War in Ukraine, Analytics. Day 1194: Has Russia Decided on the Plan for Ukraine's Future? Arestovych, Shelest

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Hello, dear guests and subscribers to my channel. Thank you
for following our new releases and new streams with alexeir Stovic. Hello, Lexy,
good evening. All right, friends, you're watching us live on
both channels, and if you want to ask a question
or support any of us, and then next to me

(00:24):
down at the bottom, there is a QR code where
you can both ask a question and support my channel.
And we'll start this session with q and a today
with those that you asked and QR code below the
right side of the screen. Andre Alexey this is the
link to his school, to his school of Speech Psychology

(00:49):
and Logic, and the next seminar that he has lined
up is pretty interesting. It's actually about women. So if
you're curious, follow through and in our today stream everything
it will be as usual. We'll first talk a bit
and that will give Mike open to our listeners and

(01:10):
we will bring a bunch of questions that you guys
have asked during this week and as our communication goes,
we will talk to the chat live as well on
both channels. All right, let's start with the usual pol
question today. The question is a bit philosophic important in

(01:30):
a spirit of time. If Ukraine will be no more,
then the world will a win, two, lose, three not
notice four? What the heck Ukraine will be forever? Alex say,
we'll talk about other things, but let's ask you first

(01:53):
that same question. What do you say? Oh, I think
the world perhaps will be upset for a couple of days,
maybe three days. We'll write about that in the news
and then will adapt to the new reality. So the
world will notice it. Right, Oh, yeah, it will notice.
Perhaps there'll be a conversation for the whole week or

(02:14):
even three. Okay, guys, please continue voting. We'll come back
to this topic, to the topic of existence of Ukraine
and how it will be. But let's start with the
main epic and somewhat disturbing news. Both sides exchanged strikes

(02:37):
this week and yesterday. Ukraine was rather successful in its
drone attack in Russia, and we were concerned what will
happen in Turkey and Stanbul. However, Stumbul meeting went fine.
Both sides exchanged memorandums. They even started exchanging prisoners of war.

(03:00):
Also came out and said that he don't talked about
Rubio and agreed that they will be talking once again
all sides. So sometime by the end of the month,
and we're starting to see that Stumbul is gradually evolving
from the platform where and the place where we were
discussing peace to a place where both sides just meet
and chat. So in your review, do you think Ukrainian

(03:27):
attempts this week to blow up the railroad bridge, to crymea,
to destroy dozens of Russian strategic bombers where they aimed
at destroying or disrupting Stumbul negotiations. Okay, Alexandra, Look, when
the operations were planned, nobody knew that Stumbul negotiations will
be on a certain day in a certain month. Because sure,

(03:49):
when they tell us that these things were being prepared
for a year and a half, these are fair tales.
But they definitely were preparing these for at least half
a year, maybe nine months, And when that ball started rolling,
nobody knew when Stambul will happen. So this is a
different logic. This is a military logic of unfolding and

(04:09):
managing an ongoing operation. But I do want our listeners
to understand that there was no direct intent to disrupt
negotiations when the operation was conceived, but what could have
been done. They did not have to execute on the
week of Stambul agreements meeting. Operation was already prepared. But

(04:32):
you can always move it a couple of days one
way or the other, or even for a week. Sometimes,
even if you have a very brave diver with a
thousand kilos of explosives hugging one of the pylons of
the bridge, you can always move the date. You can
talk to you a smart dolphin and ask him to
swim for a couple more days and then blow later.

(04:54):
But that was not used. That was not done. That's
what I'm saying. Not that we wanted to disrupt Stambul
from the beginning, but we did not delay the operations
when we could, and it did not Stumboul up negotiations.

(05:14):
Did not bother our side to conduct these operations. We
conducted some right before we did, another one the day off,
and some right after. Why this is the logic of
going into the summer campaign. Some are autumn campaign of
battle actions. The goals from Russian side are rather clear.
Complete capture of Lugansk, Danetsk and some more territories, with

(05:37):
preparing another ultimatum by autumn, and they will be talking
about Zapardogia and hads Own districts as well, and since
there would be more motions up north with the buffer zone,
and the buffer zone is not just to isolate Russian
territory from incursions of Ukrainian forces, it also creates additional

(05:59):
zone for Orther advancement. As for the future, basically plans
to say that, hey, if you will misbehave, we will
continue cropping up your territories and biting them off on
all sides. And this is the logic of military So
if there'll be no agreement happening in summer, then the

(06:19):
entrance into winter campaign will be to be made to
be done at the most advantageous positions for Russian side,
pure military logic, the rules of strategy and no politics there.
Political component of interest is another one is that our
leadership did not pause these operations during Stumbul negotiations, did

(06:41):
not conduct them a little sooner or a little later.
And the second component is that this slap in the
face did not bother Russian delegations to come to Stumbul.
And Putin has not been too loud about that. And
I can come in a bit more. Hear that other story.

