reports from President Zelenski's office indicate that Ukrainian troops have
not only halted some of Russia's recent gains, but have
actually reclaimed a substantial amount of territory, particularly in the east.
So what does this counterfensive signal.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
I think it signals a few important things. First, it
demonstrates that the Ukrainian military retains a high degree of
operational capability, also a high degree of resolve. This is
even after months of intense defensive fighting. Now reclaiming territory,
especially in a contested area in the east like Dunnetsk.
(04:08):
This is a complex undertaking. Secondly, it disrupts this narrative
of inevitable Russian progress, which had been building here since
Trumpet started asking for these peace negotiations to move along. Now,
forcing Russian troops to retreat boosts morale for Ukraine. It
(04:30):
also boosts morale for Ukraine's partners like NATO. It also
creates significant strategic and logistical problems for Moscow. They are
not just defending, they're not actively dictating the terms of
engagement in specific sectors.
Speaker 3 (04:45):
And this is not just happening on the front line.
Ukraine appears to be expanding the scope of its operations,
with strikes occurring deep inside Russia. We have seen reports
of explosions at major oil facilities, some over one thousand
kilometers from border.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Yeah, that's right. And then these are not random acts.
These are targeted and targeting facilities like the gas bron
plant or the refinery in Volgograd. This is a calculated
part of Ukraine's strategy. Now. The goal here is twofold
one is to degrade Russia's ability to fuel its war
machine and also to create economic pressure. These refineries are
(05:27):
actually very vital to the Russian economy. They supply fuel
to the Russian military, So by hitting these refineries, Ukraine
aims to make the cost of the war tangibly felt
far from the front lines. It's a way of showing
that no part of Russia's critical infrastructure is entirely safe.
Speaker 3 (05:45):
It also seems to be prompting new levels of international cooperation.
After a Russian drone recently crossed into Polish airspace, we
are now seeing WARSAW and Kiev agree to form a
joint task force for unmanned systems, and.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
We spoke about this last week for a bit. Now
we're seeing the tangible effects of this a Russian drone
being shot down o Ournado country. That is a serious escalation.
So the creation of this joint task force is a
direct and practical response to that escalation. So this all
shows a deepening of the security partnership between Poland and Ukraine,
(06:22):
but also NATO and Ukraine. So they're not just sharing
equipment anymore. They are planning to integrate technologies, conduct joint training,
and develop new defensive projects. So this is a signal
of this move kind of signals towards a more formalized
long term defense collaboration in the face of this shared
(06:47):
threat from Russia.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
And on the diplomatic front, we saw some rather direct
comments from President Donald Trump during his state visit to
the UK, specifically aimed at Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
Yeah he did, President Trump admitted Putin quote, let him
down end quote. With his recent actions, the public criticism
of that nature, especially during a high profile joint press
conference with the British Prime Minister, this is designed to
apply international pressure on Putin, so it serves to further
isolate the Russian president on the world stage. Now, for
(07:21):
the British officials hosting this visit, a comment such as
this is most likely seen as a success for them.
It reinforces a unified stance against Moscow's actions.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
All right, let's shift from the international stage to the
internal situation within Russia. There seems to be a growing
intolerance for any criticism of the war effort, even from
those who were previously supportive. We're seeing some of the
staunchly pro war bloggers now speak out. Hell.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
This is very fascinating. We're now seeing a narrative shift
among a group that has been so support for so
long of this war. So that to me is very telling.
We're not talking about anti war activists speaking out in Russia.
These are pro war commentators who are now highly critical
of how the Russian government and the Russian military handled
(08:14):
the Ukrainian incursion, especially into the area of the Curse region.
They are pointing fingers directly at the Ministry of Defense
and the FSB.
Speaker 3 (08:25):
And one of those blockers has been arrested for alleged
embezzlement and labeled a quote foreign agent end quote.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Yeah, exactly, we know this. This is a typical Putin
narrative management and scapegoating. The military failure in Curse that
we are seeing was a significant embarrassment for both Putin
and the Kremlin. So rather than addressing the systemic issues
that allowed it to happen, the response is to silence
(08:54):
the critics shift the blame onto those regional officials of
that area. So designate this mill blogger as a foreign agent.
That is a powerful tool to discredit him. It also
sends a clear message to the other ulternationalist bloggers criticism
of tactical execution is not going to be tolerated in Russia. SOS.
(09:14):
The Kremlin is more concerned with controlling the information space
than with actually addressing the failures themselves.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
So we are seeing Ukraine regain initiative on the battlefield
and expand its strategic attacks, while Russia appears to be
turning inward, tightening its control over information and cracking down
on internal dissent. Let's shift to the other conflict dominating headlines.
After a period of intense aerial bombardment, Israeli forces have
(09:43):
initiated a major ground defensive into Gaza City. This marks
a significant escalation in a conflict that has already lasted
for nearly two years.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
Yeah, it absolutely does, and this is a deliberate and
substantial shift in Israel's strategy. The stated objective from the
Israeli government is they want to dismantle what they describe
as Hamas's last major stronghold. This is also its primary
symbol of governance in Gaza.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
So from a strategic standpoint, what is the calculus here?
Why this move and why now? It seems like an
incredibly high stakes decision.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
It's incredibly high stakes. I think what's most telling is
that this decision was reportedly not a unanimous one within
the Israeli security cabinet. You have the heads of the IDEF,
Masad and shin Bet. They actually advise the Prime Minister
against the specific operation.
Speaker 3 (10:40):
That seems to be happening a little bit more frequently
than they would like they are making. They don't have
unanimous support, but they're doing it anyways, and it's kind
of blowing up in their face a bit. It seems
very significant. What are the primary concerns here? Why didn't
the cabinet give their full support through their full support
(11:04):
behind this decision.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
Oh, there were a few warnings that came from the cabinet.
First and foremost was extreme danger to them remaining Israeli
hostages held in Gaza. They believe that should be at
the forefront of every mind of every leader in Israel.
Second was the potential for very heavy casualties among the
IDF who would be conducting a dense urban warfare campaign.
(11:29):
The third thing was the long term strategic consequence. You know, yeah,
maybe it'll be successful on the battlefield and they take
over Gaza, but what happens the day after. They wanted
that this could fail to fully dismantle Hamas and it
might force Israel into the position of directly governing over
(11:49):
two million Palestinians. That is a scenario that everyone in
the cabinet actually wants to avoid.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
Oh so the fact that they would possibly kill thousands
more Palestinian civilians didn't go on their radar at all.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
Well, I mean, yeah, is that on the radar. It could.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
As yet has yet to pop up.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
I was just one since all of a sudden, now
they're what they're doing is not getting full support. I
don't know. I thought maybe a conscience sprouted up somewhere
for someone other than themselves.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Right, But I guess not.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
Okay, So anyways, there is a deep rift between the
political leadership and the security establishment, and while those strategic
debates are happening, the humanitarian reality on the ground continues
to be catastrophic. Walk us through what this escalation means
for the civilian population that they don't seem to care about.
Speaker 2 (12:54):
Yeah, well, it is a nightmare scenario. Look, this is
a grim reality for hundreds of thousands, for two million
Palestinians on the ground there. For weeks, the Israeli military
has been telling the population of the city to evacuate
south now tanks on the ground. That has turned from
(13:16):
a warning into a frantic exodus for those people. People
are fleeing with whatever they can carry. They're on foot,
whether whether they're on foot or in carts or on boats,
all along the coast. They are trying to get out
before complete destruction to the city happens.
Speaker 3 (13:35):
Okay, but where are they supposed to go? We hear
reports that the designated humanitarian zones are already overwhelmed.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
Yeah, and I think that's the core issue the crisis here.
