July 28, 2025 • 41 mins
This week, we unpack the latest diplomatic and military developments in Ukraine and Gaza, alongside a new and escalating conflict in the South China Sea. Are these regional flashes leading to a broader global recalibration?
Episode Highlights:
------
This is an advertisement from our new friends over at BetterHelp. Helping you build the mental resilience to navigate a complex world! Talk it out, with BetterHelp! Visit our link - BetterHelp.com/THISWEEK. Using this link acts as your promo code THISWEEK for 10% off your first month!
-------
This Week Explained is presented by our new friends over at Fresh Roasted Coffee & Positively Tea. Have a cup of the best tasting coffee that gets Tiana & Kervin through breaking down the latest geopolitics news! Visit our link - https://lddy.no/1lc0u & use our promo code THISWEEK for 20% off your first purchase!
Enjoyed this episode? Don’t forget to subscribe, leave a review, and share it with your network! Follow us @thisweekexplained for more.
-------------
Disclaimer:The views and opinions expressed on the podcast 'This Week Explained' are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any organization or entity. The information provided on the podcast is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered professional advice or a substitute for independent research and analysis. Each individual listener should research and identify their own opinions based on facts and logic before making any decisions based on the information provided on the podcast. The podcast hosts and guests are not responsible for any actions taken by individuals based on the information provided on the podcast.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/this-week-explained--6199515/support.
Episode Highlights:
- Ukraine's Diplomatic Dance: High-level meetings are on the horizon, with US President Trump, British Prime Minister Starmer, and EU Commission President von der Leyen discussing an end to the war, while the US pressures China to halt support for Russia's aggression.
- Gaza's Humanitarian Catastrophe: Ceasefire negotiations have stalled, leading to a grim humanitarian crisis with increasing starvation deaths, as Israel signals a major military campaign to dismantle Hamas.
- Thailand-Cambodia Border Eruption: A century-old territorial dispute has exploded into heavy fighting, displacing nearly 200,000 people and testing alliances amidst accusations of civilian targeting and the use of banned munitions.
- Geopolitical Chessboard: The Southeast Asian conflict highlights the strategic competition between the US and China, with Beijing positioning itself as a mediator and the US balancing its alliances while deterring conflict over Taiwan.
------
This is an advertisement from our new friends over at BetterHelp. Helping you build the mental resilience to navigate a complex world! Talk it out, with BetterHelp! Visit our link - BetterHelp.com/THISWEEK. Using this link acts as your promo code THISWEEK for 10% off your first month!
-------
This Week Explained is presented by our new friends over at Fresh Roasted Coffee & Positively Tea. Have a cup of the best tasting coffee that gets Tiana & Kervin through breaking down the latest geopolitics news! Visit our link - https://lddy.no/1lc0u & use our promo code THISWEEK for 20% off your first purchase!
Enjoyed this episode? Don’t forget to subscribe, leave a review, and share it with your network! Follow us @thisweekexplained for more.
-------------
Disclaimer:The views and opinions expressed on the podcast 'This Week Explained' are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any organization or entity. The information provided on the podcast is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered professional advice or a substitute for independent research and analysis. Each individual listener should research and identify their own opinions based on facts and logic before making any decisions based on the information provided on the podcast. The podcast hosts and guests are not responsible for any actions taken by individuals based on the information provided on the podcast.
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.
Speaker 1 (02:21):
And you are in the right place. Welcome to this
week Explained, your.
Speaker 2 (02:25):
Weekly deep diving in the most complex and impactful stories
shaping our world.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
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.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
Ensure you never miss an episode, make sure you're following
or subscribed on your podcast platform.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
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.
Speaker 2 (02:50):
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 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 Leon Media Network.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
This week, we're diving into the latest from Ukraine and
Gaza in a new conflict brewing in South Ternessee. We've
got a lot to unpack for our listeners today. We're
going to start with the ongoing situation in Ukraine's specifically
the diplomatic dance that seems to be picking up pace.
We've heard about some significant meetings on the horizon, So
can you lay out what's on the table?
Speaker 3 (03:35):
Yeah, you bet so. Right now. What's going on over
the last week is that it appears that there is
a flurry of high level diplomatic activity that is brewing,
and we are expecting to see US President Donald Trump
meet with British Prime Minister Kars Starmer and European Commission
President Ursula vonder Lane, and he's going to meet them
(03:56):
in Scotland.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
You know.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
The big topic for that conversation, from what we understand,
is going to be ending the war in Ukraine. The
most notably, President Trump floated the idea of secondary sanctions
on Russia before he even left Washington, DC, and vonder
Lane is also slated to meet with Trump independently from
the British Prime Minister. What's particularly interesting is that British
(04:22):
officials seem to be feeling a bit more optimistic about
a shift in Trump's stance on Ukraine and Russia recently.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
Those are some having diplomatic kitterers. And speaking of the US,
it seems they're continuing to put pressure on other key players,
specifically China. So what's the latest there.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
Yeah, they absolutely are at the UN. Recently, the US
directly called on China to stop supporting Russia's aggression, particularly
by halting the export of dual use goods that could
contribute to Russia's military industrial base. Now China, because we
do give both sides of the story on this podcast,
quickly pushed back. They said that it's not party to
(05:01):
the conflict and has not provided lethal weapons. They maintain
that it strictly controls those dual use materials.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
So we have these international pressures and then there are
the direct talks between Russia and Ukraine. So what is
the latest on their willingness to come to the table.
Speaker 3 (05:19):
Yeah, I mean that's a mixed bagh Siena Ukrainian presidents.
Zelensky did announce that a new round of peace talks
between Russia and Ukraine is set for Istanbul on Wednesday
of this week, so that's July thirtieth, And these talks
are reportedly going to focus on prisoner exchanges and the
possibility of a meeting between Zelensky and Putin. Now, as always,
(05:41):
the Kremlin has been quite clear they do not expect
a miraculous breakthrough from these discussions. They see a Putin
Zelensky summit only as a final step to seal the
peace deal, and they've already poured cold water on Ukraine's
proposal for such a meeting by the end of August. Now,
Zelensky did that Russia is beginning to engage on the
(06:02):
possibility of a leader level meeting, but Moscow's rhetoric suggests
that they're still quite far apart on the core issues. Also,
we should not forget it was I think six months
ago we talked about it on the podcast where Putin
informed his military leaders he actually wants this war ended
in Russia's favor obviously by twenty twenty six. So I
(06:26):
get a sense we're starting to see Russia race to
that finish line.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
Well, I mean, twenty twenty six is not far off,
but it certainly sounds like a long road ahead for
any significant peace agreement. So, moving from diplomacy to the battlefield,
what's been happening on the ground in Ukraine, especially regarding
their defensive capabilities.
Speaker 3 (06:47):
Yeah, like a crucial area of focus for Ukraine, especially
given the ongoing drone and missile attacks from Russia. Is
strengthening their air defenses. Now, Zelenski recently toured a factory
producing interceptor zones and he set an ambitious goal. He
wants Ukraine to produce up to one thousand of these
drones daily. This is a significant push to protect Ukrainian cities.
(07:11):
On top of that, Ukraine has received confirmation for funding
for three Patriot missile defense systems, two from Germany, one
from Norway. They're actually working with Dutch partners to secure
funding for seven more of those systems. So highlights a
critical need those air defense missiles, and it's a concerted
(07:31):
effort now among Europe to bolster their aerial production against
Russia's intensified attacks.
Speaker 1 (07:39):
Okay, Well, speaking of internal matters, there was a significant
development regarding Ukraine's anti corruption efforts that initially caused quite
a start and then a reversal. So can you walk
us through that.
Speaker 3 (07:51):
Yeah, you know, I may have been out of the
loop for a few days, especially within what the media
is posting, but actually saw a lot of this through
person sources. I didn't really see much of it in
the media this past week, but I do think it
was quite significant that President Zelensky signed this new bill.
