June 2, 2025 • 42 mins
This week, we pull back the curtain on the intense geopolitical competition reshaping our world. We'll ask the crucial question: Who's truly gaining ground in Ukraine, Gaza, and the heart of Africa? Join us as we dissect Russia's strategic maneuvers, China's growing global footprint, and the alarming implications for the shifting balance of power.
Are you ready to understand the forces shaping tomorrow's headlines? Follow "This Week Explained" wherever you listen to podcasts and hit subscribe to get alerted to new episodes! If you enjoyed this deep dive, please leave a quick rating or review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify – it truly helps others discover the show. You can also engage with us by leaving comments on Spotify. Discover more great podcasts from the Leon Media Network at leonmedianetwork.com, and follow us on social media @thisweekexplained.
------
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.
Are you ready to understand the forces shaping tomorrow's headlines? Follow "This Week Explained" wherever you listen to podcasts and hit subscribe to get alerted to new episodes! If you enjoyed this deep dive, please leave a quick rating or review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify – it truly helps others discover the show. You can also engage with us by leaving comments on Spotify. Discover more great podcasts from the Leon Media Network at leonmedianetwork.com, and follow us on social media @thisweekexplained.
------
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 (00:09):
Hello, and welcome to this Week Explained, your essential download
on the global stories making headlines. We're ready to unpack
get another complex week from around the globe. But before
we dive in, just a quick reminder. If you want
to get alerted to new episodes as they are released,
make sure you're following or subscribed to wherever you're listening
right now. It's the easiest way to stay updated. And hey,
(00:30):
if you're enjoying the show and want to help others
discover it, leaving a quick rating or review on Apple
Podcasts or Spotify really makes a difference. Also, did you
know that Spotify allows comments? This is a great way
to stay involved with the podcast. Others can view those comments,
and now Spotify is allowing others to interact with your comments.
This keeps the conversation going long after the episode.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
But okay, big news.
Speaker 1 (00:54):
For us because this week we are excited to announce
that this show is now sponsored by Betterhelp. Let's pause
and take a moment to talk about something very important.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Life has its.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
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, or unhealthy habits.
We want to normalize the idea that it's okay to struggle.
(01:23):
Real strength actually comes from opening up about what you're
carrying and doing something about it so you can be
at your best for yourself and everyone in your life.
If you're feeling the weight 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 loved one, or a therapist. We hear
it this week explained believe that therapy can be incredibly valuable.
(01:47):
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.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
Version of yourself.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
And it's important to remember that therapy isn't just for
those who have 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 that this
week Explained is now sponsored by better Help, with over
thirty five thousand therapists worldwide. Better help is the world's
largest online therapy platform, having served over five million people globally,
(02:22):
and it clearly resonates with users, boasting an app store
rating of four point nine out of five stars based
on over one point seven million client reviews. It's also
incredibly convenient. You can connect with a therapist at the
click of a button, helping you fit therapy into your
busy life, and you can even switch therapists at any
time if you feel it's not the right fit. And
(02:43):
there's something special for our listeners. As 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 betterhelp once again. Our
listeners get ten percent off their first month by going
to better help dot com slash this week. That's betterhelp
dot com slash this week. Finally, remember that This Week
(03:07):
Explained is part of the awesome Leon Media network. You
can discover more great podcasts over at leonmedianetwork dot com.
All right, let's get to why you're really here. Those
stories that are shaping our world. This week on the podcast,
we're diving deep into the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and
the Middle East, plus an urgent warning from US Africa Command.
(03:29):
We'll also unpack how China's seemingly capitalized on last month's
India Pakistan conflict. As we've done every week since twenty
twenty two, we're starting our discussion in Ukraine, and frankly,
it's no surprise that Russia's current peace overtures seem less
about genuine de escalation and more about narrative control and
setting conditions, all while their military operations press on. From
(03:52):
what we're seeing, Russian officials are practically dictating terms and timing,
almost trying to paint Ukraine as the reluctant party. So, Curvin,
what is your take on this June second meeting, especially
with Russia's focus on identifying the quote root causes of
the war. But I'm guessing we're not going to mention
that they did it, they started it. Why are we
(04:13):
forgetting this? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (04:14):
I mean this, well, this is part this whole part
of the narrative, right, But before we get started into that,
I do want to mention something because when this comes out,
I'm sure everyone will have seen that Ukraine has done
an incredible counter offensive into Russia through drone strikes on
various military sites. And I believe this is I haven't
(04:37):
had a chance to dive into that because we're getting
set up for the podcast and recording and all that stuff,
but it looks to me like they are trying to
push this effort to start these piece this piece deal
so June second in Turkey, trying to get Russia to
actually come to the table in good faith. Looks like
Ukraine is going to push that pressure onto Russia through
(05:00):
these drone strikes. They've hit naval assets, various military assets
within Russia. So you'll hear about that next week on
the podcast. We might even get a post out on
Instagram this week on how effective that counter offensive was.
But I wanted to talk about it just at the
top here because when this comes out on Monday, you
(05:21):
will probably have already seen all of this news and
wonder why we didn't we didn't talk about it. It's
because we don't like to talk about things unless we've
been able to go into a deep dive and actually
see what's going on, as opposed to like BBC and
CNN who have to get breaking news out and say, look,
this is what happened. We don't know why it happened,
but here's what happened. That's not what we like to do.
(05:42):
So back to what you were talking about, which is
the root cause, identifying the root cause of the war,
which at Russia classic Krimlin playbook. They're saying NATO Ukraine,
they're the root cause of this. Now it was Sergey
Lavrov who assisted on discussing these root causes for Russia.
(06:04):
That always sertles back to NATO, the NATO expansion, this
alleged discrimination against Russian speakers in Ukraine. And what they're
trying to do is reframe the discussion of this conflict
on their terms. So it's an attempt to shift blame,
distract from the ongoing aggression that is Russian aggression. And frankly,
(06:24):
the fact that they're sending the same low level delegation
that proves to me they're not coming to the table
for good faith negotiations. They're there to manage perceptions, not
to make peace.
Speaker 1 (06:37):
And it's not just the terms, it's the location too, right,
I mean Putin initially floated Istanbul then rejected Zelenski's invitation
for in person meeting there, and now they're still pushing
for Istanbul, even after the US suggested the Vatican. It
feels like they're trying to force Ukraine into a specific.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
Environment.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
Yeah, absolutely, you're absolutely right. So look it's NATO's on
most unreliable member, right Turkey. But Istanbul also carries a
specific historical weight for Russia in these talks. That's tied
to the twenty twenty two Istanbul Protocols, where Russia essentially
demanded Ukraine's capitulation. Now, by insisting on Istanbul, they're trying
(07:20):
to frame any current discussions as a continuation of the
past attempts that were made thereby pushing for those same
maximalist demands. It's about leveraging the venue to gain a
psychological and diplomatic advantage.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
Well, it sounds like a chess game where one side
is moving all the pieces, so like it's not really
a game. It's not really a game because that implies
there's more than one player that are controlling the pieces,
you know, and you know, speaking of pieces, it seems
like the US has made some significant concessions, particularly regarding
NATO's eastward expansion, which Russia views as a root cause.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Of course.
Speaker 1 (07:57):
Yeah, Russia is pocketing these and still making more demands.
So how does that fit in with your analytical mind?
Speaker 3 (08:04):
Yeah, Look, it's incredibly frustrating to watch because you know,
from a diplomatic and intelligence perspective, when you make a
concession and a negotiation, you expect a reciprocal move. And
I think that's why Trump is getting very angry at
Putin right now, because that's sort of a business discussion,
right when you're having business negotiations, When you make a concession,
(08:27):
you're wanting the other person to also make concessions. But
Russia's not playing that game. So these comments about the
US understanding Putin's concerns on NATO, that's a clear sign
that they see this as a win for them. Russia
sees this as a win in their regard. It's not
a basis for compromise. They're effectively gaining ground on their
(08:49):
desired post war security posture, which is a veto over
NATO's open door policy without giving anything in return. Now
we're seeing them demand an endto Western military aid and
Ukrainian mobilization is pre recresits for a ceasefire, which is
I'm going to say this, that's a non starter for Kiev.
Speaker 1 (09:07):
So they're pushing for a ceasefire on their terms, which
would essentially freeze the conflict in place and allow them
to consolidate their gains while also disarming Ukraine. Come on, now,
they don't have to do anything, they think, Yeah, they
must think they have all the leverage.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
Right, No, absolutely, you're absolutely right they do, and we'll
see how it works out for them. Right. It aligns
with our prior assessments that Russia's deliberately protracting these negotiations.
So the absence of concrete deadlines for the peace process
that benefits Russia. It allows them to continue offensive operations
(09:43):
like the recent advances we've seen, and then use those
battlefield gains to extract even more concessions from Ukraine and
Western Europe. They're effectively saying, we'll keep fighting until you
accept our terms, or until Russia can't fight anymore.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
Shifting gears slightly, but still the topic of international support.