These zones are not equipped to handle such a massive
influx of people. Eight agencies, many of which are now
issuing the most severe warnings that we've heard since the
start of this war, describe a situation of extreme overcrowding
in those areas. There is insufficient shelter, insufficient water, and
(14:06):
insufficient food. The death toll from Moult nutrition is actually
climbing daily. We have seen We've even seen reports of
the critical infrastructure of the area, like the only specialized
children's hospital in the area was damaged in the fighting.
This is a complete systemic collapse.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
And in the middle of all of this are the hostages.
This brings us to a chilling statement that was just
released by Hamas.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
Yeah, I think this is a pivotal moment in the
psychological dimension of this war. Hamas's military wing issued a statement,
pointedly written in Hebrew, addressed the Israeli people, said that
this ground offensive has closed the door on any potential
return of those hostages. Their message was that the Israeli
government has effectively chosen military action or the lives of
(14:58):
its own citizens. They also said that not one of
the remaining captives will be returned, whether alive or dead.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
Oh my gosh, and didn't. They also make a reference
to Ron Arad, which I imagine carries a very specific weight
inside Israel.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
They did, and it does. That is a deep national trauma.
Ron Arad was an Israeli airman. He was lost in
Lebanon in the nineteen eighties, and that Israel never recovered
the body of or know if he's alive. Still he's
still listed as missing an action, and as recently as
(15:39):
twenty twenty one, Israel has tried to identify his whereabouts,
invoking his name as a way of saying, the hostages
will vanish into history, becoming a permanent, unresolved wound for
the country of Israel. It's an exceptionally harsh message. Is
designed to amplify the pressure on the net Yahoo government
from within, and it seems.
Speaker 3 (16:01):
To be working. The families of the hostages have been
protesting and accusing the Prime Minister of sacrificing their loved ones.
But at the same time, I feel like they've been
doing that for months now.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
They have, and it is getting louder because they honestly,
they felt betrayed for a long time. Right, this isn't
the first time we've talked about They're protesting right. They
are echoing the same warnings the security chiefs gave the
Prime Minister that this offensive is going to be a
(16:31):
death sentence for the people that they love. This has
created an immense internal political crisis for the government, and
that's running parallel to that military operation itself.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Of course, this conflict is not happening in a vacuum.
So how is the international community responding to this new phase?
Speaker 2 (16:51):
Yeah, I mean the condemnation has been widespread, it is
growing sharper. A United Nations commission recently released a report
concluded that Israel has committed acts of genocide. It's an
accusation that Israel has categorically rejected. Now more tangibly, the
European Union, this is Israel's largest trading partner. They're now formally
(17:13):
proposing sanctions on Israel. Say, significant diplomatic shift. That signals
growing isolation.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
And when we talk about regional stability, it is impossible
not to think about other flashpoints. The risk of this
conflict spiraling into a wider war has been a concern
from the very beginning. We've seen rhetoric from Iran, for example,
after hypothetical US actions, stating that all options are on
the table to defend itself. It is a terrifyingly delicate
(17:41):
balance ground offensive with immense human cost, a government at
odds with its own security experts, a desperate hostage crisis,
and then ever present threat of regional escalation. It is
hard to see a clear path forward. Now it is
time to shift our focus back to Europe and discuss
more Russian incursions into NATO airspace. But first we need
(18:04):
to take a quick break, so stay with us. We'll
be right back. Welcome back, listeners. Last week we dedicated
our time to the Russian drone incursion over Poland. It
felt like a significant moment, like a deliberate test of
NATO's borders. But it seems that was only the beginning
of a new chapter. This past Friday, the situation escalated further,
(18:26):
this time in this guise over Estonia, which we visited
and loved. So let us start there for our listeners,
Can you lay out what exactly happened on Friday and
what happened to our buddies in Estonia?
Speaker 2 (18:44):
Yeah, I'm more Russian incursions right. So on Friday morning,
the Estonian government reported that three Russian Make thirty one
fire jets violated their sovereign airspace over the Gulf of Finland.
This is not a brief or ax dental crossing. Reports
indicate they remained inside Estonia airspace for approximately twelve minutes. Now,
(19:06):
more importantly, these aircraft were flying dark, They had no
flight plans filed, their transponders were inactive, and they were
not in communication with air traffic control.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
Flying dark, as you say, certainly signals this was not
a standard scheduled flight. So what was the immediate response
from NATO?
Speaker 2 (19:27):
I think the response was as quick as it could be,
which that's also a key data point in all of this.
NATO's Baltic Air Policing mission was activated Italian F thirty
five fighter jets. Those were based in Estonia. Those they
were scrambled to intercept. Finland and Sweden also launched their
own aircraft, and essentially the Russian jets were met and
(19:50):
escorted out of the area and toward the Russian exclave
of Koliningrad. From a procedural standpoint, the system worked as
in ten did for NATO.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
But do you think Russia did that in order to
test their response times?
Speaker 2 (20:07):
Yes? Absolutely, short answer, yes, okay, okay, So it's an
intelligence gathering.
Speaker 3 (20:13):
Okay, So from a political standpoint, an encourasion like this
is not just a military issue. Estonia's reaction was very strong,
from what I understand.
Speaker 2 (20:24):
Extremely strong. It was much like Poland did last week.
Estonian Prime Minister Kristin Mikhail announced that Estonia was formally
invoking Article four of the NATO Treaty.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
Right, and I don't know if we got into this
last time. So can you remind us what Article four entails?
Speaker 2 (20:43):
Yes? So Article four is a consult uh, a consultation mechanism,
so it doesn't automatically trigger military response like the more
famous Article five. Instead, it allows any member state to
bring an issue to the table for urgent consultation when
they fill their territorial integrity, political independence, or their security
being threatened. It is a formal declaration that a serious
(21:07):
threat exists and it compels the entire NATO alliance to
address it collectively. So doing this twice in two weeks
over similar provocations since a very powerful signal to Russia
and the world.
Speaker 3 (21:22):
I don't think with what's going on internally in Russia currently,
they can you know, fight on all these different fronts. Well,
what's going on at home. They need to quit pushing
people's buttons. So Estonian officials have called this particular violation
unprecedentedly brazen. So what makesists one different from past incursions.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
I think it's a combination of factors. The duration is significant,
so we're not talking about like a whoopsie moment here
for those aircraft. This was deliberate. This was sustained the
use of three advanced interceptor jets rather than a single plane.
That's certainly an escalation on the NATO side, and doing
this so soon after the incident in Poland suggest a
(22:09):
deliberate and coordinated strategy. The Estonian Foreign minister used an
interesting analogy. He actually they refer to it as the
boiling frog theory.
Speaker 3 (22:21):
Yuck. Yeah, it makes me sad thinking about that, but
that's because I am quite literally picturing a boiling frogs
So anyways, the idea that if you turn up the
heat slowly enough, the frog will not notice it is
in danger until it is too late. Right, That's what
(22:44):
it boils down to.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
For lack of a better term, yeah, I guess that's
the perfect term. Right. So the concern is that Russia
is engaging in a series of escalating provocations. Each one
on its own is managed, does not lead to open
conflict here, but if you take them together, they serve
to test NATO's reaction times, probe its defenses, and perhaps
(23:10):
more importantly, gauge its political unity and resolved. There is
also the assessment that this is an attempt to draw
attention away from the conflict in Ukraine, would force the
Alliance to focus more on its territorial on its own
territorial defense, And of.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
Course Russia denies the entire event.
Speaker 2 (23:35):
Yeah, the Russian Ministry of Defense issued a statement. They
claim the jets were on a routine flight, they complied
with all international regulations, they flew strictly over neutral waters.
Now that's a standard element of the Kremlin playbook. Execute
a provocative action and then flatly deny it, and that
creates an ambiguous information environment.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
Well, I am sure we will be talking about provocations
between Russia and NATO a lot more time to shift
our focus to a development that feels both sudden and
somehow entirely predictable. Intelligence reports have emerged from Seoul, South Korea,
suggesting that North Korea may have crossed a significant technological
threshold not on its own, of course, but with a
(24:20):
powerful benefactor.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
A very powerful one that we were just talking about.