This bill would curb the independence of anti corruption institutions
(08:13):
in the country of Ukraine, and obviously that drew heavy
criticism domestically because it is perceived to effectively strip Ukraine's
key anti corruption bodies of its independence. Like they would
do this by granting the Prosecutor General more control over
investigations as opposed to these anti corruption bodies. Now, this move,
(08:34):
which Olensky claimed, was to clear out Russian influence, much
like we talk about with national security in Ukraine. If
you talk about Russian influence, you can get some votes
pretty easily there. But Zelensky said he wanted to address
some of these dormant cases of corruption. It did spark wide,
pressed widespread protests across Ukrainian cities. It's the largest anti
(09:00):
government demonstrations since the twenty twenty two invasion by Russia.
But this wasn't just a domestic issue. It also raised
serious alarms among Ukraine's Western allies, who had pushed for
the establishment of these independent anti corruption agencies, and they
did this as a precondition for the aid that is
being sent, as well as future EU membership.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Yeah, I don't see how signing that is going to
help clear out Russian influence and address dormant cases.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
At all, but yeah, when it's Western supported, absolutely.
Speaker 1 (09:32):
Yeah. So, I mean that was quite a rapid turn
of events. I mean I would be unhappy if I
were Ukrainian civilian as well to hear that. You know,
the government's kind of closing the circle a bit. So
where do things stand now with the independence of these
anti corruption institutions and what's the path forward after such
a public challenge.
Speaker 3 (09:54):
Well, it looks like the pressure did make an impact.
Zelenski made an abrupt u turn and submitted new legislation
aimed at restoring the independence of those very agencies. Now,
this was met with some relief, though the head of
Ukraine's anti corruption agency has stated that he still expects
ongoing attempts to undermine their work. This is a clear
(10:16):
indication that while the immediate crisis was diffused, the underlying
tensions after all these years of war and surrounding anti
corruption efforts within Ukraine, still remains.
Speaker 1 (10:29):
It really highlights how complex the internal and external pressures
are for Ukraine right now. All right, Lastly, Garvin, any
general overview of the military situation on.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
The ground, Well, I mean this should come no surprise
to anyone, but the fighting remains intense. Ukrainian forces are
reporting fierce fighting in the east of Ukraine, which has
some key logistic hubs that Russia wants, and Russia has
been claiming the capture of villages in those very eastern areas.
(11:00):
US saw reports of Ukrainian forces continuing to operate in
the northern Sumai region that's where Russian troops have established
a foothold and where there are claims of both advances
and retractions from both sides, but you can never know
depending on who's reporting where those forces are. So after
(11:20):
two and a half years, almost the fighting remains intense,
with the end to this war a very very distant thought.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
Well, it's still a complex and difficult situation all around,
and unfortunately that sentiment carries over to the deeply concerning
situation and folding it in Gaza, the breakdown of ceasefire
negotiations and the rapidly escalating humanitarian crisis. There is demanding
our tension, wouldn't you agree, Kurbin?
Speaker 3 (11:49):
Yeah, absolutely. We don't spend the day together talking that
we don't talk about this crisis. And the information coming
out paints a picture of a negotiation process that has
not only stalled, but it seems to have actively regressed
at this point. The public statements from people like President
(12:09):
Donald Trump and Prime Minister net and Yahoo, coupled with
the withdrawal that happened this week of the negotiating teams
of those two countries, signal a significant shift.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
Right, like Trump's blunt assessment that Hamas didn't really want
to make a deal, in Netanyahu echoing the consideration of
alternative options after the US and Israel pulled their negotiators
from Cutter. So what does that tell us from an
analytical standpoint about the perceived intentions on both sides?
Speaker 3 (12:41):
I mean, it feels to me like the US and
Israel are actually just done negotiating. So you remember last
week we talked about the ultimatums from Hamas that if
Israel doesn't negotiating good faith, they're done. Hamas is leaving. Well,
we're now seeing Israel and its allies, most notably the
United States, call their bluffalm that and once again, and
(13:02):
I feel like we repeat this every single week that
we talk about it. There is a fundamental breakdown in trust.
And if you can't trust each other, how can you
negotiate in good faith? I don't think that's possible. Now,
getting to those alternative options you talked about, I think
we're about to see a major Israeli campaign. That campaign
(13:26):
will probably try to finally accomplish their goals, the goal
of removing Hamas completely and possibly something you predicted when
all of this started taking over and becoming the governing
body of the Gaza strip.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
Hm, yep, I did say that, and you told me
that I was wrong, So apologize to me right now.
Speaker 3 (13:50):
Do you have a question? I didn't hear a question
in that one. We can move on. Do you want
to go to the next topic now?
Speaker 1 (13:57):
Just kidding, kidding. I also saw an article that, I
mean all joking aside. I saw an article where Trump
came out and he said he told Israel and Netanyahu,
He's like, just finished the job. It's time for you
to finish the job, because they weren't going to negotiate anymore.
Speaker 3 (14:19):
Yeah, I mean yeah, And that's what we're seeing play
out right now. I do believe that conversation did happen
because President Trump said, right like I'm gonna be elected,
I'm going to end this war on day one. Well,
we're over one hundred days into his presidency and Israel
has not only not stopped the war, but they've become
(14:41):
more aggressive in their campaigns.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
So given all of that, what do you think the
immediate next steps might look like if this military campaign
truly gets underway? And do you see any off ramps
or potential interventions that could still shift this trajectory or
are we way past that point?
Speaker 3 (15:01):
Well, I mean, if a full scale military campaign is
indeed the alternative option here Sienna, we're going to see
an immediate and intense escalation of combat operations and the
goal will likely be a swift and decisive end too
the conflict, primarily on Israel's terms, without prolonged consultations or
negotiations with the Palestinians. And I've noticed I said the
(15:21):
Palestinians and not Hamas. I don't think they're going to
have room at the table here. Unfortunately, this means a
rapid intensification of aerial operations followed by aggressive ground maneuvers
focused on dismantling Hamas's infrastructure and leadership. They want to
do this. Israel wants to do this as quickly and
completely as possible. I don't have to tell anybody. They're
(15:46):
not getting good press. They're getting more and more pressure
to end this war. And the way to do that,
I think is they're just going to intensify it until
it ends very quickly. Now, I would expect a rapid
push to control key areas within Gaza, make buffer zones,
all aimed at achieving their objective in very short order.
Speaker 1 (16:08):
And as for off ramps, are there any left? Or
is the momentum too strong? Now?
Speaker 3 (16:15):
Yeah? Right now? I think it's just incredibly difficult to
find off ramps. The trust deficit here is so severe
and the public commitments from both sides are so firm.
I think a significant external intervention from a major international player,
or a dramatic shift in the internal political calculations of
either side would be required to change anything. Honestly, given
(16:39):
the current climate and the sense that negotiations have truly
broken down, those seem increasingly unlikely in the immediate term. Now,
the window for easy diplomatic solutions appears to have closed,
and that leaves us with a very narrow path forward.
I think the only thing that might shift the trajectory
would be an unforeseen, significant external event that completely reorders
(17:03):
priorities for the major players involved. And the major players
I'm talking about are like the US, China, Russia, Iran,
and so I'm thinking literal World War III would be
the only thing that changes this. But as it stands,
it feels like we're on a predetermined course here.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
All right, So let's talk about Hamas though, because they
expressed surprise at the US envoys negative remarks and maintained
that they were close to a breakthrough. So how do
we reconcile these vastly different narratives?
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Hey, look, I did expect nothing less, frankly, and that's
not a dig at Hamas specifically. It's just how these
types of high stakes negotiations usually play out. That's no
matter who's at the table, each side has a deeply
vested interest in framing the situation in a way that
benefits them both for their own people back in their
(17:53):
own countries, but also for the international audience. So Hamas
pointing to a near agreement could totally be an attempt
to hold on to legitimacy or even put some pressure
on the mediators or the Israelis even But you know,
from our perspective, we really focus on actions over words,
and so in this case, the withdrawal of negotiating teams
(18:17):
that speaks volumes. That's no matter what's being said publicly,
it is a pretty clear indicator of where things stand
at this point.
Speaker 1 (18:26):
You know, Cravin, What really hits home amidst all of
this is the human cost. So these reports of increasing
starvation deaths are devastating. This should not be happening, the
Gaza Health Ministry saying the number has now jumped to
(18:47):
over one hundred and twenty people since October and it's shattering.