There's been some concerning news about China's role. Western reports
indicate that China is increasing drone deliveries to Russia while
reducing sales to Ukraine and Western buyers. So what does
this tell us about China's true stance in the conflict.
Speaker 3 (10:16):
Look, it says the same thing that we've said from
the very beginning. This is a very clear demonstration of
China's support for Russia's war effort. Now, Zelenski's Zolenski did
make a statement about these Dji Mavic drones that Russia's using.
There were Chinese representatives even at Russian production facilities. It's
(10:37):
very telling in the international community. So it's not just
about turning a blind eye. They are actively complicit in
this war. And we've been tracking reports of Chinese made
equipment with Russian forces and even joint production lines for
those shahed like drones. This isn't neutral. China is not
being neutral. This is direct material support that fuels the
(10:58):
Kremlin's war machine.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
And on the flip side of that coin, Ukraine is
also making significant strides in its own defense technology. The
announcement about Ukraine fielding a long range drone with sophisticated
AI sounds like a game changer. So what are the
implications of this new technology?
Speaker 3 (11:15):
Yeah, this is huge, it's the really big deal, and
you're talking about the go gole ILM. It's a serious
advancement its ability to act as a mothership for these
first person view drones or FPV drones with automated target acquisition.
It's got a three hundred kilometer range and it's independent
(11:37):
of GPS. That's because of its AI powered smart pilot
system that makes it highly resistant to electronic warfare. This
gives Ukraine enforces a critical edge and surveillance and strike capabilities.
This especially against Russian military targets. It could significantly impact
their operational reach and their precision.
Speaker 1 (11:56):
So while Russia tries to control the diplomatic narrative, Kraine
is innovating on the battlefield. So it paints a picture
of a very complex and evolving conflict, both militarily and diplomatically.
And with these proposed sanctions from the US Senate, it
seems like the West is also preparing to escalate its
pressure on Russia and its allies. I mean it seems
(12:17):
that way.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
Yeah, it does. And look, this conflict is multi layered.
We have Russia trying to leverage diplomatic talks for strategic
gain while also continuing their own military aggression. We've got
the West particular, I'm particularly talking about the United States.
Here they are responding with increased sanctions in military support
for Ukraine because Putin isn't being what they thought he
(12:39):
would be. That's coming from the Trump administration. And then
the lastoile here there's Ukraine. Despite facing immense pressure, Ukraine
is pushing forward with technological advancements that actually could change
warfare in the future globally.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
Well, thank you so much for that update on the
war in Ukraine. For now, we need to shift our
focus to the ongoing efforts for a ceasefire in Gaza.
We should obviously start with the latest developments. We've been
hearing a lot about this new US backed proposal, so
can you walk us through what we know about it.
Speaker 3 (13:13):
Well, look, what's clear is that the US has put
forward a new proposal aimed at brokering a ceasefire and
hostage release. The White House has been quite firm on
one point. Israel actually signed off on this plan before
it was even sent to Hamas. Now this was confirmed
to be a direct result of discussions between US on
Voice Dve Whitcough and Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer. Now,
(13:36):
the Americans are essentially telling Hamas quote, We've got Israel's
buy in. Now we're waiting on you Hamas end quote.
Speaker 1 (13:46):
So Israel's on board, at least officially with what the
US has proposed, and even Prime Minister Netanya who reportedly
told hostage families he accepted it, despite his office later
muddying the waters a bit about how that information even
got out. But what exactly is in this proposal, at
least according to the leaks that we've seen, that would
(14:07):
entice both sides.
Speaker 3 (14:09):
Look, we can only say what is being released in
the media. So from what Israeli media has reported, citing
their officials within the Israeli government, the proposal involves a
phased exchange. Now, Hamas would release ten living hostages and
the bodies of eighteen deceased hostages in two phases. In return,
(14:29):
there would be a sixty day ceasefire and the release
of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails. So the idea is
to get those initial hostages out and provide a substantial
pause in the fighting.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
I mean, this sounds like a significant step, especially with
the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza. We're talking about almost
four thousand people killed in the last ten weeks, six
hundred thousand displaced in reports of half a million facing
catastrophic hunger. A sixty day ceasefire could provide much native relief.
But and this is a big butt, Hamas has reportedly
(15:06):
rejected it. I've seen several articles saying that they are
not backing this at all. There is now talk of
a partial acceptance. So what is going on here? Like
what is their hang up?
Speaker 3 (15:18):
Yeah right, it just seems like conflicting reports all over
the place, and this where things have been changing daily,
if not hourly. Hamas has responded to the usc spire
proposal and it's your favorite word, Tiana, nuanced. So we've
got a not a direct acceptance, but we also don't
(15:41):
have an outright rejection. That is key. They haven't walked
away from the table they stated they so. Hamas has
stated that they are prepared to release ten living Israeli
hostages and eighteen dead hostages in exchange for what they
called quote an agreed upon number of Palestinian prisoners. But
they've also requested some significant amendments to the plan, amendments.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
That sounds like a negotiation in motion. But what are
these key amendments that they're pushing for.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
Yeah, their repeated demands remain for a permanent truce. They
also want to complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and guarantees
for the continuous flow of humanitarian aid. Now, critically, none
of these are explicitly in the deal currently on the table,
with one Hamas official that told news outlets that there
(16:31):
was a prior understanding with US on Voice Steve Widkough
on a proposal that was acceptable for negotiation, but the
Israeli response to that original understanding brought forth this new
text that was put out that went away from what
Hamas said they had agreed to. Now that Hamas individual
accused the mediation process of being completely biased towards Israel. I.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
Mean, can you blame him? Look at who is mediating
the negotiations. Okay, So back to the facts of the matter.
You are saying that even though the White House in
Israel publicly stated Israel signed off on this US backplan,
Hamas is essentially saying, not so fast.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
This isn't what we discussed and.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
It doesn't meet our fundamental requirements. And what has the
US and Israel's reaction been to this non rejection, non
acceptance response from Hamas.
Speaker 3 (17:24):
Look, they were immediate and blunt. Tiana Witcough issued a
statement he said, I want to quote him here. I
received the Hamas response to the United States proposal. It
is totally unacceptable and only takes us backward. In quote
from Steve Woodcough, he urged Hamas to accept the framework
as the basis for proximity talks, and he suggested that
(17:47):
those could start this week actually, so we could see
some stuff coming out this week now. Similarly, Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Ninya, who's office echoed the sentiment from Steve Whitcock.
They said, it's going to want to quote them here. Quote.
While Israel has agreed to the updated Witcough outline for
the release of our hostages, Hamas continues to adhere to
(18:08):
its refusal end quote. Now. Defense Minister Israel Cats even
went so far as to say Hamas must either accept
the terms of the wit Cough deal or be annihilated.
Speaker 1 (18:21):
Quote totally unacceptable end quote, and quote only takes us
backward end quote. That's that sounds like a very strong pushback, especially.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Coming from the US envoy.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
But you have mentioned over the last few weeks that
Hamas is in a really complex and difficult position right now,
like they can't accept it easily due to internal pressure
and past rejections of less favorable terms. So what's the
other side of this, Like, why can't they just.
Speaker 2 (18:47):
Outright reject it?
Speaker 3 (18:49):
Well, because the alternative is it's even worse for them.
Hamas is acutely aware that Israel is preparing to escalate
its ground offensive in Gaza. And this the secrucial analytical
point that I want to make. The Hamas movement simply
lacks the military capacity to prevent or even seriously resist
such an assault. They've been significantly degraded since the board began,
(19:14):
So an outright rejection that could invite an even more
devastating Israeli operation that would lead to further loss of
life and then greater destruction, and all of that without
any tangible gains for their stated objective.
Speaker 1 (19:29):
Okay, that does make a lot of sense. It appears
to me that Hamas is kind of trapped. You know,
they can't fully accept and they can't fully reject it,
And you said their response is effectively a counterproposal. So
what does that mean for the original US plan, which
included a sixty day pause, release of hostages, a release
of over one thousand poulace to Nian prisoners, and the
(19:49):
free flow of humanitarian aid.
Speaker 3 (19:51):
Yeh, look cause that sound like pretty good.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
Terms to me.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
Yeah, you would think so. And like, never having not
been in these diplo discussions sitting side by side with
enemy forces, we just don't know how all of these
come about.
Speaker 1 (20:08):
I mean, they don't trust each other, so I mean
there's that playing into it as well.
Speaker 3 (20:12):
Yeah, we try not to bring it up every week,
but yeah, we don't want.
Speaker 2 (20:15):
To bring it up every time.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
But and also Israel goes back on their word kind
of frequently as well.
Speaker 3 (20:22):
So I mean just yeah, it's two people, it's two groups,
not even just two groups, but it's groups that just
don't have what they said. Like you said, they don't
have trust for each other first of all, and without
a lack of trust, you can't have good faith discussions.
But to answer your question on you know what all
(20:44):
of this means, it means that they've taken the US proposal.