(07:02):
If you want, I can talk more about it. Of course,
of course, a Lexey, we actually were hoping to talk
to you yesterday. Well, sorry, Alexander, I was flying. I
was in the sky at the time, so I'm here today.
So Russians actually do behave as adults in this situation.
When we sunk in April of twenty two their flagship Moscow,

(07:23):
they were not bothered to conduct negotiations the next day
with US Sam Midinsky, same delegation, talking the same topics. Additionally,
they suffered a rather significant military defeat near Ki of Chernigev,
near Sumei and Harkov at that time. The whole Northern Group,
to say the least, has not fulfilled their tasks. They

(07:48):
were withdrawing with losses. They've lost about seventy five percent
of command of paratroopers. They only had some success in
the south near Minitopa and Mirupel, but in the north
they were slapped pretty hardly. So what did Russian delegation do?
They did not only not withdraw, they continued giving us compliments.

(08:11):
As the fighting side. It was difficult for them, but
they threw their clinched teeth, were acknowledging that yes, you
guys can fight back. And now a question, an open question.
Can you imagine a Ukrainian delegation or remember thereof who
is giving compliments to their visa VI at the negotiations

(08:31):
to the Russians. Well wait, Alexey, as we are discovering
now midianscian a meta. We're talking for two and a
half hours before the official session. While definitely not exchange
of compliments, Alexander, there was one person who was giving
occasional compliment and congratulating with a birthday if somebody had

(08:54):
a birthday during the negotiations and was giving the mic
to the general to start talking because he was of
the lieutenant colonel rank himself. But that person was removed
from the negotiation group because he was not an easy
member to continue pushing the line that Ukrainian delegation is pushing.

(09:19):
Do you think it was difficult Russians too? Oh? Yeah,
it was difficult for Rusians to communicate with me, for sure.
They were pushing on their own things and I was
not letting them have their agenda, and they used Belarus
to make me step out. Belarus started anti terrorism case
against me, and Russian delegation said, well, we could not

(09:42):
be negotiating with a person under investigations, so I had
to take a step back and my chair was slightly
out of the frame. During the remainder of the negotiations,
so I was still there, but I was not in
the limelight. And Russians they have an understanding of diplomacy,

(10:02):
an old school understanding. They do not call you names,
they do not misbehave, they do not make strange outbursts
during negotiations. They're rather cordial and to the protocol, and frankly,
it is much easier to deal with them than to

(10:23):
deal with Ukrainian delegations that very often behaves like small children.
We've talked on a different stream with Bandayanka about one
of these examples of Ukrainian delegation. We have a rhetoric
in the country that talks about twenty thousand disappeared Ukrainian kids,
and on the negotiations we're only talking about three hundred

(10:45):
and twenty and Russian side is actually asking give us parents,
show us that you have parents of these kids, but
will return the kids to you. So I participated in
three different negotiations of different formats, in Minsk, in Stanbul
and in Normandy format. So I saw representatives from OC

(11:09):
from different countries. I've seen our speakers, I've seen Russians,
different speakers, different leads for different negotiations, and my conclusion,
it's much more difficult to deal with the Ukrainians. It's
a mix of hype, hootspa, stand up show, pr opportunities,
very unreliable, not professional, and very if I'm using the

(11:35):
right word here, prostituting. What I mean by that is
that try not to go deeper into the symbolic and
psychological meaning. Let's say it is when people have seen

(11:57):
to obtain immediate benefits, they give up very big elements
of ethics or goals. It's, for example, when the leader
of the country comes out and calls the other side idiots.
This is what I call prostituting, when he is using

(12:20):
public resources in personal goals to a chief personal goals.
This is technically an description of corruption. When you use
the public capital, including symbolic capital. You're the leader of
the country at war, it depends your behavior will define
whether prisoners, whether the bodies of soldiers will be returned,

(12:42):
and you cannot find anything better than to hypen the problem,
perhaps strengthen your political rating just by including that extra
expletive in your speech. He did not have to write.
But starting all the way from the top of leadership
of Ukraine, that public capital is being used to support

(13:09):
to obtain additional political resources for the current Ukrainian leadership.
Alex say, whom are they hyping with? Do you think
do they do it in front of Russians, in front
of for the Western audience to see? Because see I
was reading the statement by Piscoff. I reread it three times.