So what does this trend tell us about the actual
reality on the ground there.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
It's just a grim picture. Yeah, when you see numbers
like that, especially a significant rise in starvation related deaths,
particularly among children. And in any time, starvation affects children first,
So the majority of those numbers are children. And if
you see that and your heart doesn't go out to
those suffering, I just don't know what to tell you. You
(19:21):
can support Israel and say it has a right to
defend itself. You can continue to highlight the atrocities of
Hamas and you can be utterly heartbroken by what is
happening to children in Gasa. We're talking about severe disruptions
to essential resources like food, water, medical supplies. There's also
a clear breakdown of the systems meant to distribute those supplies.
(19:44):
And regardless of who's ultimately responsible, the humanitarian implications at
this moment are beyond dire. It screams for immediate, effective intervention.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
So Israel has denied creating a famine, and they are
now saying that it will allow foreign nations to air
drop aid. But agencies are warning that air drops are
costly and dangerous. So what is the dynamic at play here?
Speaker 3 (20:16):
Yeah, this is honestly infuriating. You've got leaders that are
going to present solutions that they think are right. You
have others that are going to dismiss those solutions, even
temporary solutions, and they'll go, well, that's too expensive, it's
too dangerous. We saw that with Israel saying you can't
(20:38):
let these ground aid in because Hamas has it it's
too dangerous. Look, you're right, air drops are a last resort,
but we have children literally starving to death. We are
at that last resort. If air drops can happen, let
them happen. It feels like too many people are just
(20:59):
content to offer no real solutions. They want to just
point fingers, engage in the endless back and forth of
who's right who's wrong, And even worse with people who
want to exploit this catastrophe and yeah, catastrophe, that's the
word for this, and they want to do it for
their own political or personal gain or monetary gain. And
I'm talking about world leaders, but I'm talking about content
(21:20):
creators as well, on both sides of this, anyone who's
perpetuating any of this conflict. And I like, at the
end of it, with all of this, I understand war. Look,
I've been there. I know it you personally. I've seen
pictures of me with children in those combat zones, and
not once, not for a single second, did I ever think,
(21:41):
let me just let them suffer because their parents brought
them into this place and time for whatever reason. It's
not about blame anymore. This is about basic human decency.
You get to a ceasefire, you stop, you let aid
into these camps, and at the very least you just
grow a heart.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Well, I loved every word that you just said, so
thank you for that. On that note, we should probably
take a break here so that you can regulate your
nervous system and get your blood pressure back to normal.
Speaker 3 (22:18):
I just think it needs to be said.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
Yeah, I mean I did need to be said, and
I appreciate it. So when we come back, we will
get into new reports out of Gaza that there may
have been no evidence of aid theft by Hamas. So
oh my gosh, stay with us, We'll be right back. Well,
come back, listeners. As I alluded to before the break,
(22:41):
an internal US government review reportedly found no evidence of
widespread theft by Hamas of US funded humanitarian aid. So
how does this finding potentially impact to the narrative around
aid distribution? Like, is this part of the reason you
were at your wits end?
Speaker 3 (23:00):
It could be. It absolutely could be why I'm at
my wits end, but maybe not for the reason that
some might think. You know, accusations of aid diversion have
so often been used to justify restricting the aid flows, right,
that's what Israel always says. We talked about that just
a few minutes ago, and this is things that we've
(23:23):
talked about on this very podcast, that Hamas was taking
the aid and selling it to people in need.
Speaker 1 (23:31):
We certainly have. It's been a recurring theme.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
Unfortunately exactly. And my issue with this particular report is
how the headlines and the overall narrative often seem to
fly in the face of what's actually in the body
of the article. So you're going to see a headline
like US Agency finds no evidence of widespread theft of
humanitarian aid by Hamas, and that sounds I would say,
that sounds great on the surface. It's not being stolen, right.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
It sounds like a clear, exact honeration, right.
Speaker 3 (24:02):
And then you actually read a bit further into the article,
there's often some clarifying statement, something along the lines up
it is true that aid is being taken, but it
isn't the USAID or the UNAID, And so that's where
I get skeptical. So my skepticism kicks in. We've also
reported on the documented infiltration of the un relief efforts
(24:25):
by HAMAS. So if aid is being taken and Hamas
has influencer control within some of these distribution channels, then
is it really theft When you're taking something you already
largely control.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Oh okay. So in essence, they the very framing of
the report, while technically accurate and it's narrow finding, it
could be misleading about the broader reality of aid reaching
those who need it. So it seems designed to alleviate
pressure rather than truly clarify the situation.
Speaker 3 (25:01):
Yeah, like the UN desperately wants to take back over
that aid distribution. And so when someone pushes that hard
to do something, I always ask, why do they just
care so much about the starving people of Gaza? Or
are their ulterior motives? Is aid distribution to cash cow
(25:21):
for organizations like the United Nations. I think someone should
investigate that. I don't know. I know these organizations make
billions of dollars. That's why on this podcast we tell
people not to give to the Red Cross because their
CEOs are making eight hundred thousand a year and have
twenty two million dollar houses and all this stuff. Right,
(25:49):
they should be giving, you know, ninety nine percent of
that aid of those donations in aid, and then they're
really not. They're giving at most sixty percent. And so
right now, what's happening here is being framed as proof
that aid wasn't being stolen by Hamas in the way
people might imagine. But as a CNN article pointed out,
(26:12):
aid was being stolen, but they said the majority of
incidents could not be definitively attributed to a specific actor,
meaning they couldn't pin down whether it was Hamas or not.
So aid is being stolen, it is being redistributed somewhere else,
but they couldn't say that Hamas was doing it, And
(26:34):
that kind of nuance gets lost and it allows for
a less critical look at the actual aid flow. It
just adds another layer to how incredibly difficult and opaque
aid distribution in a conflict zone can actually be.
Speaker 1 (26:46):
All right, well, let's shift our conversation back to those negotiations,
because reports also mention a US proposal for a sixty
day cease fire involving hostage releases and the exchange of prisoners.
But that agreement be reached. What were the major sticking
points as far as we can tell, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (27:06):
Like, it's the same that they've always been. Fundamental issues
of Israeli troop withdrawals, the mechanisms for sustained and sufficient
aid distribution, and guarantees that any cease fire would lead
to a permanent into the conflict, and these are core
demands for hamas they likely involve significant security considerations in
long term strategic calculations for Israel.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
And the hostages. The families are understandably desperate, aren't they.
The hostages and the missing families form in Israel express
deep concern over the return of negotiators without a deal.
Speaker 3 (27:40):
Yeah, absolutely, they're They're upset and for the families, every
day that passes is absolutely agonizing. So their pressure on
the Israeli government to prioritize the release of hostages is honest,
it's immense. It's also understandable the differing perspectives within Israel.
Even suggestions of considering martial deals just shows the complex
(28:02):
and emotionally charged nature of this issue.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
And finally, Kurvin, amidst all this, we also heard a
disturbing statement from a far right Israeli minister regarding Gauz's population, Nania,
who was quick to distance himself. But what does this
kind of rhetoric signify in the broader context?
Speaker 3 (28:22):
Yeah, I do appreciate Natanya who's distancing of this. A
swift disavowal that's very important. Of these statements, especially when
it's coming from within a governing coalition, they are going
to have damaging effects, especially in how Israel is viewed globally. Now,
while they can fuel regional tensions, they really undermine international
(28:44):
efforts for a peaceful resolution, and then honestly, they further
erode trust with the Palestinian population.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
It certainly paints a concerning picture on multiple fronts. The
breakdown of negotiations, escalating humanitarian crisis, and the deeply entrenched
positions all point to a protracted and incredibly difficult situation.
Speaker 3 (29:06):
It's an unfortunate reality. Without a renewed commitment to good
faith negotiations and prioritization of civilian lives, the current trajectory
of this conflict is still deeply worrying, and the international
community will likely need to intensify its diplomatic efforts and
humanitarian aid to try and mitigate the worst of these consequences.