Hamas has taken it. They've attempted to modify it to
meet their essential demands. They're offering the ten living in
eighteen dead hostages for that agreed upon number of Palestinian
prisoners I think going to get to about one thousand
at the end of this. But crucially, they want to
(21:05):
ensure that this leads to a permanent ceasefire full with
Israeli withdraw and guaranteed continuous aid flow. That is what
they're slapping their fists or slapping their hands on the table.
That's what they want. Now. The US proposal they do
it does provide a sixty day pause, but it doesn't
guarantee the permanence of the seat spire. It also doesn't
(21:27):
guarantee in a media and unconditional flow of that humanitarian
aid that is so desperately needed. Now. The the original
US plan that was designed with Israel's red lines in mind,
because Israel is a US ally, So if any of
that is taken off the table, it makes it unlikely
(21:47):
NET and Yahoo's going to be willing to negotiate the
changes that Hamas wants, especially since Israel insists on its
right to resume hostilities and aims to dismantle Hamas.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
So we have the US and Israel all saying Hamas's
response is unacceptable, and Hamas arguing that the US proposal
itself changed and is biased. Well, now once again it
feels like we are in a stalemate with immense suffering
on the ground continuing. But at least no one has
to you know, no one's putting their pride aside. You
know that their pride's intact because no one is thinking
(22:20):
about the civilians. But given all this, Kravin, what do
you see as the most likely next steps in this
agonizing situation.
Speaker 3 (22:31):
Well, I think we're going to see the mediators continue
to work with both sides and try to build these
fundamental gaps now. Right now, the pressure is on Hamas
to make some concessions. That pressure is immense. Look, we
see it in the media every single day. The pressure
is also on Israel because of the humanitarian situation and
(22:53):
the Israeli hostages that the Israeli families want back. This
counterproposal from Hamas. Now it is deemed unacceptable by whitcough,
But that doesn't mean the door is lamb shut. Nobody
walked out and said we're not negotiating anymore. It's a
statement of Hamasa's minimum conditions under extreme duress. We're likely
(23:13):
going to see continued diplomatic efforts. I think there's gonna
be some subtle adjustments to the terms. Sort of see
that the mediators try to find that elusive sweet spot
for both sides, but I think each side's kind of
gonna be reluctant to agree to it until we can
find something that both sides can go back and say
(23:34):
we won. In these negotiations. Like I've said, this has
at certain points changed either daily or hourly, So I
think this week, this is an important week of discussions.
We're not probably not going to get to an agreement,
but we can get to a framework of an agreement
within the next week.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
So not a completely a gram outlook for the immediate future. Still,
you have given us a lot to process. Thank you
so much for breaking it down. As always, we'll continue
tracking this war, but for now, let's shift our focus
to some pretty alarming warnings coming out of the US
Africa coming. But before we dive in, we need to
take a quick break for a message from our sponsors.
Speaker 2 (24:12):
Stay with us.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
We'll be write back welcome back listeners. As we hinted
at before the break, this week, we've been seeing some
pretty alarming warnings coming out of the US Africa Command,
which is AFRICOM because you know how we love our
acronyms over here. Yep. General Michael Langley, the head of AFRICAM,
just made a really stark statement about the Sahel region
(24:33):
in Africa. All Right, Carvin laid on us.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
What's he saying and why is it so concerning?
Speaker 1 (24:38):
Look?
Speaker 3 (24:39):
General Langley did not mince words here, and he's honestly
known around the command for being quite frank with everyone.
He unequivocally stated that the Sahill region is now the
quote epicenter of terrorism on the globe end quote huh,
what do you know? Another prediction from this podcast turning
(25:00):
out to be nostradamus, Like I know you remember Tiana.
We've discussed how giving the Sehiel to Russia and China
that's going to cause it to become a hotbed of
terror activity. Now we've got General Langley, head of Africa Command.
He's seeing terror factions dramatically increasing their presence and critically
their capabilities over the past three years. The most worrying
(25:24):
part for all of us here in the United States
is his assessment that they're ramping up their ability to
launch attacks inside the US homeland. Look at a scau Curvin,
We're like one hundred for one hundred Tianna.
Speaker 1 (25:36):
It's like, it's like we're good at this. Yeah, reading people.
We're really good at reading people from all from all
environments and world views, so that we can figure out
what their angle is going to be.
Speaker 3 (25:51):
Yeah, because when you take it, don't take someone at
their word and see what they're actually doing in their
past actions, you can pretty much formulate what they're going
to do in the future.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Pattern recognition.
Speaker 3 (26:02):
Almost there you go, we're all data analysts.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
Well yeah, well, I mean I'm not, but you know,
I like to pretend. But you so, so the epicenter
of terrorism on the globe that that phrase really makes
you want to sit up and pay attention. And when
you say this a heel for our listeners who might
not be immediately familiar, which countries are we primarily talking
(26:26):
about here?
Speaker 3 (26:27):
That's a that's a great question because a lot of
times I just say stuff thinking everyone's already got a
broad view of all this. So let's start there. The
Western sahil encompasses countries like Mali, Burkino, Fasso, Nigeria, and
Najir Chad. These are countries that have seen significant instability.
They've seen very famously coups that we've been part of.
(26:52):
And this also growing presence of extremist groups for some
time now.
Speaker 1 (26:57):
So all countries that you've been to.
Speaker 3 (26:59):
Yes, it's not my fault.
Speaker 1 (27:01):
So well you went where they told you to go.
I guess no.
Speaker 3 (27:06):
I always checked Tabby at that because I'm like, I
was here and here and here, and I was like,
it's not my fault. They got worse after I left.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
Oh that, Oh okay, I see what you mean now.
I thought you were saying it wasn't your fault. You
went to Africa to begin Oh okay, No, no, no, I'm like,
you knew where you were going to be.
Speaker 3 (27:22):
Sent though, I'm saying the current aation is and not
my fault.
Speaker 1 (27:27):
Yes, yes, yes, yes, And it has degraded denegrated so
much since you've left.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
Curvin need to.
Speaker 3 (27:34):
Go back out there. I think, Mmm, they're.
Speaker 1 (27:36):
Just missing some I'm just kidding.
Speaker 2 (27:38):
I'm just kidding. It's not that simple, obviously.
Speaker 1 (27:41):
But anyways, speaking of extremist groups, Langley singled out one
in particular, and al Qaeda aligned faction known as j
N I am, so, what's so significant about this group?
And why is Langley so concerned about them?
Speaker 3 (27:57):
Yes, so you were talking about Jamia Islam while muslimin
that's Jay and I am. That is loosely translated as
the group for the support of Islam and Muslims. It's
not loosely translated. Sorry, I shouldn't say that. It's directly
translated as the group for the support of Islam and Muslims.
(28:18):
That they are a major concern because much like isis
in twenty fourteen, this group has rapidly expanded. A General
Angley stated that they've expanded fourfold since just twenty twenty two.
And think about that for a second, a terrorist group
growing that fast in just a couple of years, and
the impact they now control much of Burkina Fasso. When
(28:41):
you have a group like that with that kind of
reach and control over territory, their operational capabilities and their
ambitions inevitably grow. A General Angley specifically warned that they
don't want to quote him here, this is quote. They
could have the capacity to attack the US homeland end quote.
That's not a statement made lightly that General Langley does
(29:02):
not do that. He's very cautious about the terms that
he uses in the statements that he makes. And what's
complicating matters significantly is the shifting geopolitical landscape in Africa.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Right the elephant in the room, or in this case,
the dragon and the bear. As you alluded to with
our predictions, we are now seeing Russia and China making
significant inroads on the continent. So how is there increased
investment and influence impacting the US's counter terrorism efforts and
the overall stability in this heel.
Speaker 3 (29:34):
Look, it's a huge Factoriana. While the US has been
grappling with domestic issues and frankly pulling back from some engagements,
China and Russia have been investing heavily and forging alliances
with local governments. Let's look at something we discussed last
year with na year, the US had a crucial presence there.
Millions were spent on a hub for counter terrorism operations,
(29:56):
but after a governing militia asked the US to leave,
they welcomed Russian troops instead. That's a direct blow to
the US ability to conduct intelligence gathering and also to
conduct operations in such a crucial area.
Speaker 1 (30:11):
So not only are these extremist groups gaining ground and capability,
but the US is also losing its strategic footholds and
influence in the region. Sounds like a perfect storm.
Speaker 3 (30:21):
Yeah, it is, and it's a stark illustration of how
interconnected these geopolitical challenges are. When extremist groups gain ground
and expand their ambitions and simultaneous sleeve the US is
sidelined in favor of other global powers, it directly impacts
our ability to protect our own homeland. Now, General Langley's
core message was precisely that he said, quote, extremist groups
(30:46):
are gaining ground and also expanding their ambitions. Therein lies
the threat to the homeland as they gain in capability
and capacity in quote. This is a complex, multi layered problem.