The reports alleged that Russia has supplied North Korea with
a nuclear reactor and other key components for a nuclear
powered submarine, just like one of those missile tests from
North Korea. If this intelligence proves accurate, this represents a
(24:46):
fundamental shift in the security landscape of the Korean Peninsula
and beyond.
Speaker 3 (24:51):
So let us start there, breakdown for us what is
being reported, like, what exactly has Russia supposedly provided to Pyongyang?
Speaker 2 (25:00):
So the information, this information that South Korea has reportedly
shared with the United States points to the transfer of
several modules from decommissioned Russian nuclear submarines. We're talking about
the heart of the vessel, so the reactor itself, the turbine,
the cooling systems. These are not parts one can build
(25:21):
easily or actually acquire on the open market. Is a
state level, highly sensitive technology.
Speaker 3 (25:30):
And the context for this is the strategic partnership that
Moscow and Pyongyang formalized last year. We have seen North
Korea supplying Russia with munitions and personnel for its war
in Ukraine. Is this transfer simply Moscow's way of paying
them back for those weapons and the personnel.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
I mean, it is payment, for sure, but I think
it's more, much more than just a simple transaction. It
signals a d deepening of their alliance, and it's a
calculated decision by the Kremlin. For years, Russia was reluctant
to share this level of military technology. So by providing
nuclear propulsion zo line, which was a line that they
(26:15):
were unwilling to cross before, this shows that they have
now changed in that thinking. So why is that thinking changing? Well,
the pressures of the war in Ukraine appear to have
changed the calculus there. Now Moscow needs support, they need money,
they need personnel, they need weapons, and in return, Pyongyang
(26:37):
gets something it has craved for a very long time,
a key to building a true blue water navy.
Speaker 3 (26:44):
And why is a nuclear powered submarine such a coveted
piece of hardware? North Korea already had submarine, so what
makes this difference?
Speaker 2 (26:54):
Basically, endurance a conventional diesel electric submarine that those are
tethered to the surface, it's got to come up for air.
What I mean there is that it needs to run
its engines and recharge its batteries. It makes it very
vulnerable to detection. A nuclear submarine can stay submerged for
months at a time. Its only limitation is the food
(27:17):
it can carry for the crew that's in the submarine.
It is faster, it can travel farther, and it can
stay hidden for much longer periods. It turns a regional
navy in North Korea into one with a potential global reach.
So for North Korea, say, massive leap and strategic capability,
(27:37):
allowing it to project power far beyond its own shores
and better threatn the assets of the United States and
US allies.
Speaker 3 (27:45):
Well, this is a deeply concerning development on its own.
But I have to ask, does this feel like an
isolated event to you? Or is it part of a
wider pattern? We are seeing a merge on the global stage.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
Yeah, I really don't think you can look at this
in a vacuum. It's absolutely part of a broader, more
troubling pattern. Here. We're seeing a growing alignment of states
that operate outside of the established international norms the global South,
and they are increasingly willing to cooperate in ways that
directly challenge Western security interests.
Speaker 3 (28:21):
So what happens next? How do South Korea and the
United States respond to a North Korea that is on
the verge of deploying a nuclear powered submarine.
Speaker 2 (28:31):
I think the first step is verification. That has not
gone through rigorous verification yet, so the intelligence will be
scrutinized from every possible angle. We will see heightened surveillance.
We're gonna see satellites, ships, aircraft, all focused on North
Korean naval shipyards. The North Koreans understand well, at least
(28:52):
Kim Stung un understands this, But assuming the intelligence holds,
the response should be multifaceted. There should be diplomatic condemnation,
but that has limited effect on Moscow or Pyongyang these days.
And militarily, I think militarily it's likely going to accelerate
(29:16):
a regional alarms race. So South Korea has its own
ambitions for a nuclear powered submarine. The debate over that
in Soul is going to intensify dramatically. The United States
will almost certainly increase its naval presence in the region.
It's going to enhance its anti submarine warfare cooperation that's
going to be with both South Korea and Japan, and
(29:38):
every move North Korea makes with this new asset that's
it's going to create a more much more crowded in
tense underwater environment.
Speaker 3 (29:50):
Well, it sounds like a new and very dangerous chapter
of a long running story, a story where the risks
of miscalculation are now significantly higher. For our final topic,
we are returning to a situation we touched upon recently,
but it has certainly heated up. We are talking about
the escalating tensions between the United States and Venezuela and
(30:12):
the Caribbean carving. The last time we spoke about this,
there was already a palpable sense of increased US activity
in the region. So can you remind us of the
context and what was the foundational shift that was happening there. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:25):
Absolutely, what we are observing is not an isolated incident,
but rather the visible manifestation of a significant policy pivot
by the United States. This really began to take shape
during the Trump administration's first term. The foundational shift involves
a decisive increase in US military presence and capability across
(30:46):
the Caribbean across Latin America. This was initially framed around
a robust counter narcotics mission under US Southern Command or
US Southcom. The key change here was the US designating
drug cartels as transnational criminal organizations and I'm sorry, drug
(31:07):
cartels transnational criminal organizations are now being designated as foreign
terrorist organizations. This designation then unlocks new tools for both
law enforcement but most importantly, the military to target these groups,
including their financial networks.
Speaker 3 (31:26):
So it is not just about stopping drug flows, but
treating these groups with a counter terrorism lens in this,
as we have seen, has led to a kinetic action.
What are the latest updates on these US military operations.
Speaker 2 (31:44):
Yeh, the situation is escalating very rapidly. We now have
confirmation of at least two, probably three, lethal US military
strikes targeting vessels in international waters. President Trump himself announced
a recent strike that killed three individual rules He described
them as narco terrorists. This follows an earlier strike on
(32:05):
September second that reportedly killed eleven suspected members of the
trend de Araqua gang. Now that gang has been designated
as a terrorist organization by the United States. The administration
is presenting these actions as direct hits against groups poisoning
America with illicit narcotics.
Speaker 3 (32:25):
And we have even seen visual evidence with videos of
these strikes being released from Venezuela's perspective, how are they
reacting to these actions and the overall heightened US military
presence so close to their shores.
Speaker 2 (32:40):
Well, their reaction has been swift and predictably highly confrontational.
Now President Maduro has publicly declared that relations with the
US are now quote completely broken in quote that's due
to these what he called bomb threats and aggression towards Venezuela. Now,
Venezuela has vowed to full exercise its legitimate right to
(33:02):
defend itself, and we have also seen direct military responses.
We saw a Venezuelan F sixteen fighter jet buying overhead
of a US Navy destroyer. They also reported an incident
where a Venezuelan fishing vessel was allegedly boarded by US
forces for eight hours. Now, Venezuela viuwsed this as an
(33:23):
illegal and hostile at designated to provoke further conflict and
justify regime change.
Speaker 3 (33:30):
That image of a US destroyer with an F sixteen
overhead really brings home the level of tension. So we
have this very aggressive posture from the US and then
Venezuela's clear defiance. From an analytical standpoint, what are the
immediate risks here.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
I think the immediate risks are exceptionally high for unattended escalation.
We talk about this in the end of Pacific with
the US in China. Look, we are in a tit
for tat dynamic where each action elicits an equal reaction.
The presence of significant US naval and air assets, combined
(34:09):
with Venezuela's willingness to challenge these forces, this creates numerous
points of fiction friction, a miscalculation by either side, whether
this is a Venezuelan jet that's flying too close or
a US force misidentifying a target, or even an accidental
engagement between the two militaries that could quickly spiral into
(34:32):
a direct military confrontation between two sovereign states. The absence
of clear diplomatic channels for de escalation makes this all
the more perilous, and.
Speaker 3 (34:43):
The legality of these actions has been questioned, particularly the
strikes in international waters. So how does that factor into
the broader geopolitical landscape?