Speaker 1 (29:32):
All right, lovely listeners, we are going to take a
step away for just a minute as we get ready
for our final topic of the day, and when we
come back, we'll pivot to yet another conflict, this time
in the South Tennessee. So stay with us. We'll be
right back. Well, come back, lovely listeners. Before the break,
we told you that we are turning our attention to
Southeast Asia, where a simmering border dispute between Thailand and
(29:55):
Cambodia has frankly exploded into their worst fighting in a
way for a decade. So Kuran set the scene for us.
What's the core issue igniting this conflict right now?
Speaker 3 (30:07):
Well, look at its heart, this is a territorial dispute
that's been brewing for over a century. It traces back
to how borders were drawn during the French colonial era.
And while there have been sporadic clashes over the last
few years, the current hostilities escalated significantly after a Cambodian
soldier was killed back in May. So this isn't while
(30:30):
the intensification is new, It actually goes back a couple
of months to the month of May, and since then
we've seen a rapid deterioration, culminating in the last Thursday's
outbreak of heavy fighting along multiple points of the shared
borders of those countries.
Speaker 1 (30:46):
And heavy fighting sounds like an undo statement. We've seen
reports of artillery exchanges and even aerial engagements. So what
is the human cost that we're looking at.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
So far, well, both sides of reports. It's significant casualties.
We've seen over thirty people killed, that's both military and civilian.
And beyond that, we've seen the displacement numbers at a
staggering rate. Nearly two hundred thousand people have been forced
to flee their homes on both sides of the border,
(31:16):
and it's in yet another humanitarian crisis unfolding alongside this
military crisis.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
So both countries are blaming each other for initiating these
latest clashes, right, and we are seeing some serious accusations
on both sides. What are you hearing?
Speaker 3 (31:37):
Yeah, look, and we always say take it, you know
where it, take it how you want, depending on who's
telling you this stuff. But Thailand claims the conflict began
with Cambodian military drones conducting surveillance and they followed that
with ground incursions. So they're saying that Cambodian military did
ground incursions after these drone surveillance. Now Cambodia, on the
(32:02):
other hand, alleges that Thai soldiers violated a prior agreement
by advancing on a disputed temple site. What's particularly concerning
are the accusations of tactics being employed. Thailand claims Cambodia
is firing into civilian areas, and Cambodia is accusing Thailand
of using cluster munitions, which, as we've talked about on
(32:23):
this podcast before, those are banned in much of the
world due to their indiscriminate effect. That's Highland has not
commented on that specific accusation.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
What about the efforts to de escalate, Has there been
any movement towards a ceasefire or mediation?
Speaker 3 (32:43):
Yeah, Look, as with the other two topics today, that's
where things get complicated. So Cambodia has formally called for
an immediate and unconditional ceasefire. They have even appealed to
the UN Security Council for intervention. But Thailand has been
quite firm in its stands. They prefer bilateral negotiations to
(33:03):
resolve the conflict and that there is no need for
third party mediation at this stage.
Speaker 1 (33:09):
So even with offers from major players like the US, China,
and Malaysia, which notably chairs the Association of Southeast Asian Nations,
Thailand is holding firm two party solution.
Speaker 3 (33:23):
Yeah, that's right. They've stated that bilateral mechanisms have not
been exhausted. Yet they made it clear that Cambodia must
cease the violence first before any talks can truly proceed.
Remember we talked last week. That goes back to okay,
who does you know who stops first? Who's going to
stop the shooting first. I even saw a report from
(33:46):
Cambodia's Prime minister that an initial ceasefire proposal from Malaysia
was agreed upon by both nations, but Thailand later reversed
its decision. Also, the capital Bangkok had did not public
comment on that claim. They're being very close lipped about this,
and it shows a very clear divergence in their approaches
(34:07):
to resolution here.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
This brings us to the capabilities of these two militaries.
So carbon you've looked at the numbers and the affiliations,
So how do the armed forces of Thailand and Cambodia
stack up against each other.
Speaker 3 (34:24):
Well, there's quite a bit of a contrast here. So Thailand,
as a long standing US ally, possesses a significantly larger
and more advanced military. It's probably three times the active
duty personnel compared to Cambodia, and their air force is
considered one of the best equipped and trained in Southeast Asia.
They have modern fighter jets like the Swedish Grippon and
(34:48):
the F sixteen's. They also have a substantial advantage in
terms of ground forces and artillery.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
And Cambodia, on the other hand, relies heavily on a
different major power.
Speaker 3 (34:59):
Absolutely, and so here's where things start coming into focus.
So Cambodia's military is much younger, they are heavily reliant
on China for defense equipment and support. Beijing has become
a key supplier and has even developed a naval base
for Cambodia. That naval base is capable of hosting Chinese
aircraft carriers. They also conduct annual joint military exercises, signaling
(35:23):
a deep and growing defense relationship between those two countries. Now,
Cambodia simply lacks the ability to design or manufacture its
own modern equipment.
Speaker 1 (35:34):
So while Thailand has the quantitative and qualitative edge, especially
in air power, are there any factors that might bounce
that out even slightly in this specific conflict.
Speaker 3 (35:44):
That's absolutely great question, and it's quite interesting how the
terrain plays a role here. While Thailand certainly has the
upper hand with its superior air power and long range artillery,
the disputed border itself seems to favor Cambodia. This means
Ambodian forces could use tactics like land mines and booby traps,
which would make it a lot tougher for Thie ground
(36:07):
forces to advance, So Thailand might end up relying more
on those longer range assets that it has.
Speaker 1 (36:15):
This conflict isn't just a local issue either, is it.
It actually has much broader implications for the Indo Pacific,
especially when we think about the strategic competition between the
United States and China. So how do you think this
fits into that larger geopolitical puzzle?
Speaker 2 (36:36):
Now?
Speaker 3 (36:36):
I think this is a critical test for that. So
for China, this conflict presents a dual opportunity. Beijing right
now has positioned itself as a potential mediator that could
enhance its regional credibility and deepen its influence. This is
especially true given its close ties with Cambodia. Now, a
successful mediation would demonstrate China's community with a shared future approach.
(36:59):
This is something that they've been pushing globalists even with
the Russia Ukraine conflict, and it potentially would expand China's
network of partners. Now prolonged instability is also a risk
for China's economic projects in the region. We're talking the
Belton Road Initiative, which Cambodia is a part of. China
(37:21):
prefers stability here and they certainly want to avoid any
perception of a proxy conflict where US ally Thailand is
clashing with China backed Cambodia.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
And as for the United States, how does this impact
their strategy of building alliances, particularly in the context of
turning potential conflict over Taiwan. Well.
Speaker 3 (37:43):
For the US, this conflict is a test of its
alliances and influence in Southeast Asia. Now, Thailand is a
treaty ally, and while the US has called for de escalation,
its public involvement has been more restrained compared to China's
stated intent to mediate. Perceived lack of decisive US engagement
or inability to de escalate could subtly undermine confidence among
(38:07):
US partners. Also, projected conflict here could divert US diplomatic
attention or even US military resources away from its primary
focus of deterring China in the Taiwan Strait. So building
a robust network of allies is key to the US strategy,
and the endo Pacific and any internal friction with the
(38:29):
broader Indo Pacific framework complicates that objective.
Speaker 1 (38:34):
You know, as we wrap up our discussion on this
intense situation between Thailand and Cambodia, I think it offers
us a really crucial lens through which to view the
broader global landscape.
Speaker 3 (38:47):
Yeah, I think you hit on a crucial point here.
It is often too simplistic to pinpoint one single event
as the root cause of a large scale conflict. That
we probably think of something like the invasion of Taiwan
and that sparked World War three in the future. But
when we look at the historical paths to major wars, take,
(39:07):
for instance, World War One, we consistently find that what
appears to be the triggery event in that case, the
assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, it was merely the spark
in an already volatile environment. The truth is World War
One was the culmination of decades of deep seated tensions
and rivalries brewing across Europe. These weren't always direct confrontations.
(39:32):
They often were a series of seemingly unrelated, smaller skirmishes
or regional tensions. Each one added another ripple to the pond,
slowly but surely, creating an environment where the likelihood of
a larger confrontation increased exponentially.
Speaker 1 (39:49):
So, rather than looking for a single smoking gun incident
that sparks a global war, we should be paying closer
attention to this accumulation of smaller regional flashes, standing how
they influence the broader geopolitical climate. It's about recognizing the
pattern and not just the individual events.