It requires a sophisticated and sustained response, something that feels
like it's been lacking for a few years now. The
current stated goal of the governments of both China and Russia,
(31:09):
the dragon and the bear that you alluded to, that's
to make the United States weaker. One way to do
this is to allow for the free flow of violent
extremists from the Western heel into Europe. Then from there
they're free to hop on a flight and they can
go to the US and do damage.
Speaker 1 (31:26):
It's like they think Terris won't eventually infiltrate their countries.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
Like what, yeah, well, but when you project the United
States is the great evil, then those extremist groups are
going to want to go just to the US. But
I get exactly what you're saying. Ten years from now,
let's say it works out for China and Russia, who
have been, you know, very publicly pretty evil to Muslim
(31:55):
people within their countries. You know, we saw isis K
kind of a Russia, right, We're seeing what's happening with
Muslims in China. Who's to say in ten years that
Russian and China aren't seen as the great Satan, the
great evils, and then they're starting to be attacked. So
(32:15):
something that they should listen to Tiana here, Those countries
should start listening to her. Try to find some common
ground with the United States, because it could be coming
for you.
Speaker 1 (32:25):
And obviously that's a tough reality to sit with, especially
knowing the sacrifices that so many have made in the
fight against terrorism. And speaking of tough realities, let's shift
our focus to the recent flare up between India and Pakistan.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
For those just catching up, we saw.
Speaker 1 (32:42):
A four day conflict enfold between India and Pakistan in May,
and it sparked a brutal terror attack in India. India
launch strikes code named Operations Indoor, and then it turned
into a tit for tax situation with drones, missiles, and
fighter jets. But what really caught my curve was Beijing's
notable silence on the performance of its weapons.
Speaker 3 (33:05):
Yeah, I mean there's silent, or there's rather there spokesperson's
carefully worded non comment. That was quite telling, I think so.
When asked about Pakistan using Chinese weapons and India finding
an unexploited Chinese missile, China's Defense ministry spokesman just didn't
(33:25):
really say anything. He avoided talking about how well the
weapons performed. He just said the missile was an export
item that had been shown publicly before.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
Now.
Speaker 3 (33:35):
Basically, he was being very careful with his words. He
was trying not to get directly involved in the conversation,
but his silence and vague answers seemed to suggest there's
more to this story. It was like they're trying to
hint at something important, but they didn't want to actually
say it out loud.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
You know, as a wife and a mother.
Speaker 1 (33:53):
That kind of evasiveness always raises my antenna. It's kind
of like whenever I'm trying to get a straight answer
out of you the kids about who finished the last
of the ice cream when all I wanted was a
dang coke float, because I am actually a seventy year
old person who enjoys going to soda shops and loves
putting ice cream in my sodas and chocolate malts and
(34:15):
milkshakes and.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
All that stuff.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
I love soda shop things. But anyways, you guys never
give me a straight answer on who ate the last
of the ice cream? And I'm left hanging. I don't
have ice cream for my soda, and it's really rude,
but I need to ring it back. On a more
serious note, India has claimed that China provided air defense
(34:37):
and satellite support to Pakistan and that their weapons systems
performed below average. Is there any truth to these assertions
or is it just the usual geopolitical mud slinging.
Speaker 3 (34:47):
Oh well, that's a great question, and I didn't eat
the ice cream. I promise you for that other question
that you were asking. Look, given the geopolitically, what's called
the all weather ties between China and Pakistan, and the
sheer volume of Chinese weapons Pakistan procures, like eighty percent
(35:08):
of their arms procurement from twenty twenty to twenty twenty
four that comes from China, And it would be naive
to think there wasn't a significant level of cooperation between
the two, from the J seventeen aircraft which they co produced,
to naval ship, submarines, missiles. China Pakistan's go to supplier,
(35:28):
So whether it was direct air defense or satellite support,
the deeper strategic alignment is undeniable.
Speaker 1 (35:35):
I mean that makes sense. A weak Pakistan isn't in
China's best interest, especially with all that investment in the
China Pakistan Economic Corridor. But let's get to the juicy
bits of the aerial skirmishes, like India reportedly used its
French and Russian made jets while Pakistan deployed their Jay
tens and seventeens, and then Pakistan claimed to have shot
(35:55):
down at least six Indian planes and India's response was
quite vague, saying, quote losses are a part of combat
end quote. So what do you make of all of
this from your analytical person?
Speaker 3 (36:06):
I lock, right now, we are all in an information vacuum.
Both sides have claimed victory, but there's this lack of definitive,
independently verified account of this particular event. Now, India says
they killed one hundred terrorists, they targeted lashkar At Taiba
and jaish If Mohammed headquarters Pakistan. On the other hand,
(36:29):
they're pushing this narrative of downing those Indian jets. Now,
the fact that Beijing hasn't commented on the Jay ten,
specifically taking down that jet, that's interesting to me, but
that has not stopped the jubilation on Chinese social media. Internally,
it appears that at the moment, perception matters way more
than the reality.
Speaker 1 (36:50):
So you're saying that, regardless of the actual combat performance,
the perception of Chinese weapons doing well in a real
combat situation is a huge win for Beijing. Ye.
Speaker 3 (37:00):
Absolutely, this was, as some experts have called it, a
quote deep seek moment in quote, and that's for the Chinese.
This is all for the Chinese weapon industry, and it's
referring to that Chinese AI startup that rattled US giants
because of this cost effective tech that they stole from
the United States and incorporated into their own AI company.
(37:24):
We had. One retired senior colonel from the PLA even
told the BBC that this aerial fight was a quote
big advertisement end quote for the Chinese weapon industry. Claimed
it showed quote China has some systems that are next
to none end quote. When this all happened, shares in
(37:44):
the Chinese EBIC Chindu Aircraft company they make the J
ten they surged by up to forty percent after those
reports happened, and that was even though no one confirmed
that this even happened. This is a testament to the
fact that sometimes perception can be reality.
Speaker 1 (38:05):
That's incredible. But playing devil's advocate here, there are always
dissenting voices, like some within the international community say it's
too early to declare Chinese weapons superior. Some suggest India's
mission might not have been to provoke retaliation, but rather
to achieve specific ground targets. And let's not forget past
reports of technical malfunctions with Chinese made jets at Mayomar
(38:29):
and Nigeria. Would you agree that sometimes the reality on
the ground is far messier than the headline suggests.
Speaker 3 (38:36):
Yeah. Absolutely, I've seen it play out in real time personally,
and it's a crucial point that you bring up Tianna.
The argument here about India's mission intent is very significant.
If the objective wasn't to engage in a prolonged dogfight,
but rather to strike targets and then disengage and leave,
(38:57):
then the narrative of Chinese jets outmann maneuvering those Indian
jets becomes a little more nuanced. India did, after all,
report hitting an impressive breadth of targets across Pakistan, including
sensitive air bases, which seems to have gone largely unnoticed.
They claim to have used an array of missiles and
(39:18):
drones against Pakistani air defenses, and that suggests a level
of sophistication and effectiveness on the Indian side as well.
Speaker 1 (39:27):
So despite all the fanfare around the Jay ten, India
was still able to achieve its objectives, albeit.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
With a different strategy.
Speaker 1 (39:35):
I mean it sounds like India's military, by not getting
into the nitty gritty of the mission, might have lost
control of the narrative.
Speaker 3 (39:42):
Yeah, like in today's world evincedent information and social media,
how something is perceived can often be more important than
the actual truth. Let's bring it to a US perspective
from the business side. Think about the company Therapists. For
years it was a failing company, but it's careful, well
controlled image convinced many it was a groundbreaking unicorn of
(40:03):
the company. China understands as very well. The perceived success
of their J ten fire jet in real world combat
is a powerful marketing tool for their weapons, especially as
they aim to become an even bigger player in global
arms exports. They're already the fourth largest export worldwide now
that's largely selling to developing nations, but they are keen
(40:27):
to catch up to the United States now. Even if
the full details of the Jay ten's performance remain unclear,
this kind of combat exposure provides incredibly valuable information for China.
It helps them improve their weapons for a future large
scale combat operation, and perhaps more importantly, reinforces a narrative
(40:48):
of success that boosts those arm sales.
Speaker 1 (40:51):
And what does this mean for India beyond the immediate conflict.
It feels like a wake up call for them, doesn't it?
Speaker 3 (40:57):
Yeah, it absolutely is. Remember, India is part of bricks.
China is one of their allies, but it's also a
supplier to their enemies. India is acutely aware of the
advancements China's making that. We're talking about the J twenty
stealth fighter jets, other sorts of weapons, satellite intelligence. Now,
given their long standing border disputes with China, this conflict
(41:21):
with Pakistan underscores the urgent need for India to accelerate
investments in its home grown defense, manufacturing their own military,
and to continue to modernize that military through international acquisitions.
They need to ensure they can counter these perceived advancements
from China.
Speaker 1 (41:40):
So, in essence, while the India Pakistan conflict was localized,
its ripples are being fought globally, particularly in the armstraight
and the ongoing geopolitical competition between major powers.