Speaker 2 (34:54):
You're absolutely right. Legal experts have indeed raised concerns about
whether these kinetic strikes in international wants actually comply with
international human rights and maritime law. From Venezuela's perspective, any
perceived violation of international law provides potent propaganda to rally
domestic support and then garner that international sympathy for the US.
(35:17):
If the legal basis for these actions is seen as
ambiguous by the international community, it could undermine the legitimacy
of the operation and complicate efforts to build broader support
against the Maduro regime.
Speaker 3 (35:31):
Beyond the immediate military classes, what do you see as
the strategic objectives for both sides and how did these
current actions play into them? Well.
Speaker 2 (35:43):
For the US, the stated objective is unequivocally counter narcotics
and counter terrorism. Eliminating a threat to national security is
what the US is saying. But there is a clear
implicit pressure campaign on the Maduro regime. The US wants
to see regime change in Venezuela now. While direct regime
change is not explicitly stated as the goal of these
(36:05):
specific operations, the aggressive actions, coupled with the fifty million
dollar bounty on Maduro's head, certainly contribute to a wider
strategy to destabilize his government. Now for Venezuela, Maduro is
using these US actions to consolidate power domestically, he's framing
the US as an external aggressor, and by doing this
(36:27):
he can now rally nationalist sentiment, justify internal crackdowns, and
divert attention from Venezuela's severe internal crises that Maduro started.
He is also signaling that he will not yield easily
and he's prepared to defend Venezuelan's sovereignty and his power.
(36:47):
Right is everyone is always about their power.
Speaker 3 (36:51):
So looking ahead, what is your predictive analysis for the
next few weeks or even months, Like, what should we
be watching for.
Speaker 2 (37:00):
I think we're going to see continued escalation. De escalation
appears highly unlikely. In the short term, we should anticipate
more US kinetic strikes against those alleged narco terrorist targets.
The key indicators to watch are any changes in the
nature of these strikes. So if the US begins targeting
uniform to Venezuelan military assets or facilities on mainland Venezuelan,
(37:25):
that's going to be a major shift and almost certainly
lead to a direct armed conflict. Another critical factor is
Venezuela's potential for asymmetric responses. Beyond military posturing. They could
explore cyber attacks, they could do other covert actions in
order to retaliate against the United States, but also watch
(37:47):
for increased diplomatic engagement from Russia, China, and Iran on
behalf of Venezuela. These nations could offer more tangible support
to the Maduro regime that's going to further international liias
this crisis. Conversely, any indication of covert back channel communications
between the US and Venezuela, that would be the earliest
(38:11):
sign of a potential, albeit currently unlikely off ramp to
this situation.
Speaker 3 (38:19):
So a very precarious situation with many movid parts and
high stakes. It seems the Caribbean is indeed becoming a
crucible for these heightened geopolitical tensions. So thank you for
your insightful analysis on this complex and rapidly evolving situation.
Is there anything else you want to discuss?
Speaker 2 (38:38):
Not really, I mean, we're going to be off for
the next two weeks, but I do have plans to
put episodes out for those weeks. We just won't have
current up to date geopolitical intelligence analysis because we will
be doing other things. And I won't name and shame
those things.
Speaker 3 (38:58):
You won't name, and she but what he means to say, folks,
is our four year anniversary episode will be coming out
and it's going to be kind of like the greatest
hits of all of our insightful inquiries.
Speaker 1 (39:13):
That we've had throughout the four years we've been doing.
Speaker 2 (39:17):
Can you believe that? No, consistently for four years?
Speaker 3 (39:25):
I know, I've never done anything there.
Speaker 2 (39:28):
To say that. I was trying to think, what have
I done consistently for four years?
Speaker 3 (39:35):
Like my daily routine changes on a whim, and it's
never quite the same. I mean, there's like a framework
that I go by, but it just it changes all
the time. But yeah, there, we're gonna release a so
you have enough for two episodes.
Speaker 2 (39:54):
Yeah, I'm doing one with all the interviews from you know,
the Insightful Inquiries on this week, and then we're gonna
do for the real four year anniversary, which is the
week after. Uh, We're going to do the best of
Tianna and Curban, getting, Getting, geopulic events.
Speaker 3 (40:15):
Just getting. You can listen to whatever you want to
listen to.
Speaker 1 (40:18):
But yeah, we were.
Speaker 3 (40:19):
Right on so many things.
Speaker 2 (40:21):
But we're glad you support us in this, and so
smash the like button. Oh yeah, I like conscribe.
Speaker 3 (40:28):
Say that's what they say, right, that's what they said.
Speaker 2 (40:31):
That's I think.
Speaker 3 (40:32):
So.
Speaker 2 (40:33):
I mean, I've been watching a lot of YouTube lately.
Speaker 3 (40:35):
I have not. And what have you been watching on YouTube?
Speaker 2 (40:39):
Well, I just watched Napoleon taking over Egypt, so a
bunch of like historical battles.
Speaker 3 (40:49):
And I thought, you're gonna say October Fest videos.
Speaker 2 (40:52):
I have too. I've been watching those two. Those are
intermittent in between you know, the World War our one started.
Speaker 3 (41:00):
We are going to our first October Fest, well not
our traditional, ye's first traditional in the area in which
you're supposed to go, because we did the one in Raleigh.
Speaker 2 (41:13):
We did October Oh what fine?
Speaker 3 (41:19):
Obviously yeah, probably not very authentic, but Charlotte loved it,
and she loved all the cops. She hugged every single
cop there. I don't know, I feel like we told
this story on here before, but we did. Yeah, Charlotte
had to hug every single cop. And finally, like all
(41:41):
the cops like, there was one cop that was missing
and they were like, oh, he's patrolling them the parking lot,
and so they went and hunted him down for her
because she was really upset because I Charlotte used to
have to hug everybody, like from the janitors at the Smithsonians.
(42:01):
Anytimes she saw them, she'd hug them and thanked them
for cleaning up people's messes.
Speaker 1 (42:06):
She would hug our cashiers at the grocery store.
Speaker 3 (42:10):
She would hug our waiters and waitresses and restaurants like
she hugged everybody who performed some kind of service for her.
But so the cops, she wanted to hug the cops
who were keeping us safe. And yeah, so this cop
came in from the after they all had all searched
(42:31):
for them because they couldn't freaking find them, and Charlotte
was crying about it, and he saw her, and all
all the cop the cops that she had already hugged,
saw her, and they pointed at her, and he turned
and looked at her, and he got down on one
knee and he opened his arms wide and she ran
him like that was her daddy.
Speaker 2 (42:51):
Could have been a virable moment if we captured it
on video.
Speaker 3 (42:55):
Yeah, it was really really cute. But yeah, so we're
going to our first Coberfess, and I'm both excited and terrified.
Speaker 2 (43:06):
It'll be on a weekday so that's not going to
be too crazy.
Speaker 3 (43:09):
Thank goodness, it's okay. How Yeah, I have my loop
ear plugs overrotect me from stuff, so not a sponsor,
not a sponsor, and I'm bringing you a pair too,
so yes, yeah, we're going to be We're good to go. Anyways,
thank you for sticking with us while we rambled. Again,
(43:31):
it's great.
Speaker 2 (43:31):
No, I don't have anything else except that we have episode.
We will have episodes coming out, but they're not going
to be current events. So yeah, we'll get back to
that after.
Speaker 3 (43:42):
Yeah, after we're done doing all the things, all the things.
We're doing all the things for the next couple weeks.
Thank you 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 at This.
Speaker 2 (44:02):
Week Explained Tianna. Thank you so much, and until next week,
stay safe out there.
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.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
What are you waiting for?
Speaker 1 (01:59):
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 t l P dot com slash this week.