Speaker 3 (40:07):
Yeah, exactly. And this is what we're trying to do
on this podcast is highlight these things. We want to
explain that these smaller conflicts can shift power dynamics. They
can even inadvertently draw in larger players who are backing
one side or another, they create allies. That's a subtle
but constant recalibration of the tapestry of international relations, especially
(40:29):
as we navigate a world with increasing friction between these
major powers.
Speaker 1 (40:36):
Thank you Cravin for shedding light on such a complex
and critical situation. We will continue to monitor this closely.
So anything else you want to discuss.
Speaker 3 (40:46):
That's all I have. Do you have anything?
Speaker 1 (40:48):
I'm coming to see you, Sin.
Speaker 3 (40:52):
It's all set up.
Speaker 1 (40:53):
It's all set up. It's going to be so fun.
It's going to be so fun. It will anyways, I
just wanted to throw that out there. I get to
see him, so it's gonna be fun.
Speaker 3 (41:04):
Finally, finally, finally, I know we have a little work
on keeping you here.
Speaker 1 (41:09):
Oh yeah, it probably won't be too hard once I'm
actually there. Yeah, but as of right now, no, I don't.
I don't know anyway, I don't know what I'm trying
to say there anyways? Is that all I just want
to say? That was excited. I'm excited to see you. Well,
thank you so much for listening to this week explained.
(41:31):
We hope you found it informative and engaging. If you
have any feedback or suggestions for future episodes, we would
love to hear from you, so for more in depth
coverage of these stories and more, be sure to follow
us on social media. This Week Explained
Speaker 3 (41:44):
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.
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.
Speaker 1 (02:21):
And you are in the right place. Welcome to this
week Explained, your.
Speaker 2 (02:25):
Weekly deep diving in the most complex and impactful stories
shaping our world.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
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.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
Ensure you never miss an episode, make sure you're following
or subscribed on your podcast platform.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
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.
Speaker 2 (02:50):
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 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 Leon Media Network.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
This week, we're diving into the latest from Ukraine and
Gaza in a new conflict brewing in South Ternessee. We've
got a lot to unpack for our listeners today. We're
going to start with the ongoing situation in Ukraine's specifically
the diplomatic dance that seems to be picking up pace.
We've heard about some significant meetings on the horizon, So
can you lay out what's on the table?
Speaker 3 (03:35):
Yeah, you bet so. Right now. What's going on over
the last week is that it appears that there is
a flurry of high level diplomatic activity that is brewing,
and we are expecting to see US President Donald Trump
meet with British Prime Minister Kars Starmer and European Commission
President Ursula vonder Lane, and he's going to meet them
(03:56):
in Scotland.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
You know.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
The big topic for that conversation, from what we understand,
is going to be ending the war in Ukraine. The
most notably, President Trump floated the idea of secondary sanctions
on Russia before he even left Washington, DC, and vonder
Lane is also slated to meet with Trump independently from
the British Prime Minister. What's particularly interesting is that British
(04:22):
officials seem to be feeling a bit more optimistic about
a shift in Trump's stance on Ukraine and Russia recently.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
Those are some having diplomatic kitterers. And speaking of the US,
it seems they're continuing to put pressure on other key players,
specifically China. So what's the latest there.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
Yeah, they absolutely are at the UN. Recently, the US
directly called on China to stop supporting Russia's aggression, particularly
by halting the export of dual use goods that could
contribute to Russia's military industrial base. Now China, because we
do give both sides of the story on this podcast,
quickly pushed back. They said that it's not party to
(05:01):
the conflict and has not provided lethal weapons. They maintain
that it strictly controls those dual use materials.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
So we have these international pressures and then there are
the direct talks between Russia and Ukraine. So what is
the latest on their willingness to come to the table.
Speaker 3 (05:19):
Yeah, I mean that's a mixed bagh Siena Ukrainian presidents.
Zelensky did announce that a new round of peace talks
between Russia and Ukraine is set for Istanbul on Wednesday
of this week, so that's July thirtieth, And these talks
are reportedly going to focus on prisoner exchanges and the
possibility of a meeting between Zelensky and Putin. Now, as always,
(05:41):
the Kremlin has been quite clear they do not expect
a miraculous breakthrough from these discussions. They see a Putin
Zelensky summit only as a final step to seal the
peace deal, and they've already poured cold water on Ukraine's
proposal for such a meeting by the end of August. Now,
Zelensky did that Russia is beginning to engage on the
(06:02):
possibility of a leader level meeting, but Moscow's rhetoric suggests
that they're still quite far apart on the core issues. Also,
we should not forget it was I think six months
ago we talked about it on the podcast where Putin
informed his military leaders he actually wants this war ended
in Russia's favor obviously by twenty twenty six. So I
(06:26):
get a sense we're starting to see Russia race to
that finish line.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
Well, I mean, twenty twenty six is not far off,
but it certainly sounds like a long road ahead for
any significant peace agreement. So, moving from diplomacy to the battlefield,
what's been happening on the ground in Ukraine, especially regarding
their defensive capabilities.
Speaker 3 (06:47):
Yeah, like a crucial area of focus for Ukraine, especially
given the ongoing drone and missile attacks from Russia. Is
strengthening their air defenses. Now, Zelenski recently toured a factory
producing interceptor zones and he set an ambitious goal. He
wants Ukraine to produce up to one thousand of these
drones daily. This is a significant push to protect Ukrainian cities.
(07:11):
On top of that, Ukraine has received confirmation for funding
for three Patriot missile defense systems, two from Germany, one
from Norway. They're actually working with Dutch partners to secure
funding for seven more of those systems. So highlights a
critical need those air defense missiles, and it's a concerted
(07:31):
effort now among Europe to bolster their aerial production against
Russia's intensified attacks.
Speaker 1 (07:39):
Okay, Well, speaking of internal matters, there was a significant
development regarding Ukraine's anti corruption efforts that initially caused quite
a start and then a reversal. So can you walk
us through that.
Speaker 3 (07:51):
Yeah, you know, I may have been out of the
loop for a few days, especially within what the media
is posting, but actually saw a lot of this through
person sources. I didn't really see much of it in
the media this past week, but I do think it
was quite significant that President Zelensky signed this new bill.
This bill would curb the independence of anti corruption institutions
(08:13):
in the country of Ukraine, and obviously that drew heavy
criticism domestically because it is perceived to effectively strip Ukraine's
key anti corruption bodies of its independence. Like they would
do this by granting the Prosecutor General more control over
investigations as opposed to these anti corruption bodies. Now, this move,
(08:34):
which Olensky claimed, was to clear out Russian influence, much
like we talk about with national security in Ukraine. If
you talk about Russian influence, you can get some votes
pretty easily there. But Zelensky said he wanted to address
some of these dormant cases of corruption. It did spark wide,
pressed widespread protests across Ukrainian cities. It's the largest anti
(09:00):
government demonstrations since the twenty twenty two invasion by Russia.
But this wasn't just a domestic issue. It also raised
serious alarms among Ukraine's Western allies, who had pushed for
the establishment of these independent anti corruption agencies, and they
did this as a precondition for the aid that is
being sent, as well as future EU membership.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Yeah, I don't see how signing that is going to
help clear out Russian influence and address dormant cases.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
At all, but yeah, when it's Western supported, absolutely.
Speaker 1 (09:32):
Yeah. So, I mean that was quite a rapid turn
of events. I mean I would be unhappy if I
were Ukrainian civilian as well to hear that. You know,
the government's kind of closing the circle a bit. So
where do things stand now with the independence of these
anti corruption institutions and what's the path forward after such
a public challenge.
Speaker 3 (09:54):
Well, it looks like the pressure did make an impact.
Zelenski made an abrupt u turn and submitted new legislation
aimed at restoring the independence of those very agencies. Now,
this was met with some relief, though the head of
Ukraine's anti corruption agency has stated that he still expects
ongoing attempts to undermine their work. This is a clear
(10:16):
indication that while the immediate crisis was diffused, the underlying
tensions after all these years of war and surrounding anti
corruption efforts within Ukraine, still remains.