Speaker 3 (41:51):
Yeah, you absolutely nailed it there, Tana. You're absolutely right.
Speaker 2 (41:55):
Thank you so.
Speaker 1 (41:55):
Much for breaking this down for us. Another week of
drama of what you're wrong? That is? Anything else you
want to Is there anything else you want to talk about?
Speaker 3 (42:05):
No, I mean unless we have some fun things we
can talk about. Okay, and that's where the world is today.
Speaker 1 (42:12):
Okay, Well, thank you so much for listening to this
week explained. We hope you found it both informative and
engaging and 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 as week explained.
Speaker 3 (42:29):
Tianna, thank you so much, and until next week, stay
safe out there,
Hello, and welcome to this Week Explained, your essential download
on the global stories making headlines. We're ready to unpack
get another complex week from around the globe. But before
we dive in, just a quick reminder. If you want
to get alerted to new episodes as they are released,
make sure you're following or subscribed to wherever you're listening
right now. It's the easiest way to stay updated. And hey,
(00:30):
if you're enjoying the show and want to help others
discover it, leaving a quick rating or review on Apple
Podcasts or Spotify really makes a difference. Also, did you
know that Spotify allows comments? This is a great way
to stay involved with the podcast. Others can view those comments,
and now Spotify is allowing others to interact with your comments.
This keeps the conversation going long after the episode.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
But okay, big news.
Speaker 1 (00:54):
For us because this week we are excited to announce
that this show is now sponsored by Betterhelp. Let's pause
and take a moment to talk about something very important.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Life has its.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
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, or unhealthy habits.
We want to normalize the idea that it's okay to struggle.
(01:23):
Real strength actually comes from opening up about what you're
carrying and doing something about it so you can be
at your best for yourself and everyone in your life.
If you're feeling the weight 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 loved one, or a therapist. We hear
it this week explained believe that therapy can be incredibly valuable.
(01:47):
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.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
Version of yourself.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
And it's important to remember that therapy isn't just for
those who have 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 that this
week Explained is now sponsored by better Help, with over
thirty five thousand therapists worldwide. Better help is the world's
largest online therapy platform, having served over five million people globally,
(02:22):
and it clearly resonates with users, boasting an app store
rating of four point nine out of five stars based
on over one point seven million client reviews. It's also
incredibly convenient. You can connect with a therapist at the
click of a button, helping you fit therapy into your
busy life, and you can even switch therapists at any
time if you feel it's not the right fit. And
(02:43):
there's something special for our listeners. As 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 betterhelp once again. Our
listeners get ten percent off their first month by going
to better help dot com slash this week. That's betterhelp
dot com slash this week. Finally, remember that This Week
(03:07):
Explained is part of the awesome Leon Media network. You
can discover more great podcasts over at leonmedianetwork dot com.
All right, let's get to why you're really here. Those
stories that are shaping our world. This week on the podcast,
we're diving deep into the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and
the Middle East, plus an urgent warning from US Africa Command.
(03:29):
We'll also unpack how China's seemingly capitalized on last month's
India Pakistan conflict. As we've done every week since twenty
twenty two, we're starting our discussion in Ukraine, and frankly,
it's no surprise that Russia's current peace overtures seem less
about genuine de escalation and more about narrative control and
setting conditions, all while their military operations press on. From
(03:52):
what we're seeing, Russian officials are practically dictating terms and timing,
almost trying to paint Ukraine as the reluctant party. So, Curvin,
what is your take on this June second meeting, especially
with Russia's focus on identifying the quote root causes of
the war. But I'm guessing we're not going to mention
that they did it, they started it. Why are we
(04:13):
forgetting this? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (04:14):
I mean this, well, this is part this whole part
of the narrative, right, But before we get started into that,
I do want to mention something because when this comes out,
I'm sure everyone will have seen that Ukraine has done
an incredible counter offensive into Russia through drone strikes on
various military sites. And I believe this is I haven't
(04:37):
had a chance to dive into that because we're getting
set up for the podcast and recording and all that stuff,
but it looks to me like they are trying to
push this effort to start these piece this piece deal
so June second in Turkey, trying to get Russia to
actually come to the table in good faith. Looks like
Ukraine is going to push that pressure onto Russia through
(05:00):
these drone strikes. They've hit naval assets, various military assets
within Russia. So you'll hear about that next week on
the podcast. We might even get a post out on
Instagram this week on how effective that counter offensive was.
But I wanted to talk about it just at the
top here because when this comes out on Monday, you
(05:21):
will probably have already seen all of this news and
wonder why we didn't we didn't talk about it. It's
because we don't like to talk about things unless we've
been able to go into a deep dive and actually
see what's going on, as opposed to like BBC and
CNN who have to get breaking news out and say, look,
this is what happened. We don't know why it happened,
but here's what happened. That's not what we like to do.
(05:42):
So back to what you were talking about, which is
the root cause, identifying the root cause of the war,
which at Russia classic Krimlin playbook. They're saying NATO Ukraine,
they're the root cause of this. Now it was Sergey
Lavrov who assisted on discussing these root causes for Russia.
(06:04):
That always sertles back to NATO, the NATO expansion, this
alleged discrimination against Russian speakers in Ukraine. And what they're
trying to do is reframe the discussion of this conflict
on their terms. So it's an attempt to shift blame,
distract from the ongoing aggression that is Russian aggression. And frankly,
(06:24):
the fact that they're sending the same low level delegation
that proves to me they're not coming to the table
for good faith negotiations. They're there to manage perceptions, not
to make peace.
Speaker 1 (06:37):
And it's not just the terms, it's the location too, right,
I mean Putin initially floated Istanbul then rejected Zelenski's invitation
for in person meeting there, and now they're still pushing
for Istanbul, even after the US suggested the Vatican. It
feels like they're trying to force Ukraine into a specific.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
Environment.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
Yeah, absolutely, you're absolutely right. So look it's NATO's on
most unreliable member, right Turkey. But Istanbul also carries a
specific historical weight for Russia in these talks. That's tied
to the twenty twenty two Istanbul Protocols, where Russia essentially
demanded Ukraine's capitulation. Now, by insisting on Istanbul, they're trying
(07:20):
to frame any current discussions as a continuation of the
past attempts that were made thereby pushing for those same
maximalist demands. It's about leveraging the venue to gain a
psychological and diplomatic advantage.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
Well, it sounds like a chess game where one side
is moving all the pieces, so like it's not really
a game. It's not really a game because that implies
there's more than one player that are controlling the pieces,
you know, and you know, speaking of pieces, it seems
like the US has made some significant concessions, particularly regarding
NATO's eastward expansion, which Russia views as a root cause.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Of course.
Speaker 1 (07:57):
Yeah, Russia is pocketing these and still making more demands.
So how does that fit in with your analytical mind?
Speaker 3 (08:04):
Yeah, Look, it's incredibly frustrating to watch because you know,
from a diplomatic and intelligence perspective, when you make a
concession and a negotiation, you expect a reciprocal move. And
I think that's why Trump is getting very angry at
Putin right now, because that's sort of a business discussion,
right when you're having business negotiations, When you make a concession,
(08:27):
you're wanting the other person to also make concessions. But
Russia's not playing that game. So these comments about the
US understanding Putin's concerns on NATO, that's a clear sign
that they see this as a win for them. Russia
sees this as a win in their regard. It's not
a basis for compromise. They're effectively gaining ground on their
(08:49):
desired post war security posture, which is a veto over
NATO's open door policy without giving anything in return. Now
we're seeing them demand an endto Western military aid and
Ukrainian mobilization is pre recresits for a ceasefire, which is
I'm going to say this, that's a non starter for Kiev.
Speaker 1 (09:07):
So they're pushing for a ceasefire on their terms, which
would essentially freeze the conflict in place and allow them
to consolidate their gains while also disarming Ukraine. Come on, now,
they don't have to do anything, they think, Yeah, they
must think they have all the leverage.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
Right, No, absolutely, you're absolutely right they do, and we'll
see how it works out for them. Right. It aligns
with our prior assessments that Russia's deliberately protracting these negotiations.
So the absence of concrete deadlines for the peace process
that benefits Russia. It allows them to continue offensive operations
(09:43):
like the recent advances we've seen, and then use those
battlefield gains to extract even more concessions from Ukraine and
Western Europe. They're effectively saying, we'll keep fighting until you
accept our terms, or until Russia can't fight anymore.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
Shifting gears slightly, but still the topic of international support.
There's been some concerning news about China's role. Western reports
indicate that China is increasing drone deliveries to Russia while
reducing sales to Ukraine and Western buyers. So what does
this tell us about China's true stance in the conflict.
Speaker 3 (10:16):
Look, it says the same thing that we've said from
the very beginning. This is a very clear demonstration of
China's support for Russia's war effort. Now, Zelenski's Zolenski did
make a statement about these Dji Mavic drones that Russia's using.