Speaker 3 (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. If you want to ensure
(02:37):
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 a fantastic equato engaged directly
(03:01):
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 Ukrainian Gaza, more escalation between Russia and NATO, Russia
and North Korea's Nuclear Pact, and the US war on cartels.
(03:25):
So let's start on the battlefield of Putin's special military operation.
Reports from President Zelenski's office indicate that Ukrainian troops have
not only halted some of Russia's recent gains, but have
actually reclaimed a substantial amount of territory, particularly in the east.
So what does this counterfensive signal.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
I think it signals a few important things. First, it
demonstrates that the Ukrainian military retains a high degree of
operational capability, also a high degree of resolve. This is
even after months of intense defensive fighting. Now reclaiming territory,
especially in a contested area in the east like Dunnetsk.
(04:08):
This is a complex undertaking. Secondly, it disrupts this narrative
of inevitable Russian progress, which had been building here since
Trumpet started asking for these peace negotiations to move along. Now,
forcing Russian troops to retreat boosts morale for Ukraine. It
(04:30):
also boosts morale for Ukraine's partners like NATO. It also
creates significant strategic and logistical problems for Moscow. They are
not just defending, they're not actively dictating the terms of
engagement in specific sectors.
Speaker 3 (04:45):
And this is not just happening on the front line.
Ukraine appears to be expanding the scope of its operations,
with strikes occurring deep inside Russia. We have seen reports
of explosions at major oil facilities, some over one thousand
kilometers from border.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Yeah, that's right. And then these are not random acts.
These are targeted and targeting facilities like the gas bron
plant or the refinery in Volgograd. This is a calculated
part of Ukraine's strategy. Now. The goal here is twofold
one is to degrade Russia's ability to fuel its war
machine and also to create economic pressure. These refineries are
(05:27):
actually very vital to the Russian economy. They supply fuel
to the Russian military, So by hitting these refineries, Ukraine
aims to make the cost of the war tangibly felt
far from the front lines. It's a way of showing
that no part of Russia's critical infrastructure is entirely safe.
Speaker 3 (05:45):
It also seems to be prompting new levels of international cooperation.
After a Russian drone recently crossed into Polish airspace, we
are now seeing WARSAW and Kiev agree to form a
joint task force for unmanned systems, and.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
We spoke about this last week for a bit. Now
we're seeing the tangible effects of this a Russian drone
being shot down o Ournado country. That is a serious escalation.
So the creation of this joint task force is a
direct and practical response to that escalation. So this all
shows a deepening of the security partnership between Poland and Ukraine,
(06:22):
but also NATO and Ukraine. So they're not just sharing
equipment anymore. They are planning to integrate technologies, conduct joint training,
and develop new defensive projects. So this is a signal
of this move kind of signals towards a more formalized
long term defense collaboration in the face of this shared
(06:47):
threat from Russia.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
And on the diplomatic front, we saw some rather direct
comments from President Donald Trump during his state visit to
the UK, specifically aimed at Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
Yeah he did, President Trump admitted Putin quote, let him
down end quote. With his recent actions, the public criticism
of that nature, especially during a high profile joint press
conference with the British Prime Minister, this is designed to
apply international pressure on Putin, so it serves to further
isolate the Russian president on the world stage. Now, for
(07:21):
the British officials hosting this visit, a comment such as
this is most likely seen as a success for them.
It reinforces a unified stance against Moscow's actions.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
All right, let's shift from the international stage to the
internal situation within Russia. There seems to be a growing
intolerance for any criticism of the war effort, even from
those who were previously supportive. We're seeing some of the
staunchly pro war bloggers now speak out. Hell.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
This is very fascinating. We're now seeing a narrative shift
among a group that has been so support for so
long of this war. So that to me is very telling.
We're not talking about anti war activists speaking out in Russia.
These are pro war commentators who are now highly critical
of how the Russian government and the Russian military handled
(08:14):
the Ukrainian incursion, especially into the area of the Curse region.
They are pointing fingers directly at the Ministry of Defense
and the FSB.
Speaker 3 (08:25):
And one of those blockers has been arrested for alleged
embezzlement and labeled a quote foreign agent end quote.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Yeah, exactly, we know this. This is a typical Putin
narrative management and scapegoating. The military failure in Curse that
we are seeing was a significant embarrassment for both Putin
and the Kremlin. So rather than addressing the systemic issues
that allowed it to happen, the response is to silence
(08:54):
the critics shift the blame onto those regional officials of
that area. So designate this mill blogger as a foreign agent.
That is a powerful tool to discredit him. It also
sends a clear message to the other ulternationalist bloggers criticism
of tactical execution is not going to be tolerated in Russia. SOS.
(09:14):
The Kremlin is more concerned with controlling the information space
than with actually addressing the failures themselves.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
So we are seeing Ukraine regain initiative on the battlefield
and expand its strategic attacks, while Russia appears to be
turning inward, tightening its control over information and cracking down
on internal dissent. Let's shift to the other conflict dominating headlines.
After a period of intense aerial bombardment, Israeli forces have
(09:43):
initiated a major ground defensive into Gaza City. This marks
a significant escalation in a conflict that has already lasted
for nearly two years.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
Yeah, it absolutely does, and this is a deliberate and
substantial shift in Israel's strategy. The stated objective from the
Israeli government is they want to dismantle what they describe
as Hamas's last major stronghold. This is also its primary
symbol of governance in Gaza.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
So from a strategic standpoint, what is the calculus here?
Why this move and why now? It seems like an
incredibly high stakes decision.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
It's incredibly high stakes. I think what's most telling is
that this decision was reportedly not a unanimous one within
the Israeli security cabinet. You have the heads of the IDEF,
Masad and shin Bet. They actually advise the Prime Minister
against the specific operation.
Speaker 3 (10:40):
That seems to be happening a little bit more frequently
than they would like they are making. They don't have
unanimous support, but they're doing it anyways, and it's kind
of blowing up in their face a bit. It seems
very significant. What are the primary concerns here? Why didn't
the cabinet give their full support through their full support
(11:04):
behind this decision.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
Oh, there were a few warnings that came from the cabinet.
First and foremost was extreme danger to them remaining Israeli
hostages held in Gaza. They believe that should be at
the forefront of every mind of every leader in Israel.
Second was the potential for very heavy casualties among the
IDF who would be conducting a dense urban warfare campaign.
(11:29):
The third thing was the long term strategic consequence. You know, yeah,
maybe it'll be successful on the battlefield and they take
over Gaza, but what happens the day after. They wanted
that this could fail to fully dismantle Hamas and it
might force Israel into the position of directly governing over
(11:49):
two million Palestinians. That is a scenario that everyone in
the cabinet actually wants to avoid.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
Oh so the fact that they would possibly kill thousands
more Palestinian civilians didn't go on their radar at all.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
Well, I mean, yeah, is that on the radar. It could.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
As yet has yet to pop up.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
I was just one since all of a sudden, now
they're what they're doing is not getting full support. I
don't know. I thought maybe a conscience sprouted up somewhere
for someone other than themselves.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Right, But I guess not.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
Okay, So anyways, there is a deep rift between the
political leadership and the security establishment, and while those strategic
debates are happening, the humanitarian reality on the ground continues
to be catastrophic. Walk us through what this escalation means
for the civilian population that they don't seem to care about.
Speaker 2 (12:54):
Yeah, well, it is a nightmare scenario. Look, this is
a grim reality for hundreds of thousands, for two million
Palestinians on the ground there. For weeks, the Israeli military
has been telling the population of the city to evacuate
south now tanks on the ground. That has turned from
(13:16):
a warning into a frantic exodus for those people. People
are fleeing with whatever they can carry. They're on foot,
whether whether they're on foot or in carts or on boats,
all along the coast. They are trying to get out
before complete destruction to the city happens.
Speaker 3 (13:35):
Okay, but where are they supposed to go? We hear
reports that the designated humanitarian zones are already overwhelmed.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
Yeah, and I think that's the core issue the crisis here.