Speaker 1 (10:29):
It really highlights how complex the internal and external pressures
are for Ukraine right now. All right, Lastly, Garvin, any
general overview of the military situation on.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
The ground, Well, I mean this should come no surprise
to anyone, but the fighting remains intense. Ukrainian forces are
reporting fierce fighting in the east of Ukraine, which has
some key logistic hubs that Russia wants, and Russia has
been claiming the capture of villages in those very eastern areas.
(11:00):
US saw reports of Ukrainian forces continuing to operate in
the northern Sumai region that's where Russian troops have established
a foothold and where there are claims of both advances
and retractions from both sides, but you can never know
depending on who's reporting where those forces are. So after
(11:20):
two and a half years, almost the fighting remains intense,
with the end to this war a very very distant thought.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
Well, it's still a complex and difficult situation all around,
and unfortunately that sentiment carries over to the deeply concerning
situation and folding it in Gaza, the breakdown of ceasefire
negotiations and the rapidly escalating humanitarian crisis. There is demanding
our tension, wouldn't you agree, Kurbin?
Speaker 3 (11:49):
Yeah, absolutely. We don't spend the day together talking that
we don't talk about this crisis. And the information coming
out paints a picture of a negotiation process that has
not only stalled, but it seems to have actively regressed
at this point. The public statements from people like President
(12:09):
Donald Trump and Prime Minister net and Yahoo, coupled with
the withdrawal that happened this week of the negotiating teams
of those two countries, signal a significant shift.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
Right, like Trump's blunt assessment that Hamas didn't really want
to make a deal, in Netanyahu echoing the consideration of
alternative options after the US and Israel pulled their negotiators
from Cutter. So what does that tell us from an
analytical standpoint about the perceived intentions on both sides?
Speaker 3 (12:41):
I mean, it feels to me like the US and
Israel are actually just done negotiating. So you remember last
week we talked about the ultimatums from Hamas that if
Israel doesn't negotiating good faith, they're done. Hamas is leaving. Well,
we're now seeing Israel and its allies, most notably the
United States, call their bluffalm that and once again, and
(13:02):
I feel like we repeat this every single week that
we talk about it. There is a fundamental breakdown in trust.
And if you can't trust each other, how can you
negotiate in good faith? I don't think that's possible. Now,
getting to those alternative options you talked about, I think
we're about to see a major Israeli campaign. That campaign
(13:26):
will probably try to finally accomplish their goals, the goal
of removing Hamas completely and possibly something you predicted when
all of this started taking over and becoming the governing
body of the Gaza strip.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
Hm, yep, I did say that, and you told me
that I was wrong, So apologize to me right now.
Speaker 3 (13:50):
Do you have a question? I didn't hear a question
in that one. We can move on. Do you want
to go to the next topic now?
Speaker 1 (13:57):
Just kidding, kidding. I also saw an article that, I
mean all joking aside. I saw an article where Trump
came out and he said he told Israel and Netanyahu,
He's like, just finished the job. It's time for you
to finish the job, because they weren't going to negotiate anymore.
Speaker 3 (14:19):
Yeah, I mean yeah, And that's what we're seeing play
out right now. I do believe that conversation did happen
because President Trump said, right like I'm gonna be elected,
I'm going to end this war on day one. Well,
we're over one hundred days into his presidency and Israel
has not only not stopped the war, but they've become
(14:41):
more aggressive in their campaigns.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
So given all of that, what do you think the
immediate next steps might look like if this military campaign
truly gets underway? And do you see any off ramps
or potential interventions that could still shift this trajectory or
are we way past that point?
Speaker 3 (15:01):
Well, I mean, if a full scale military campaign is
indeed the alternative option here Sienna, we're going to see
an immediate and intense escalation of combat operations and the
goal will likely be a swift and decisive end too
the conflict, primarily on Israel's terms, without prolonged consultations or
negotiations with the Palestinians. And I've noticed I said the
(15:21):
Palestinians and not Hamas. I don't think they're going to
have room at the table here. Unfortunately, this means a
rapid intensification of aerial operations followed by aggressive ground maneuvers
focused on dismantling Hamas's infrastructure and leadership. They want to
do this. Israel wants to do this as quickly and
completely as possible. I don't have to tell anybody. They're
(15:46):
not getting good press. They're getting more and more pressure
to end this war. And the way to do that,
I think is they're just going to intensify it until
it ends very quickly. Now, I would expect a rapid
push to control key areas within Gaza, make buffer zones,
all aimed at achieving their objective in very short order.
Speaker 1 (16:08):
And as for off ramps, are there any left? Or
is the momentum too strong? Now?
Speaker 3 (16:15):
Yeah? Right now? I think it's just incredibly difficult to
find off ramps. The trust deficit here is so severe
and the public commitments from both sides are so firm.
I think a significant external intervention from a major international player,
or a dramatic shift in the internal political calculations of
either side would be required to change anything. Honestly, given
(16:39):
the current climate and the sense that negotiations have truly
broken down, those seem increasingly unlikely in the immediate term. Now,
the window for easy diplomatic solutions appears to have closed,
and that leaves us with a very narrow path forward.
I think the only thing that might shift the trajectory
would be an unforeseen, significant external event that completely reorders
(17:03):
priorities for the major players involved. And the major players
I'm talking about are like the US, China, Russia, Iran,
and so I'm thinking literal World War III would be
the only thing that changes this. But as it stands,
it feels like we're on a predetermined course here.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
All right, So let's talk about Hamas though, because they
expressed surprise at the US envoys negative remarks and maintained
that they were close to a breakthrough. So how do
we reconcile these vastly different narratives?
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Hey, look, I did expect nothing less, frankly, and that's
not a dig at Hamas specifically. It's just how these
types of high stakes negotiations usually play out. That's no
matter who's at the table, each side has a deeply
vested interest in framing the situation in a way that
benefits them both for their own people back in their
(17:53):
own countries, but also for the international audience. So Hamas
pointing to a near agreement could totally be an attempt
to hold on to legitimacy or even put some pressure
on the mediators or the Israelis even But you know,
from our perspective, we really focus on actions over words,
and so in this case, the withdrawal of negotiating teams
(18:17):
that speaks volumes. That's no matter what's being said publicly,
it is a pretty clear indicator of where things stand
at this point.
Speaker 1 (18:26):
You know, Cravin, What really hits home amidst all of
this is the human cost. So these reports of increasing
starvation deaths are devastating. This should not be happening, the
Gaza Health Ministry saying the number has now jumped to
(18:47):
over one hundred and twenty people since October and it's shattering.
So what does this trend tell us about the actual
reality on the ground there.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
It's just a grim picture. Yeah, when you see numbers
like that, especially a significant rise in starvation related deaths,
particularly among children. And in any time, starvation affects children first,
So the majority of those numbers are children. And if
you see that and your heart doesn't go out to
those suffering, I just don't know what to tell you. You
(19:21):
can support Israel and say it has a right to
defend itself. You can continue to highlight the atrocities of
Hamas and you can be utterly heartbroken by what is
happening to children in Gasa. We're talking about severe disruptions
to essential resources like food, water, medical supplies. There's also
a clear breakdown of the systems meant to distribute those supplies.
(19:44):
And regardless of who's ultimately responsible, the humanitarian implications at
this moment are beyond dire. It screams for immediate, effective intervention.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
So Israel has denied creating a famine, and they are
now saying that it will allow foreign nations to air
drop aid. But agencies are warning that air drops are
costly and dangerous. So what is the dynamic at play here?
Speaker 3 (20:16):
Yeah, this is honestly infuriating. You've got leaders that are
going to present solutions that they think are right. You
have others that are going to dismiss those solutions, even
temporary solutions, and they'll go, well, that's too expensive, it's
too dangerous. We saw that with Israel saying you can't
(20:38):
let these ground aid in because Hamas has it it's
too dangerous. Look, you're right, air drops are a last resort,
but we have children literally starving to death. We are
at that last resort. If air drops can happen, let
them happen. It feels like too many people are just
(20:59):
content to offer no real solutions. They want to just
point fingers, engage in the endless back and forth of
who's right who's wrong, And even worse with people who
want to exploit this catastrophe and yeah, catastrophe, that's the
word for this, and they want to do it for
their own political or personal gain or monetary gain. And
I'm talking about world leaders, but I'm talking about content
(21:20):
creators as well, on both sides of this, anyone who's
perpetuating any of this conflict. And I like, at the
end of it, with all of this, I understand war. Look,
I've been there. I know it you personally. I've seen
pictures of me with children in those combat zones, and
not once, not for a single second, did I ever think,
(21:41):
let me just let them suffer because their parents brought
them into this place and time for whatever reason. It's
not about blame anymore. This is about basic human decency.