(13:32):
It was very amorphous, very neutral about Zelensky. There is
no name calling, there is no actual bickering. So Zelensky
was left alone in the room with that word idiot
that he used. Remember when near Saint Nicholas Cathedral, Russians
hit the Kiev and all the politicians walked nearby on

(13:55):
their cameras and they used all the last words to
attack Russia. This is what I imply being prostituting. When
to achieve immedia goals, they forego much bigger goals and achievements,
and when the president comes out and calls the other
side names, after which more ballistics fall on the heads

(14:15):
of his citizens. This is a wrong story, but that
tells me that people have lost their moral bearings and
they do not understand what is beneficial and what is
not long term for them. What do Russians do? They
still remember how adults behave, don't matter how many strategy

(14:37):
bombers we would have bombed, a dozen, forty even two
would be a big achievement. Yet they still came to
the negotiations because if we are in the negotiation track,
and of course there are both sides. There is protocol
negotiations in Stumbul, and there are also the closed negotiations happening,
and if we are on this track, and it's a

(14:58):
separate question how success so it is and where it goes.
But still they made a decision to participate in it.
Even I think a direct hit on Kremlin would not
have canceled it, because the country made a decision to
go this way. What does Ukrainian side do? Our favorite one?
They continue using every tool in their toolbox, turn left,

(15:22):
turn right, jump powder the face, throw a tantrum, do
anything to and everything to make sure that nothing serious
would come out of it of the negotiations, that there
would be no serious results. Alexnikal Avit. So besides children,

(15:45):
where instead of thousands we apparently are looking at three
hundred and thirty nine kids. To be specific, we Ukrainians
live in that and we see how Yermak and Jena
Zelenski are riding this time that we will bring our
kids back. Here are the T shirts logos campaign talks

(16:06):
in different parliaments of Europe. They put some T shirts
on Austrians and some other but turned out to be
to have an unintended consequence because I think the night
of Sunday to Saturday or Saturday to Sunday, Ukraine got
one hundred and fifty kids from Austria back to Ukraine orphans,

(16:29):
the ones who have no parents anymore, whose parents died,
and Austrian powers are saying, well, listen, we've been taking
care of them, but we can do nothing. We got
an order to send them back to Ukraine. So they
were put in the bus and brought back to the
country at war. Right, So they returned the kids right
from Austria. And here one can ask probably the main

(16:54):
question Midinski, who destroyed this pr can pain on kids
by actually asking about exact last names and numbers Austria
that is returning kids to the country at war where
UAVs and ballistic missiles are getting dropped on their heads,

(17:15):
and we are getting our kids back to Ukraine from Europe,
not from Russia. What for where to who's the target audience? Well,
this is the style of Xidansk administration, the style of
this HOODI dictatorship. Same, for example, as we had called
Fort bachmat Right, one military friend of mine who has

(17:39):
access to secret documents, he's saying that the cost of
Bachmut is twenty thousand dead on our side. That number
needs verification, but that's the number he did quote. This
is the price of that PR campaign. Well, well, I say,

(18:01):
I'm somewhat used to communication with you, and I'm sorry
for we're talking about you in a third phase now,
But I remember you were saying that you are going
to name some numbers when the war will be heading
to an end. Right, Alexander, I think we need to
know truth even before the finals, because I think they

(18:24):
may lose the same amount, maybe three times that on
three other PR projects of fort somethings, and they will
continue doing that until somebody stops them. This number does
require verification. The argument that this is an equaintance of
mine cannot be taken seriously in public sphere. But I'm

(18:46):
using it to make people think could be more, could
be less. But I want to remind how did the
fort Bachmut appeared from the pr side. On the technical side,
Bachmut was very poor place to defend. And there was
a time there when the losses won. For every five