These zones are not equipped to handle such a massive
influx of people. Eight agencies, many of which are now
issuing the most severe warnings that we've heard since the
start of this war, describe a situation of extreme overcrowding
in those areas. There is insufficient shelter, insufficient water, and
(14:06):
insufficient food. The death toll from Moult nutrition is actually
climbing daily. We have seen We've even seen reports of
the critical infrastructure of the area, like the only specialized
children's hospital in the area was damaged in the fighting.
This is a complete systemic collapse.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
And in the middle of all of this are the hostages.
This brings us to a chilling statement that was just
released by Hamas.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
Yeah, I think this is a pivotal moment in the
psychological dimension of this war. Hamas's military wing issued a statement,
pointedly written in Hebrew, addressed the Israeli people, said that
this ground offensive has closed the door on any potential
return of those hostages. Their message was that the Israeli
government has effectively chosen military action or the lives of
(14:58):
its own citizens. They also said that not one of
the remaining captives will be returned, whether alive or dead.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
Oh my gosh, and didn't. They also make a reference
to Ron Arad, which I imagine carries a very specific weight
inside Israel.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
They did, and it does. That is a deep national trauma.
Ron Arad was an Israeli airman. He was lost in
Lebanon in the nineteen eighties, and that Israel never recovered
the body of or know if he's alive. Still he's
still listed as missing an action, and as recently as
(15:39):
twenty twenty one, Israel has tried to identify his whereabouts,
invoking his name as a way of saying, the hostages
will vanish into history, becoming a permanent, unresolved wound for
the country of Israel. It's an exceptionally harsh message. Is
designed to amplify the pressure on the net Yahoo government
from within, and it seems.
Speaker 3 (16:01):
To be working. The families of the hostages have been
protesting and accusing the Prime Minister of sacrificing their loved ones.
But at the same time, I feel like they've been
doing that for months now.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
They have, and it is getting louder because they honestly,
they felt betrayed for a long time. Right, this isn't
the first time we've talked about They're protesting right. They
are echoing the same warnings the security chiefs gave the
Prime Minister that this offensive is going to be a
(16:31):
death sentence for the people that they love. This has
created an immense internal political crisis for the government, and
that's running parallel to that military operation itself.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Of course, this conflict is not happening in a vacuum.
So how is the international community responding to this new phase?
Speaker 2 (16:51):
Yeah, I mean the condemnation has been widespread, it is
growing sharper. A United Nations commission recently released a report
concluded that Israel has committed acts of genocide. It's an
accusation that Israel has categorically rejected. Now more tangibly, the
European Union, this is Israel's largest trading partner. They're now formally
(17:13):
proposing sanctions on Israel. Say, significant diplomatic shift. That signals
growing isolation.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
And when we talk about regional stability, it is impossible
not to think about other flashpoints. The risk of this
conflict spiraling into a wider war has been a concern
from the very beginning. We've seen rhetoric from Iran, for example,
after hypothetical US actions, stating that all options are on
the table to defend itself. It is a terrifyingly delicate
(17:41):
balance ground offensive with immense human cost, a government at
odds with its own security experts, a desperate hostage crisis,
and then ever present threat of regional escalation. It is
hard to see a clear path forward. Now it is
time to shift our focus back to Europe and discuss
more Russian incursions into NATO airspace. But first we need
(18:04):
to take a quick break, so stay with us. We'll
be right back. Welcome back, listeners. Last week we dedicated
our time to the Russian drone incursion over Poland. It
felt like a significant moment, like a deliberate test of
NATO's borders. But it seems that was only the beginning
of a new chapter. This past Friday, the situation escalated further,
(18:26):
this time in this guise over Estonia, which we visited
and loved. So let us start there for our listeners,
Can you lay out what exactly happened on Friday and
what happened to our buddies in Estonia?
Speaker 2 (18:44):
Yeah, I'm more Russian incursions right. So on Friday morning,
the Estonian government reported that three Russian Make thirty one
fire jets violated their sovereign airspace over the Gulf of Finland.
This is not a brief or ax dental crossing. Reports
indicate they remained inside Estonia airspace for approximately twelve minutes. Now,
(19:06):
more importantly, these aircraft were flying dark, They had no
flight plans filed, their transponders were inactive, and they were
not in communication with air traffic control.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
Flying dark, as you say, certainly signals this was not
a standard scheduled flight. So what was the immediate response
from NATO?
Speaker 2 (19:27):
I think the response was as quick as it could be,
which that's also a key data point in all of this.
NATO's Baltic Air Policing mission was activated Italian F thirty
five fighter jets. Those were based in Estonia. Those they
were scrambled to intercept. Finland and Sweden also launched their
own aircraft, and essentially the Russian jets were met and
(19:50):
escorted out of the area and toward the Russian exclave
of Koliningrad. From a procedural standpoint, the system worked as
in ten did for NATO.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
But do you think Russia did that in order to
test their response times?
Speaker 2 (20:07):
Yes? Absolutely, short answer, yes, okay, okay, So it's an
intelligence gathering.
Speaker 3 (20:13):
Okay, So from a political standpoint, an encourasion like this
is not just a military issue. Estonia's reaction was very strong,
from what I understand.
Speaker 2 (20:24):
Extremely strong. It was much like Poland did last week.
Estonian Prime Minister Kristin Mikhail announced that Estonia was formally
invoking Article four of the NATO Treaty.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
Right, and I don't know if we got into this
last time. So can you remind us what Article four entails?
Speaker 2 (20:43):
Yes? So Article four is a consult uh, a consultation mechanism,
so it doesn't automatically trigger military response like the more
famous Article five. Instead, it allows any member state to
bring an issue to the table for urgent consultation when
they fill their territorial integrity, political independence, or their security
being threatened. It is a formal declaration that a serious
(21:07):
threat exists and it compels the entire NATO alliance to
address it collectively. So doing this twice in two weeks
over similar provocations since a very powerful signal to Russia
and the world.
Speaker 3 (21:22):
I don't think with what's going on internally in Russia currently,
they can you know, fight on all these different fronts. Well,
what's going on at home. They need to quit pushing
people's buttons. So Estonian officials have called this particular violation
unprecedentedly brazen. So what makesists one different from past incursions.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
I think it's a combination of factors. The duration is significant,
so we're not talking about like a whoopsie moment here
for those aircraft. This was deliberate. This was sustained the
use of three advanced interceptor jets rather than a single plane.
That's certainly an escalation on the NATO side, and doing
this so soon after the incident in Poland suggest a
(22:09):
deliberate and coordinated strategy. The Estonian Foreign minister used an
interesting analogy. He actually they refer to it as the
boiling frog theory.
Speaker 3 (22:21):
Yuck. Yeah, it makes me sad thinking about that, but
that's because I am quite literally picturing a boiling frogs
So anyways, the idea that if you turn up the
heat slowly enough, the frog will not notice it is
in danger until it is too late. Right, That's what
(22:44):
it boils down to.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
For lack of a better term, yeah, I guess that's
the perfect term. Right. So the concern is that Russia
is engaging in a series of escalating provocations. Each one
on its own is managed, does not lead to open
conflict here, but if you take them together, they serve
to test NATO's reaction times, probe its defenses, and perhaps
(23:10):
more importantly, gauge its political unity and resolved. There is
also the assessment that this is an attempt to draw
attention away from the conflict in Ukraine, would force the
Alliance to focus more on its territorial on its own
territorial defense, And of.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
Course Russia denies the entire event.
Speaker 2 (23:35):
Yeah, the Russian Ministry of Defense issued a statement. They
claim the jets were on a routine flight, they complied
with all international regulations, they flew strictly over neutral waters.