There were Chinese representatives even at Russian production facilities. It's
(10:37):
very telling in the international community. So it's not just
about turning a blind eye. They are actively complicit in
this war. And we've been tracking reports of Chinese made
equipment with Russian forces and even joint production lines for
those shahed like drones. This isn't neutral. China is not
being neutral. This is direct material support that fuels the
(10:58):
Kremlin's war machine.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
And on the flip side of that coin, Ukraine is
also making significant strides in its own defense technology. The
announcement about Ukraine fielding a long range drone with sophisticated
AI sounds like a game changer. So what are the
implications of this new technology?
Speaker 3 (11:15):
Yeah, this is huge, it's the really big deal, and
you're talking about the go gole ILM. It's a serious
advancement its ability to act as a mothership for these
first person view drones or FPV drones with automated target acquisition.
It's got a three hundred kilometer range and it's independent
(11:37):
of GPS. That's because of its AI powered smart pilot
system that makes it highly resistant to electronic warfare. This
gives Ukraine enforces a critical edge and surveillance and strike capabilities.
This especially against Russian military targets. It could significantly impact
their operational reach and their precision.
Speaker 1 (11:56):
So while Russia tries to control the diplomatic narrative, Kraine
is innovating on the battlefield. So it paints a picture
of a very complex and evolving conflict, both militarily and diplomatically.
And with these proposed sanctions from the US Senate, it
seems like the West is also preparing to escalate its
pressure on Russia and its allies. I mean it seems
(12:17):
that way.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
Yeah, it does. And look, this conflict is multi layered.
We have Russia trying to leverage diplomatic talks for strategic
gain while also continuing their own military aggression. We've got
the West particular, I'm particularly talking about the United States.
Here they are responding with increased sanctions in military support
for Ukraine because Putin isn't being what they thought he
(12:39):
would be. That's coming from the Trump administration. And then
the lastoile here there's Ukraine. Despite facing immense pressure, Ukraine
is pushing forward with technological advancements that actually could change
warfare in the future globally.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
Well, thank you so much for that update on the
war in Ukraine. For now, we need to shift our
focus to the ongoing efforts for a ceasefire in Gaza.
We should obviously start with the latest developments. We've been
hearing a lot about this new US backed proposal, so
can you walk us through what we know about it.
Speaker 3 (13:13):
Well, look, what's clear is that the US has put
forward a new proposal aimed at brokering a ceasefire and
hostage release. The White House has been quite firm on
one point. Israel actually signed off on this plan before
it was even sent to Hamas. Now this was confirmed
to be a direct result of discussions between US on
Voice Dve Whitcough and Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer. Now,
(13:36):
the Americans are essentially telling Hamas quote, We've got Israel's
buy in. Now we're waiting on you Hamas end quote.
Speaker 1 (13:46):
So Israel's on board, at least officially with what the
US has proposed, and even Prime Minister Netanya who reportedly
told hostage families he accepted it, despite his office later
muddying the waters a bit about how that information even
got out. But what exactly is in this proposal, at
least according to the leaks that we've seen, that would
(14:07):
entice both sides.
Speaker 3 (14:09):
Look, we can only say what is being released in
the media. So from what Israeli media has reported, citing
their officials within the Israeli government, the proposal involves a
phased exchange. Now, Hamas would release ten living hostages and
the bodies of eighteen deceased hostages in two phases. In return,
(14:29):
there would be a sixty day ceasefire and the release
of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails. So the idea is
to get those initial hostages out and provide a substantial
pause in the fighting.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
I mean, this sounds like a significant step, especially with
the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza. We're talking about almost
four thousand people killed in the last ten weeks, six
hundred thousand displaced in reports of half a million facing
catastrophic hunger. A sixty day ceasefire could provide much native relief.
But and this is a big butt, Hamas has reportedly
(15:06):
rejected it. I've seen several articles saying that they are
not backing this at all. There is now talk of
a partial acceptance. So what is going on here? Like
what is their hang up?
Speaker 3 (15:18):
Yeah right, it just seems like conflicting reports all over
the place, and this where things have been changing daily,
if not hourly. Hamas has responded to the usc spire
proposal and it's your favorite word, Tiana, nuanced. So we've
got a not a direct acceptance, but we also don't
(15:41):
have an outright rejection. That is key. They haven't walked
away from the table they stated they so. Hamas has
stated that they are prepared to release ten living Israeli
hostages and eighteen dead hostages in exchange for what they
called quote an agreed upon number of Palestinian prisoners. But
they've also requested some significant amendments to the plan, amendments.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
That sounds like a negotiation in motion. But what are
these key amendments that they're pushing for.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
Yeah, their repeated demands remain for a permanent truce. They
also want to complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and guarantees
for the continuous flow of humanitarian aid. Now, critically, none
of these are explicitly in the deal currently on the table,
with one Hamas official that told news outlets that there
(16:31):
was a prior understanding with US on Voice Steve Widkough
on a proposal that was acceptable for negotiation, but the
Israeli response to that original understanding brought forth this new
text that was put out that went away from what
Hamas said they had agreed to. Now that Hamas individual
accused the mediation process of being completely biased towards Israel. I.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
Mean, can you blame him? Look at who is mediating
the negotiations. Okay, So back to the facts of the matter.
You are saying that even though the White House in
Israel publicly stated Israel signed off on this US backplan,
Hamas is essentially saying, not so fast.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
This isn't what we discussed and.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
It doesn't meet our fundamental requirements. And what has the
US and Israel's reaction been to this non rejection, non
acceptance response from Hamas.
Speaker 3 (17:24):
Look, they were immediate and blunt. Tiana Witcough issued a
statement he said, I want to quote him here. I
received the Hamas response to the United States proposal. It
is totally unacceptable and only takes us backward. In quote
from Steve Woodcough, he urged Hamas to accept the framework
as the basis for proximity talks, and he suggested that
(17:47):
those could start this week actually, so we could see
some stuff coming out this week now. Similarly, Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Ninya, who's office echoed the sentiment from Steve Whitcock.
They said, it's going to want to quote them here. Quote.
While Israel has agreed to the updated Witcough outline for
the release of our hostages, Hamas continues to adhere to
(18:08):
its refusal end quote. Now. Defense Minister Israel Cats even
went so far as to say Hamas must either accept
the terms of the wit Cough deal or be annihilated.
Speaker 1 (18:21):
Quote totally unacceptable end quote, and quote only takes us
backward end quote. That's that sounds like a very strong pushback, especially.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Coming from the US envoy.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
But you have mentioned over the last few weeks that
Hamas is in a really complex and difficult position right now,
like they can't accept it easily due to internal pressure
and past rejections of less favorable terms. So what's the
other side of this, Like, why can't they just.
Speaker 2 (18:47):
Outright reject it?
Speaker 3 (18:49):
Well, because the alternative is it's even worse for them.
Hamas is acutely aware that Israel is preparing to escalate
its ground offensive in Gaza. And this the secrucial analytical
point that I want to make. The Hamas movement simply
lacks the military capacity to prevent or even seriously resist
such an assault. They've been significantly degraded since the board began,
(19:14):
So an outright rejection that could invite an even more
devastating Israeli operation that would lead to further loss of
life and then greater destruction, and all of that without
any tangible gains for their stated objective.
Speaker 1 (19:29):
Okay, that does make a lot of sense. It appears
to me that Hamas is kind of trapped. You know,
they can't fully accept and they can't fully reject it,
And you said their response is effectively a counterproposal. So
what does that mean for the original US plan, which
included a sixty day pause, release of hostages, a release
of over one thousand poulace to Nian prisoners, and the
(19:49):
free flow of humanitarian aid.
Speaker 3 (19:51):
Yeh, look cause that sound like pretty good.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
Terms to me.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
Yeah, you would think so. And like, never having not
been in these diplo discussions sitting side by side with
enemy forces, we just don't know how all of these
come about.
Speaker 1 (20:08):
I mean, they don't trust each other, so I mean
there's that playing into it as well.
Speaker 3 (20:12):
Yeah, we try not to bring it up every week,
but yeah, we don't want.
Speaker 2 (20:15):
To bring it up every time.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
But and also Israel goes back on their word kind
of frequently as well.
Speaker 3 (20:22):
So I mean just yeah, it's two people, it's two groups,
not even just two groups, but it's groups that just
don't have what they said. Like you said, they don't
have trust for each other first of all, and without
a lack of trust, you can't have good faith discussions.
But to answer your question on you know what all
(20:44):
of this means, it means that they've taken the US proposal.
Hamas has taken it. They've attempted to modify it to
meet their essential demands. They're offering the ten living in
eighteen dead hostages for that agreed upon number of Palestinian
prisoners I think going to get to about one thousand
at the end of this. But crucially, they want to
(21:05):
ensure that this leads to a permanent ceasefire full with
Israeli withdraw and guaranteed continuous aid flow. That is what
they're slapping their fists or slapping their hands on the table.