You get to a ceasefire, you stop, you let aid
into these camps, and at the very least you just
grow a heart.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Well, I loved every word that you just said, so
thank you for that. On that note, we should probably
take a break here so that you can regulate your
nervous system and get your blood pressure back to normal.
Speaker 3 (22:18):
I just think it needs to be said.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
Yeah, I mean I did need to be said, and
I appreciate it. So when we come back, we will
get into new reports out of Gaza that there may
have been no evidence of aid theft by Hamas. So
oh my gosh, stay with us, We'll be right back. Well,
come back, listeners. As I alluded to before the break,
(22:41):
an internal US government review reportedly found no evidence of
widespread theft by Hamas of US funded humanitarian aid. So
how does this finding potentially impact to the narrative around
aid distribution? Like, is this part of the reason you
were at your wits end?
Speaker 3 (23:00):
It could be. It absolutely could be why I'm at
my wits end, but maybe not for the reason that
some might think. You know, accusations of aid diversion have
so often been used to justify restricting the aid flows, right,
that's what Israel always says. We talked about that just
a few minutes ago, and this is things that we've
(23:23):
talked about on this very podcast, that Hamas was taking
the aid and selling it to people in need.
Speaker 1 (23:31):
We certainly have. It's been a recurring theme.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
Unfortunately exactly. And my issue with this particular report is
how the headlines and the overall narrative often seem to
fly in the face of what's actually in the body
of the article. So you're going to see a headline
like US Agency finds no evidence of widespread theft of
humanitarian aid by Hamas, and that sounds I would say,
that sounds great on the surface. It's not being stolen, right.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
It sounds like a clear, exact honeration, right.
Speaker 3 (24:02):
And then you actually read a bit further into the article,
there's often some clarifying statement, something along the lines up
it is true that aid is being taken, but it
isn't the USAID or the UNAID, And so that's where
I get skeptical. So my skepticism kicks in. We've also
reported on the documented infiltration of the un relief efforts
(24:25):
by HAMAS. So if aid is being taken and Hamas
has influencer control within some of these distribution channels, then
is it really theft When you're taking something you already
largely control.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Oh okay. So in essence, they the very framing of
the report, while technically accurate and it's narrow finding, it
could be misleading about the broader reality of aid reaching
those who need it. So it seems designed to alleviate
pressure rather than truly clarify the situation.
Speaker 3 (25:01):
Yeah, like the UN desperately wants to take back over
that aid distribution. And so when someone pushes that hard
to do something, I always ask, why do they just
care so much about the starving people of Gaza? Or
are their ulterior motives? Is aid distribution to cash cow
(25:21):
for organizations like the United Nations. I think someone should
investigate that. I don't know. I know these organizations make
billions of dollars. That's why on this podcast we tell
people not to give to the Red Cross because their
CEOs are making eight hundred thousand a year and have
twenty two million dollar houses and all this stuff. Right,
(25:49):
they should be giving, you know, ninety nine percent of
that aid of those donations in aid, and then they're
really not. They're giving at most sixty percent. And so
right now, what's happening here is being framed as proof
that aid wasn't being stolen by Hamas in the way
people might imagine. But as a CNN article pointed out,
(26:12):
aid was being stolen, but they said the majority of
incidents could not be definitively attributed to a specific actor,
meaning they couldn't pin down whether it was Hamas or not.
So aid is being stolen, it is being redistributed somewhere else,
but they couldn't say that Hamas was doing it, And
(26:34):
that kind of nuance gets lost and it allows for
a less critical look at the actual aid flow. It
just adds another layer to how incredibly difficult and opaque
aid distribution in a conflict zone can actually be.
Speaker 1 (26:46):
All right, well, let's shift our conversation back to those negotiations,
because reports also mention a US proposal for a sixty
day cease fire involving hostage releases and the exchange of prisoners.
But that agreement be reached. What were the major sticking
points as far as we can tell, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (27:06):
Like, it's the same that they've always been. Fundamental issues
of Israeli troop withdrawals, the mechanisms for sustained and sufficient
aid distribution, and guarantees that any cease fire would lead
to a permanent into the conflict, and these are core
demands for hamas they likely involve significant security considerations in
long term strategic calculations for Israel.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
And the hostages. The families are understandably desperate, aren't they.
The hostages and the missing families form in Israel express
deep concern over the return of negotiators without a deal.
Speaker 3 (27:40):
Yeah, absolutely, they're They're upset and for the families, every
day that passes is absolutely agonizing. So their pressure on
the Israeli government to prioritize the release of hostages is honest,
it's immense. It's also understandable the differing perspectives within Israel.
Even suggestions of considering martial deals just shows the complex
(28:02):
and emotionally charged nature of this issue.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
And finally, Kurvin, amidst all this, we also heard a
disturbing statement from a far right Israeli minister regarding Gauz's population, Nania,
who was quick to distance himself. But what does this
kind of rhetoric signify in the broader context?
Speaker 3 (28:22):
Yeah, I do appreciate Natanya who's distancing of this. A
swift disavowal that's very important. Of these statements, especially when
it's coming from within a governing coalition, they are going
to have damaging effects, especially in how Israel is viewed globally. Now,
while they can fuel regional tensions, they really undermine international
(28:44):
efforts for a peaceful resolution, and then honestly, they further
erode trust with the Palestinian population.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
It certainly paints a concerning picture on multiple fronts. The
breakdown of negotiations, escalating humanitarian crisis, and the deeply entrenched
positions all point to a protracted and incredibly difficult situation.
Speaker 3 (29:06):
It's an unfortunate reality. Without a renewed commitment to good
faith negotiations and prioritization of civilian lives, the current trajectory
of this conflict is still deeply worrying, and the international
community will likely need to intensify its diplomatic efforts and
humanitarian aid to try and mitigate the worst of these consequences.
Speaker 1 (29:32):
All right, lovely listeners, we are going to take a
step away for just a minute as we get ready
for our final topic of the day, and when we
come back, we'll pivot to yet another conflict, this time
in the South Tennessee. So stay with us. We'll be
right back. Well, come back, lovely listeners. Before the break,
we told you that we are turning our attention to
Southeast Asia, where a simmering border dispute between Thailand and
(29:55):
Cambodia has frankly exploded into their worst fighting in a
way for a decade. So Kuran set the scene for us.
What's the core issue igniting this conflict right now?
Speaker 3 (30:07):
Well, look at its heart, this is a territorial dispute
that's been brewing for over a century. It traces back
to how borders were drawn during the French colonial era.
And while there have been sporadic clashes over the last
few years, the current hostilities escalated significantly after a Cambodian
soldier was killed back in May. So this isn't while
(30:30):
the intensification is new, It actually goes back a couple
of months to the month of May, and since then
we've seen a rapid deterioration, culminating in the last Thursday's
outbreak of heavy fighting along multiple points of the shared
borders of those countries.
Speaker 1 (30:46):
And heavy fighting sounds like an undo statement. We've seen
reports of artillery exchanges and even aerial engagements. So what
is the human cost that we're looking at.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
So far, well, both sides of reports. It's significant casualties.
We've seen over thirty people killed, that's both military and civilian.
And beyond that, we've seen the displacement numbers at a
staggering rate. Nearly two hundred thousand people have been forced
to flee their homes on both sides of the border,
(31:16):
and it's in yet another humanitarian crisis unfolding alongside this
military crisis.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
So both countries are blaming each other for initiating these
latest clashes, right, and we are seeing some serious accusations
on both sides. What are you hearing?