Now that's a standard element of the Kremlin playbook. Execute
a provocative action and then flatly deny it, and that
creates an ambiguous information environment.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
Well, I am sure we will be talking about provocations
between Russia and NATO a lot more time to shift
our focus to a development that feels both sudden and
somehow entirely predictable. Intelligence reports have emerged from Seoul, South Korea,
suggesting that North Korea may have crossed a significant technological
threshold not on its own, of course, but with a
(24:20):
powerful benefactor.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
A very powerful one that we were just talking about.
The reports alleged that Russia has supplied North Korea with
a nuclear reactor and other key components for a nuclear
powered submarine, just like one of those missile tests from
North Korea. If this intelligence proves accurate, this represents a
(24:46):
fundamental shift in the security landscape of the Korean Peninsula
and beyond.
Speaker 3 (24:51):
So let us start there, breakdown for us what is
being reported, like, what exactly has Russia supposedly provided to Pyongyang?
Speaker 2 (25:00):
So the information, this information that South Korea has reportedly
shared with the United States points to the transfer of
several modules from decommissioned Russian nuclear submarines. We're talking about
the heart of the vessel, so the reactor itself, the turbine,
the cooling systems. These are not parts one can build
(25:21):
easily or actually acquire on the open market. Is a
state level, highly sensitive technology.
Speaker 3 (25:30):
And the context for this is the strategic partnership that
Moscow and Pyongyang formalized last year. We have seen North
Korea supplying Russia with munitions and personnel for its war
in Ukraine. Is this transfer simply Moscow's way of paying
them back for those weapons and the personnel.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
I mean, it is payment, for sure, but I think
it's more, much more than just a simple transaction. It
signals a d deepening of their alliance, and it's a
calculated decision by the Kremlin. For years, Russia was reluctant
to share this level of military technology. So by providing
nuclear propulsion zo line, which was a line that they
(26:15):
were unwilling to cross before, this shows that they have
now changed in that thinking. So why is that thinking changing? Well,
the pressures of the war in Ukraine appear to have
changed the calculus there. Now Moscow needs support, they need money,
they need personnel, they need weapons, and in return, Pyongyang
(26:37):
gets something it has craved for a very long time,
a key to building a true blue water navy.
Speaker 3 (26:44):
And why is a nuclear powered submarine such a coveted
piece of hardware? North Korea already had submarine, so what
makes this difference?
Speaker 2 (26:54):
Basically, endurance a conventional diesel electric submarine that those are
tethered to the surface, it's got to come up for air.
What I mean there is that it needs to run
its engines and recharge its batteries. It makes it very
vulnerable to detection. A nuclear submarine can stay submerged for
months at a time. Its only limitation is the food
(27:17):
it can carry for the crew that's in the submarine.
It is faster, it can travel farther, and it can
stay hidden for much longer periods. It turns a regional
navy in North Korea into one with a potential global reach.
So for North Korea, say, massive leap and strategic capability,
(27:37):
allowing it to project power far beyond its own shores
and better threatn the assets of the United States and
US allies.
Speaker 3 (27:45):
Well, this is a deeply concerning development on its own.
But I have to ask, does this feel like an
isolated event to you? Or is it part of a
wider pattern? We are seeing a merge on the global stage.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
Yeah, I really don't think you can look at this
in a vacuum. It's absolutely part of a broader, more
troubling pattern. Here. We're seeing a growing alignment of states
that operate outside of the established international norms the global South,
and they are increasingly willing to cooperate in ways that
directly challenge Western security interests.
Speaker 3 (28:21):
So what happens next? How do South Korea and the
United States respond to a North Korea that is on
the verge of deploying a nuclear powered submarine.
Speaker 2 (28:31):
I think the first step is verification. That has not
gone through rigorous verification yet, so the intelligence will be
scrutinized from every possible angle. We will see heightened surveillance.
We're gonna see satellites, ships, aircraft, all focused on North
Korean naval shipyards. The North Koreans understand well, at least
(28:52):
Kim Stung un understands this, But assuming the intelligence holds,
the response should be multifaceted. There should be diplomatic condemnation,
but that has limited effect on Moscow or Pyongyang these days.
And militarily, I think militarily it's likely going to accelerate
(29:16):
a regional alarms race. So South Korea has its own
ambitions for a nuclear powered submarine. The debate over that
in Soul is going to intensify dramatically. The United States
will almost certainly increase its naval presence in the region.
It's going to enhance its anti submarine warfare cooperation that's
going to be with both South Korea and Japan, and
(29:38):
every move North Korea makes with this new asset that's
it's going to create a more much more crowded in
tense underwater environment.
Speaker 3 (29:50):
Well, it sounds like a new and very dangerous chapter
of a long running story, a story where the risks
of miscalculation are now significantly higher. For our final topic,
we are returning to a situation we touched upon recently,
but it has certainly heated up. We are talking about
the escalating tensions between the United States and Venezuela and
(30:12):
the Caribbean carving. The last time we spoke about this,
there was already a palpable sense of increased US activity
in the region. So can you remind us of the
context and what was the foundational shift that was happening there. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:25):
Absolutely, what we are observing is not an isolated incident,
but rather the visible manifestation of a significant policy pivot
by the United States. This really began to take shape
during the Trump administration's first term. The foundational shift involves
a decisive increase in US military presence and capability across
(30:46):
the Caribbean across Latin America. This was initially framed around
a robust counter narcotics mission under US Southern Command or
US Southcom. The key change here was the US designating
drug cartels as transnational criminal organizations and I'm sorry, drug
(31:07):
cartels transnational criminal organizations are now being designated as foreign
terrorist organizations. This designation then unlocks new tools for both
law enforcement but most importantly, the military to target these groups,
including their financial networks.
Speaker 3 (31:26):
So it is not just about stopping drug flows, but
treating these groups with a counter terrorism lens in this,
as we have seen, has led to a kinetic action.
What are the latest updates on these US military operations.
Speaker 2 (31:44):
Yeh, the situation is escalating very rapidly. We now have
confirmation of at least two, probably three, lethal US military
strikes targeting vessels in international waters. President Trump himself announced
a recent strike that killed three individual rules He described
them as narco terrorists. This follows an earlier strike on
(32:05):
September second that reportedly killed eleven suspected members of the
trend de Araqua gang. Now that gang has been designated
as a terrorist organization by the United States. The administration
is presenting these actions as direct hits against groups poisoning
America with illicit narcotics.
Speaker 3 (32:25):
And we have even seen visual evidence with videos of
these strikes being released from Venezuela's perspective, how are they
reacting to these actions and the overall heightened US military
presence so close to their shores.
Speaker 2 (32:40):
Well, their reaction has been swift and predictably highly confrontational.
Now President Maduro has publicly declared that relations with the
US are now quote completely broken in quote that's due
to these what he called bomb threats and aggression towards Venezuela. Now,
Venezuela has vowed to full exercise its legitimate right to
(33:02):
defend itself, and we have also seen direct military responses.
We saw a Venezuelan F sixteen fighter jet buying overhead
of a US Navy destroyer. They also reported an incident
where a Venezuelan fishing vessel was allegedly boarded by US
forces for eight hours. Now, Venezuela viuwsed this as an
(33:23):
illegal and hostile at designated to provoke further conflict and
justify regime change.
Speaker 3 (33:30):
That image of a US destroyer with an F sixteen
overhead really brings home the level of tension. So we
have this very aggressive posture from the US and then
Venezuela's clear defiance. From an analytical standpoint, what are the
immediate risks here.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
I think the immediate risks are exceptionally high for unattended escalation.
We talk about this in the end of Pacific with
the US in China. Look, we are in a tit
for tat dynamic where each action elicits an equal reaction.
The presence of significant US naval and air assets, combined
(34:09):
with Venezuela's willingness to challenge these forces, this creates numerous
points of fiction friction, a miscalculation by either side, whether
this is a Venezuelan jet that's flying too close or
a US force misidentifying a target, or even an accidental
engagement between the two militaries that could quickly spiral into
(34:32):
a direct military confrontation between two sovereign states. The absence
of clear diplomatic channels for de escalation makes this all
the more perilous, and.