That's what they want. Now. The US proposal they do
it does provide a sixty day pause, but it doesn't
guarantee the permanence of the seat spire. It also doesn't
(21:27):
guarantee in a media and unconditional flow of that humanitarian
aid that is so desperately needed. Now. The the original
US plan that was designed with Israel's red lines in mind,
because Israel is a US ally, So if any of
that is taken off the table, it makes it unlikely
(21:47):
NET and Yahoo's going to be willing to negotiate the
changes that Hamas wants, especially since Israel insists on its
right to resume hostilities and aims to dismantle Hamas.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
So we have the US and Israel all saying Hamas's
response is unacceptable, and Hamas arguing that the US proposal
itself changed and is biased. Well, now once again it
feels like we are in a stalemate with immense suffering
on the ground continuing. But at least no one has
to you know, no one's putting their pride aside. You
know that their pride's intact because no one is thinking
(22:20):
about the civilians. But given all this, Kravin, what do
you see as the most likely next steps in this
agonizing situation.
Speaker 3 (22:31):
Well, I think we're going to see the mediators continue
to work with both sides and try to build these
fundamental gaps now. Right now, the pressure is on Hamas
to make some concessions. That pressure is immense. Look, we
see it in the media every single day. The pressure
is also on Israel because of the humanitarian situation and
(22:53):
the Israeli hostages that the Israeli families want back. This
counterproposal from Hamas. Now it is deemed unacceptable by whitcough,
But that doesn't mean the door is lamb shut. Nobody
walked out and said we're not negotiating anymore. It's a
statement of Hamasa's minimum conditions under extreme duress. We're likely
(23:13):
going to see continued diplomatic efforts. I think there's gonna
be some subtle adjustments to the terms. Sort of see
that the mediators try to find that elusive sweet spot
for both sides, but I think each side's kind of
gonna be reluctant to agree to it until we can
find something that both sides can go back and say
(23:34):
we won. In these negotiations. Like I've said, this has
at certain points changed either daily or hourly, So I
think this week, this is an important week of discussions.
We're not probably not going to get to an agreement,
but we can get to a framework of an agreement
within the next week.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
So not a completely a gram outlook for the immediate future. Still,
you have given us a lot to process. Thank you
so much for breaking it down. As always, we'll continue
tracking this war, but for now, let's shift our focus
to some pretty alarming warnings coming out of the US
Africa coming. But before we dive in, we need to
take a quick break for a message from our sponsors.
Speaker 2 (24:12):
Stay with us.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
We'll be write back welcome back listeners. As we hinted
at before the break, this week, we've been seeing some
pretty alarming warnings coming out of the US Africa Command,
which is AFRICOM because you know how we love our
acronyms over here. Yep. General Michael Langley, the head of AFRICAM,
just made a really stark statement about the Sahel region
(24:33):
in Africa. All Right, Carvin laid on us.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
What's he saying and why is it so concerning?
Speaker 1 (24:38):
Look?
Speaker 3 (24:39):
General Langley did not mince words here, and he's honestly
known around the command for being quite frank with everyone.
He unequivocally stated that the Sahill region is now the
quote epicenter of terrorism on the globe end quote huh,
what do you know? Another prediction from this podcast turning
(25:00):
out to be nostradamus, Like I know you remember Tiana.
We've discussed how giving the Sehiel to Russia and China
that's going to cause it to become a hotbed of
terror activity. Now we've got General Langley, head of Africa Command.
He's seeing terror factions dramatically increasing their presence and critically
their capabilities over the past three years. The most worrying
(25:24):
part for all of us here in the United States
is his assessment that they're ramping up their ability to
launch attacks inside the US homeland. Look at a scau Curvin,
We're like one hundred for one hundred Tianna.
Speaker 1 (25:36):
It's like, it's like we're good at this. Yeah, reading people.
We're really good at reading people from all from all
environments and world views, so that we can figure out
what their angle is going to be.
Speaker 3 (25:51):
Yeah, because when you take it, don't take someone at
their word and see what they're actually doing in their
past actions, you can pretty much formulate what they're going
to do in the future.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Pattern recognition.
Speaker 3 (26:02):
Almost there you go, we're all data analysts.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
Well yeah, well, I mean I'm not, but you know,
I like to pretend. But you so, so the epicenter
of terrorism on the globe that that phrase really makes
you want to sit up and pay attention. And when
you say this a heel for our listeners who might
not be immediately familiar, which countries are we primarily talking
(26:26):
about here?
Speaker 3 (26:27):
That's a that's a great question because a lot of
times I just say stuff thinking everyone's already got a
broad view of all this. So let's start there. The
Western sahil encompasses countries like Mali, Burkino, Fasso, Nigeria, and
Najir Chad. These are countries that have seen significant instability.
They've seen very famously coups that we've been part of.
(26:52):
And this also growing presence of extremist groups for some
time now.
Speaker 1 (26:57):
So all countries that you've been to.
Speaker 3 (26:59):
Yes, it's not my fault.
Speaker 1 (27:01):
So well you went where they told you to go.
I guess no.
Speaker 3 (27:06):
I always checked Tabby at that because I'm like, I
was here and here and here, and I was like,
it's not my fault. They got worse after I left.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
Oh that, Oh okay, I see what you mean now.
I thought you were saying it wasn't your fault. You
went to Africa to begin Oh okay, No, no, no, I'm like,
you knew where you were going to be.
Speaker 3 (27:22):
Sent though, I'm saying the current aation is and not
my fault.
Speaker 1 (27:27):
Yes, yes, yes, yes, And it has degraded denegrated so
much since you've left.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
Curvin need to.
Speaker 3 (27:34):
Go back out there. I think, Mmm, they're.
Speaker 1 (27:36):
Just missing some I'm just kidding.
Speaker 2 (27:38):
I'm just kidding. It's not that simple, obviously.
Speaker 1 (27:41):
But anyways, speaking of extremist groups, Langley singled out one
in particular, and al Qaeda aligned faction known as j
N I am, so, what's so significant about this group?
And why is Langley so concerned about them?
Speaker 3 (27:57):
Yes, so you were talking about Jamia Islam while muslimin
that's Jay and I am. That is loosely translated as
the group for the support of Islam and Muslims. It's
not loosely translated. Sorry, I shouldn't say that. It's directly
translated as the group for the support of Islam and Muslims.
(28:18):
That they are a major concern because much like isis
in twenty fourteen, this group has rapidly expanded. A General
Angley stated that they've expanded fourfold since just twenty twenty two.
And think about that for a second, a terrorist group
growing that fast in just a couple of years, and
the impact they now control much of Burkina Fasso. When
(28:41):
you have a group like that with that kind of
reach and control over territory, their operational capabilities and their
ambitions inevitably grow. A General Angley specifically warned that they
don't want to quote him here, this is quote. They
could have the capacity to attack the US homeland end quote.
That's not a statement made lightly that General Langley does
(29:02):
not do that. He's very cautious about the terms that
he uses in the statements that he makes. And what's
complicating matters significantly is the shifting geopolitical landscape in Africa.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Right the elephant in the room, or in this case,
the dragon and the bear. As you alluded to with
our predictions, we are now seeing Russia and China making
significant inroads on the continent. So how is there increased
investment and influence impacting the US's counter terrorism efforts and
the overall stability in this heel.
Speaker 3 (29:34):
Look, it's a huge Factoriana. While the US has been
grappling with domestic issues and frankly pulling back from some engagements,
China and Russia have been investing heavily and forging alliances
with local governments. Let's look at something we discussed last
year with na year, the US had a crucial presence there.
Millions were spent on a hub for counter terrorism operations,
(29:56):
but after a governing militia asked the US to leave,
they welcomed Russian troops instead. That's a direct blow to
the US ability to conduct intelligence gathering and also to
conduct operations in such a crucial area.
Speaker 1 (30:11):
So not only are these extremist groups gaining ground and capability,
but the US is also losing its strategic footholds and
influence in the region. Sounds like a perfect storm.
Speaker 3 (30:21):
Yeah, it is, and it's a stark illustration of how
interconnected these geopolitical challenges are. When extremist groups gain ground
and expand their ambitions and simultaneous sleeve the US is
sidelined in favor of other global powers, it directly impacts
our ability to protect our own homeland. Now, General Langley's
core message was precisely that he said, quote, extremist groups
(30:46):
are gaining ground and also expanding their ambitions. Therein lies
the threat to the homeland as they gain in capability
and capacity in quote. This is a complex, multi layered problem.
It requires a sophisticated and sustained response, something that feels
like it's been lacking for a few years now. The
current stated goal of the governments of both China and Russia,
(31:09):
the dragon and the bear that you alluded to, that's
to make the United States weaker. One way to do
this is to allow for the free flow of violent
extremists from the Western heel into Europe. Then from there
they're free to hop on a flight and they can
go to the US and do damage.