Speaker 3 (31:37):
Yeah, look, and we always say take it, you know
where it, take it how you want, depending on who's
telling you this stuff. But Thailand claims the conflict began
with Cambodian military drones conducting surveillance and they followed that
with ground incursions. So they're saying that Cambodian military did
ground incursions after these drone surveillance. Now Cambodia, on the
(32:02):
other hand, alleges that Thai soldiers violated a prior agreement
by advancing on a disputed temple site. What's particularly concerning
are the accusations of tactics being employed. Thailand claims Cambodia
is firing into civilian areas, and Cambodia is accusing Thailand
of using cluster munitions, which, as we've talked about on
(32:23):
this podcast before, those are banned in much of the
world due to their indiscriminate effect. That's Highland has not
commented on that specific accusation.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
What about the efforts to de escalate, Has there been
any movement towards a ceasefire or mediation?
Speaker 3 (32:43):
Yeah, Look, as with the other two topics today, that's
where things get complicated. So Cambodia has formally called for
an immediate and unconditional ceasefire. They have even appealed to
the UN Security Council for intervention. But Thailand has been
quite firm in its stands. They prefer bilateral negotiations to
(33:03):
resolve the conflict and that there is no need for
third party mediation at this stage.
Speaker 1 (33:09):
So even with offers from major players like the US, China,
and Malaysia, which notably chairs the Association of Southeast Asian Nations,
Thailand is holding firm two party solution.
Speaker 3 (33:23):
Yeah, that's right. They've stated that bilateral mechanisms have not
been exhausted. Yet they made it clear that Cambodia must
cease the violence first before any talks can truly proceed.
Remember we talked last week. That goes back to okay,
who does you know who stops first? Who's going to
stop the shooting first. I even saw a report from
(33:46):
Cambodia's Prime minister that an initial ceasefire proposal from Malaysia
was agreed upon by both nations, but Thailand later reversed
its decision. Also, the capital Bangkok had did not public
comment on that claim. They're being very close lipped about this,
and it shows a very clear divergence in their approaches
(34:07):
to resolution here.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
This brings us to the capabilities of these two militaries.
So carbon you've looked at the numbers and the affiliations,
So how do the armed forces of Thailand and Cambodia
stack up against each other.
Speaker 3 (34:24):
Well, there's quite a bit of a contrast here. So Thailand,
as a long standing US ally, possesses a significantly larger
and more advanced military. It's probably three times the active
duty personnel compared to Cambodia, and their air force is
considered one of the best equipped and trained in Southeast Asia.
They have modern fighter jets like the Swedish Grippon and
(34:48):
the F sixteen's. They also have a substantial advantage in
terms of ground forces and artillery.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
And Cambodia, on the other hand, relies heavily on a
different major power.
Speaker 3 (34:59):
Absolutely, and so here's where things start coming into focus.
So Cambodia's military is much younger, they are heavily reliant
on China for defense equipment and support. Beijing has become
a key supplier and has even developed a naval base
for Cambodia. That naval base is capable of hosting Chinese
aircraft carriers. They also conduct annual joint military exercises, signaling
(35:23):
a deep and growing defense relationship between those two countries. Now,
Cambodia simply lacks the ability to design or manufacture its
own modern equipment.
Speaker 1 (35:34):
So while Thailand has the quantitative and qualitative edge, especially
in air power, are there any factors that might bounce
that out even slightly in this specific conflict.
Speaker 3 (35:44):
That's absolutely great question, and it's quite interesting how the
terrain plays a role here. While Thailand certainly has the
upper hand with its superior air power and long range artillery,
the disputed border itself seems to favor Cambodia. This means
Ambodian forces could use tactics like land mines and booby traps,
which would make it a lot tougher for Thie ground
(36:07):
forces to advance, So Thailand might end up relying more
on those longer range assets that it has.
Speaker 1 (36:15):
This conflict isn't just a local issue either, is it.
It actually has much broader implications for the Indo Pacific,
especially when we think about the strategic competition between the
United States and China. So how do you think this
fits into that larger geopolitical puzzle?
Speaker 2 (36:36):
Now?
Speaker 3 (36:36):
I think this is a critical test for that. So
for China, this conflict presents a dual opportunity. Beijing right
now has positioned itself as a potential mediator that could
enhance its regional credibility and deepen its influence. This is
especially true given its close ties with Cambodia. Now, a
successful mediation would demonstrate China's community with a shared future approach.
(36:59):
This is something that they've been pushing globalists even with
the Russia Ukraine conflict, and it potentially would expand China's
network of partners. Now prolonged instability is also a risk
for China's economic projects in the region. We're talking the
Belton Road Initiative, which Cambodia is a part of. China
(37:21):
prefers stability here and they certainly want to avoid any
perception of a proxy conflict where US ally Thailand is
clashing with China backed Cambodia.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
And as for the United States, how does this impact
their strategy of building alliances, particularly in the context of
turning potential conflict over Taiwan. Well.
Speaker 3 (37:43):
For the US, this conflict is a test of its
alliances and influence in Southeast Asia. Now, Thailand is a
treaty ally, and while the US has called for de escalation,
its public involvement has been more restrained compared to China's
stated intent to mediate. Perceived lack of decisive US engagement
or inability to de escalate could subtly undermine confidence among
(38:07):
US partners. Also, projected conflict here could divert US diplomatic
attention or even US military resources away from its primary
focus of deterring China in the Taiwan Strait. So building
a robust network of allies is key to the US strategy,
and the endo Pacific and any internal friction with the
(38:29):
broader Indo Pacific framework complicates that objective.
Speaker 1 (38:34):
You know, as we wrap up our discussion on this
intense situation between Thailand and Cambodia, I think it offers
us a really crucial lens through which to view the
broader global landscape.
Speaker 3 (38:47):
Yeah, I think you hit on a crucial point here.
It is often too simplistic to pinpoint one single event
as the root cause of a large scale conflict. That
we probably think of something like the invasion of Taiwan
and that sparked World War three in the future. But
when we look at the historical paths to major wars, take,
(39:07):
for instance, World War One, we consistently find that what
appears to be the triggery event in that case, the
assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, it was merely the spark
in an already volatile environment. The truth is World War
One was the culmination of decades of deep seated tensions
and rivalries brewing across Europe. These weren't always direct confrontations.
(39:32):
They often were a series of seemingly unrelated, smaller skirmishes
or regional tensions. Each one added another ripple to the pond,
slowly but surely, creating an environment where the likelihood of
a larger confrontation increased exponentially.
Speaker 1 (39:49):
So, rather than looking for a single smoking gun incident
that sparks a global war, we should be paying closer
attention to this accumulation of smaller regional flashes, standing how
they influence the broader geopolitical climate. It's about recognizing the
pattern and not just the individual events.
Speaker 3 (40:07):
Yeah, exactly. And this is what we're trying to do
on this podcast is highlight these things. We want to
explain that these smaller conflicts can shift power dynamics. They
can even inadvertently draw in larger players who are backing
one side or another, they create allies. That's a subtle
but constant recalibration of the tapestry of international relations, especially
(40:29):
as we navigate a world with increasing friction between these
major powers.
Speaker 1 (40:36):
Thank you Cravin for shedding light on such a complex
and critical situation. We will continue to monitor this closely.
So anything else you want to discuss.
Speaker 3 (40:46):
That's all I have. Do you have anything?
Speaker 1 (40:48):
I'm coming to see you, Sin.
Speaker 3 (40:52):
It's all set up.
Speaker 1 (40:53):
It's all set up. It's going to be so fun.
It's going to be so fun. It will anyways, I
just wanted to throw that out there. I get to
see him, so it's gonna be fun.
Speaker 3 (41:04):
Finally, finally, finally, I know we have a little work
on keeping you here.
Speaker 1 (41:09):
Oh yeah, it probably won't be too hard once I'm
actually there. Yeah, but as of right now, no, I don't.
I don't know anyway, I don't know what I'm trying
to say there anyways? Is that all I just want
to say? That was excited. I'm excited to see you. Well,
thank you so much for listening to this week explained.
(41:31):
We hope you found it informative and engaging. If you
have any feedback or suggestions for future episodes, we would
love to hear from you, so for more in depth
coverage of these stories and more, be sure to follow
us on social media. This Week Explained
Speaker 3 (41:44):
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.