Speaker 3 (34:43):
The legality of these actions has been questioned, particularly the
strikes in international waters. So how does that factor into
the broader geopolitical landscape?
Speaker 2 (34:54):
You're absolutely right. Legal experts have indeed raised concerns about
whether these kinetic strikes in international wants actually comply with
international human rights and maritime law. From Venezuela's perspective, any
perceived violation of international law provides potent propaganda to rally
domestic support and then garner that international sympathy for the US.
(35:17):
If the legal basis for these actions is seen as
ambiguous by the international community, it could undermine the legitimacy
of the operation and complicate efforts to build broader support
against the Maduro regime.
Speaker 3 (35:31):
Beyond the immediate military classes, what do you see as
the strategic objectives for both sides and how did these
current actions play into them? Well.
Speaker 2 (35:43):
For the US, the stated objective is unequivocally counter narcotics
and counter terrorism. Eliminating a threat to national security is
what the US is saying. But there is a clear
implicit pressure campaign on the Maduro regime. The US wants
to see regime change in Venezuela now. While direct regime
change is not explicitly stated as the goal of these
(36:05):
specific operations, the aggressive actions, coupled with the fifty million
dollar bounty on Maduro's head, certainly contribute to a wider
strategy to destabilize his government. Now for Venezuela, Maduro is
using these US actions to consolidate power domestically, he's framing
the US as an external aggressor, and by doing this
(36:27):
he can now rally nationalist sentiment, justify internal crackdowns, and
divert attention from Venezuela's severe internal crises that Maduro started.
He is also signaling that he will not yield easily
and he's prepared to defend Venezuelan's sovereignty and his power.
(36:47):
Right is everyone is always about their power.
Speaker 3 (36:51):
So looking ahead, what is your predictive analysis for the
next few weeks or even months, Like, what should we
be watching for.
Speaker 2 (37:00):
I think we're going to see continued escalation. De escalation
appears highly unlikely. In the short term, we should anticipate
more US kinetic strikes against those alleged narco terrorist targets.
The key indicators to watch are any changes in the
nature of these strikes. So if the US begins targeting
uniform to Venezuelan military assets or facilities on mainland Venezuelan,
(37:25):
that's going to be a major shift and almost certainly
lead to a direct armed conflict. Another critical factor is
Venezuela's potential for asymmetric responses. Beyond military posturing. They could
explore cyber attacks, they could do other covert actions in
order to retaliate against the United States, but also watch
(37:47):
for increased diplomatic engagement from Russia, China, and Iran on
behalf of Venezuela. These nations could offer more tangible support
to the Maduro regime that's going to further international liias
this crisis. Conversely, any indication of covert back channel communications
between the US and Venezuela, that would be the earliest
(38:11):
sign of a potential, albeit currently unlikely off ramp to
this situation.
Speaker 3 (38:19):
So a very precarious situation with many movid parts and
high stakes. It seems the Caribbean is indeed becoming a
crucible for these heightened geopolitical tensions. So thank you for
your insightful analysis on this complex and rapidly evolving situation.
Is there anything else you want to discuss?
Speaker 2 (38:38):
Not really, I mean, we're going to be off for
the next two weeks, but I do have plans to
put episodes out for those weeks. We just won't have
current up to date geopolitical intelligence analysis because we will
be doing other things. And I won't name and shame
those things.
Speaker 3 (38:58):
You won't name, and she but what he means to say, folks,
is our four year anniversary episode will be coming out
and it's going to be kind of like the greatest
hits of all of our insightful inquiries.
Speaker 1 (39:13):
That we've had throughout the four years we've been doing.
Speaker 2 (39:17):
Can you believe that? No, consistently for four years?
Speaker 3 (39:25):
I know, I've never done anything there.
Speaker 2 (39:28):
To say that. I was trying to think, what have
I done consistently for four years?
Speaker 3 (39:35):
Like my daily routine changes on a whim, and it's
never quite the same. I mean, there's like a framework
that I go by, but it just it changes all
the time. But yeah, there, we're gonna release a so
you have enough for two episodes.
Speaker 2 (39:54):
Yeah, I'm doing one with all the interviews from you know,
the Insightful Inquiries on this week, and then we're gonna
do for the real four year anniversary, which is the
week after. Uh, We're going to do the best of
Tianna and Curban, getting, Getting, geopulic events.
Speaker 3 (40:15):
Just getting. You can listen to whatever you want to
listen to.
Speaker 1 (40:18):
But yeah, we were.
Speaker 3 (40:19):
Right on so many things.
Speaker 2 (40:21):
But we're glad you support us in this, and so
smash the like button. Oh yeah, I like conscribe.
Speaker 3 (40:28):
Say that's what they say, right, that's what they said.
Speaker 2 (40:31):
That's I think.
Speaker 3 (40:32):
So.
Speaker 2 (40:33):
I mean, I've been watching a lot of YouTube lately.
Speaker 3 (40:35):
I have not. And what have you been watching on YouTube?
Speaker 2 (40:39):
Well, I just watched Napoleon taking over Egypt, so a
bunch of like historical battles.
Speaker 3 (40:49):
And I thought, you're gonna say October Fest videos.
Speaker 2 (40:52):
I have too. I've been watching those two. Those are
intermittent in between you know, the World War our one started.
Speaker 3 (41:00):
We are going to our first October Fest, well not
our traditional, ye's first traditional in the area in which
you're supposed to go, because we did the one in Raleigh.
Speaker 2 (41:13):
We did October Oh what fine?
Speaker 3 (41:19):
Obviously yeah, probably not very authentic, but Charlotte loved it,
and she loved all the cops. She hugged every single
cop there. I don't know, I feel like we told
this story on here before, but we did. Yeah, Charlotte
had to hug every single cop. And finally, like all
(41:41):
the cops like, there was one cop that was missing
and they were like, oh, he's patrolling them the parking lot,
and so they went and hunted him down for her
because she was really upset because I Charlotte used to
have to hug everybody, like from the janitors at the Smithsonians.
(42:01):
Anytimes she saw them, she'd hug them and thanked them
for cleaning up people's messes.
Speaker 1 (42:06):
She would hug our cashiers at the grocery store.
Speaker 3 (42:10):
She would hug our waiters and waitresses and restaurants like
she hugged everybody who performed some kind of service for her.
But so the cops, she wanted to hug the cops
who were keeping us safe. And yeah, so this cop
came in from the after they all had all searched
(42:31):
for them because they couldn't freaking find them, and Charlotte
was crying about it, and he saw her, and all
all the cop the cops that she had already hugged,
saw her, and they pointed at her, and he turned
and looked at her, and he got down on one
knee and he opened his arms wide and she ran
him like that was her daddy.
Speaker 2 (42:51):
Could have been a virable moment if we captured it
on video.
Speaker 3 (42:55):
Yeah, it was really really cute. But yeah, so we're
going to our first Coberfess, and I'm both excited and terrified.
Speaker 2 (43:06):
It'll be on a weekday so that's not going to
be too crazy.
Speaker 3 (43:09):
Thank goodness, it's okay. How Yeah, I have my loop
ear plugs overrotect me from stuff, so not a sponsor,
not a sponsor, and I'm bringing you a pair too,
so yes, yeah, we're going to be We're good to go. Anyways,
thank you for sticking with us while we rambled. Again,
(43:31):
it's great.
Speaker 2 (43:31):
No, I don't have anything else except that we have episode.
We will have episodes coming out, but they're not going
to be current events. So yeah, we'll get back to
that after.
Speaker 3 (43:42):
Yeah, after we're done doing all the things, all the things.
We're doing all the things for the next couple weeks.
Thank you 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 at This.
Speaker 2 (44:02):
Week Explained Tianna. Thank you so much, and until next week,
stay safe out there.
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!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.