Speaker 1 (31:26):
It's like they think Terris won't eventually infiltrate their countries.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
Like what, yeah, well, but when you project the United
States is the great evil, then those extremist groups are
going to want to go just to the US. But
I get exactly what you're saying. Ten years from now,
let's say it works out for China and Russia, who
have been, you know, very publicly pretty evil to Muslim
(31:55):
people within their countries. You know, we saw isis K
kind of a Russia, right, We're seeing what's happening with
Muslims in China. Who's to say in ten years that
Russian and China aren't seen as the great Satan, the
great evils, and then they're starting to be attacked. So
(32:15):
something that they should listen to Tiana here, Those countries
should start listening to her. Try to find some common
ground with the United States, because it could be coming
for you.
Speaker 1 (32:25):
And obviously that's a tough reality to sit with, especially
knowing the sacrifices that so many have made in the
fight against terrorism. And speaking of tough realities, let's shift
our focus to the recent flare up between India and Pakistan.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
For those just catching up, we saw.
Speaker 1 (32:42):
A four day conflict enfold between India and Pakistan in May,
and it sparked a brutal terror attack in India. India
launch strikes code named Operations Indoor, and then it turned
into a tit for tax situation with drones, missiles, and
fighter jets. But what really caught my curve was Beijing's
notable silence on the performance of its weapons.
Speaker 3 (33:05):
Yeah, I mean there's silent, or there's rather there spokesperson's
carefully worded non comment. That was quite telling, I think so.
When asked about Pakistan using Chinese weapons and India finding
an unexploited Chinese missile, China's Defense ministry spokesman just didn't
(33:25):
really say anything. He avoided talking about how well the
weapons performed. He just said the missile was an export
item that had been shown publicly before.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
Now.
Speaker 3 (33:35):
Basically, he was being very careful with his words. He
was trying not to get directly involved in the conversation,
but his silence and vague answers seemed to suggest there's
more to this story. It was like they're trying to
hint at something important, but they didn't want to actually
say it out loud.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
You know, as a wife and a mother.
Speaker 1 (33:53):
That kind of evasiveness always raises my antenna. It's kind
of like whenever I'm trying to get a straight answer
out of you the kids about who finished the last
of the ice cream when all I wanted was a
dang coke float, because I am actually a seventy year
old person who enjoys going to soda shops and loves
putting ice cream in my sodas and chocolate malts and
(34:15):
milkshakes and.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
All that stuff.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
I love soda shop things. But anyways, you guys never
give me a straight answer on who ate the last
of the ice cream? And I'm left hanging. I don't
have ice cream for my soda, and it's really rude,
but I need to ring it back. On a more
serious note, India has claimed that China provided air defense
(34:37):
and satellite support to Pakistan and that their weapons systems
performed below average. Is there any truth to these assertions
or is it just the usual geopolitical mud slinging.
Speaker 3 (34:47):
Oh well, that's a great question, and I didn't eat
the ice cream. I promise you for that other question
that you were asking. Look, given the geopolitically, what's called
the all weather ties between China and Pakistan, and the
sheer volume of Chinese weapons Pakistan procures, like eighty percent
(35:08):
of their arms procurement from twenty twenty to twenty twenty
four that comes from China, And it would be naive
to think there wasn't a significant level of cooperation between
the two, from the J seventeen aircraft which they co produced,
to naval ship, submarines, missiles. China Pakistan's go to supplier,
(35:28):
So whether it was direct air defense or satellite support,
the deeper strategic alignment is undeniable.
Speaker 1 (35:35):
I mean that makes sense. A weak Pakistan isn't in
China's best interest, especially with all that investment in the
China Pakistan Economic Corridor. But let's get to the juicy
bits of the aerial skirmishes, like India reportedly used its
French and Russian made jets while Pakistan deployed their Jay
tens and seventeens, and then Pakistan claimed to have shot
(35:55):
down at least six Indian planes and India's response was
quite vague, saying, quote losses are a part of combat
end quote. So what do you make of all of
this from your analytical person?
Speaker 3 (36:06):
I lock, right now, we are all in an information vacuum.
Both sides have claimed victory, but there's this lack of definitive,
independently verified account of this particular event. Now, India says
they killed one hundred terrorists, they targeted lashkar At Taiba
and jaish If Mohammed headquarters Pakistan. On the other hand,
(36:29):
they're pushing this narrative of downing those Indian jets. Now,
the fact that Beijing hasn't commented on the Jay ten,
specifically taking down that jet, that's interesting to me, but
that has not stopped the jubilation on Chinese social media. Internally,
it appears that at the moment, perception matters way more
than the reality.
Speaker 1 (36:50):
So you're saying that, regardless of the actual combat performance,
the perception of Chinese weapons doing well in a real
combat situation is a huge win for Beijing. Ye.
Speaker 3 (37:00):
Absolutely, this was, as some experts have called it, a
quote deep seek moment in quote, and that's for the Chinese.
This is all for the Chinese weapon industry, and it's
referring to that Chinese AI startup that rattled US giants
because of this cost effective tech that they stole from
the United States and incorporated into their own AI company.
(37:24):
We had. One retired senior colonel from the PLA even
told the BBC that this aerial fight was a quote
big advertisement end quote for the Chinese weapon industry. Claimed
it showed quote China has some systems that are next
to none end quote. When this all happened, shares in
(37:44):
the Chinese EBIC Chindu Aircraft company they make the J
ten they surged by up to forty percent after those
reports happened, and that was even though no one confirmed
that this even happened. This is a testament to the
fact that sometimes perception can be reality.
Speaker 1 (38:05):
That's incredible. But playing devil's advocate here, there are always
dissenting voices, like some within the international community say it's
too early to declare Chinese weapons superior. Some suggest India's
mission might not have been to provoke retaliation, but rather
to achieve specific ground targets. And let's not forget past
reports of technical malfunctions with Chinese made jets at Mayomar
(38:29):
and Nigeria. Would you agree that sometimes the reality on
the ground is far messier than the headline suggests.
Speaker 3 (38:36):
Yeah. Absolutely, I've seen it play out in real time personally,
and it's a crucial point that you bring up Tianna.
The argument here about India's mission intent is very significant.
If the objective wasn't to engage in a prolonged dogfight,
but rather to strike targets and then disengage and leave,
(38:57):
then the narrative of Chinese jets outmann maneuvering those Indian
jets becomes a little more nuanced. India did, after all,
report hitting an impressive breadth of targets across Pakistan, including
sensitive air bases, which seems to have gone largely unnoticed.
They claim to have used an array of missiles and
(39:18):
drones against Pakistani air defenses, and that suggests a level
of sophistication and effectiveness on the Indian side as well.
Speaker 1 (39:27):
So despite all the fanfare around the Jay ten, India
was still able to achieve its objectives, albeit.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
With a different strategy.
Speaker 1 (39:35):
I mean it sounds like India's military, by not getting
into the nitty gritty of the mission, might have lost
control of the narrative.
Speaker 3 (39:42):
Yeah, like in today's world evincedent information and social media,
how something is perceived can often be more important than
the actual truth. Let's bring it to a US perspective
from the business side. Think about the company Therapists. For
years it was a failing company, but it's careful, well
controlled image convinced many it was a groundbreaking unicorn of
(40:03):
the company. China understands as very well. The perceived success
of their J ten fire jet in real world combat
is a powerful marketing tool for their weapons, especially as
they aim to become an even bigger player in global
arms exports. They're already the fourth largest export worldwide now
that's largely selling to developing nations, but they are keen
(40:27):
to catch up to the United States now. Even if
the full details of the Jay ten's performance remain unclear,
this kind of combat exposure provides incredibly valuable information for China.
It helps them improve their weapons for a future large
scale combat operation, and perhaps more importantly, reinforces a narrative
(40:48):
of success that boosts those arm sales.
Speaker 1 (40:51):
And what does this mean for India beyond the immediate conflict.
It feels like a wake up call for them, doesn't it?
Speaker 3 (40:57):
Yeah, it absolutely is. Remember, India is part of bricks.
China is one of their allies, but it's also a
supplier to their enemies. India is acutely aware of the
advancements China's making that. We're talking about the J twenty
stealth fighter jets, other sorts of weapons, satellite intelligence. Now,
given their long standing border disputes with China, this conflict
(41:21):
with Pakistan underscores the urgent need for India to accelerate
investments in its home grown defense, manufacturing their own military,
and to continue to modernize that military through international acquisitions.
They need to ensure they can counter these perceived advancements
from China.
Speaker 1 (41:40):
So, in essence, while the India Pakistan conflict was localized,
its ripples are being fought globally, particularly in the armstraight
and the ongoing geopolitical competition between major powers.
Speaker 3 (41:51):
Yeah, you absolutely nailed it there, Tana. You're absolutely right.
Speaker 2 (41:55):
Thank you so.
Speaker 1 (41:55):
Much for breaking this down for us. Another week of
drama of what you're wrong? That is? Anything else you
want to Is there anything else you want to talk about?
Speaker 3 (42:05):
No, I mean unless we have some fun things we
can talk about. Okay, and that's where the world is today.
Speaker 1 (42:12):
Okay, Well, thank you so much for listening to this
week explained. We hope you found it both informative and
engaging and 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 as week explained.
Speaker 3 (42:29):
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.