(19:09):
Russians attacking the fort the area, we were losing one
two five, and at some point it went one to one,
and then later it basically became even more losses on
the Ukrainian side because everybody who came to Bachmut were
erased with big air bombs, and the life of a

(19:31):
platoon there that entered the Bachmut area was maybe two days.
There was actually an example when drafting committee recruited somebody
in Odessa and next day, by three pm, he was
already dead in Bachmot without even having taken the military oath.
And that was the furnace that they dropped our citizens into,

(19:52):
our soldiers into. And we failed to create another third
core in the south. Doesn't mean that we would have
significant success in the side if we did, but we
chose to send these resources to Bachmut. But you know,
we could have achieved dekmok. Perhaps that's a railroad that
transport center, and that would have changed the situation on

(20:14):
the southern front. But in any case, we've lost in
the south. It was a protracted story, and we also
spent about nine months defending that Fort Bachmut, so to say,
in the last three months we should absolutely have not
been doing that. It was not in our favor. The

(20:34):
numbers were not in our favor. Given that a little
further beyond Bachmut, there are some heights. If we would
have dug in there, we could have stopped the enemy
significantly and captured them, trapped them in the lower lands. Yeah,
I like say, children, how do we get to this

(20:54):
topic now? Back? Kids? Is the same theme, same motive
these guys in presidential office. They are about pr in
the worst sense of it, not when they're highlighting the
real achievement. Look, how we can do the right things
or the real things. There is an old Chinese saying
that I've read a while ago, and I can just

(21:15):
repeat it again. I think I mentioned it before. In
one of the streams. Chinese say that the hunter should
be despised who is boasting at the feet of the
tiger or lion who died at his own death, and

(21:36):
the hunter he can be glorified as long and he
can boast as long as he wants to at the
feet of the animal that he had hunted and the messages.
As long as you actually have done it. You can
boast the success for the whole life if you want to.
But if something happened without you, you should not be

(21:57):
using it as your prop. And that's the story. Residents
can his team. They always find a semi deadlon that
can be used for all that pr maneuvering. They don't
care about precursors. They don't care about the consequences. They
only care about the moment. They've torn these kids from Austria,

(22:19):
one of the better countries in Europe, with very good medicine,
very good care, very neutral, very reliable, good country to
grow in, to grow up in, and they bring them
back under the missiles for what. And the same people

(22:39):
are saying that our military and civilians need rehabilitation services
in Europe. Europe is not helping us enough. They have
better prosthetics, they have better treatments, and yet the same
people are sending their soldiers to Ukraine under fire, but

(23:00):
they produced a flash in a media. Certain last names
acquire certain political capital that they did take care of
kids somehow, and if not the sanctioned voices like yourself
and myself, many people would have thought that it's good.
And now we actually have a chance that some of
them will pause and think that perhaps not everything is

(23:22):
so dandy when you bring the kids back under the
ballistic missiles. Let's say six thousand dead soldiers. At first
they said soldiers, then later Midinski said officers. Those some
disconnects as to who these bodies are, but the message

(23:46):
from Midinsky was that this was a humane gesture. Basically,
bury them according to Christian traditions, will take them from
our refrigerators. And he's saying that most of them are identified,
and if Ukrainian side has some of the Russian soldiers
collected on the fields, that they can transfer them to Russia,

(24:10):
and the mide Of comes out and says that they
agreed to exchange six thousand for six thousand and around
that there is already some intrigue brewing. People started multiplying
calculating that six thousand what ratio is from fifteen million,
and then President Zelenski comes in and says that we
only identified about fifteen percent of the bodies and very often.

(24:33):
We ended up having Russians giving us their own soldiers
as if there were Ukrainian soldiers dead bodies. Why do
you think Zelenski is sending this weird message over the
dead bodies? Why is he pring himself on that, Alexandra,

(24:54):
Does Ukraine conduct any diplomacy outside of diplomacy on the
dead bodies for the last three years, I don't think so.
It's all mixed with the trade of things related to death,
trade of pity, trade of death. And if any of
these kids God forbid parishes here in Ukraine, they will

(25:16):
be pointing fingers and saying, look at this God forsaken
Russians because they are responsible. Fully, but this is a
long story. At the beginning of the initial negotiations back
in twenty twenty two, we had several thousand of corpses
of Russian troops in our refrigerators and we offered them
to exchange to return them in the first stumble. They

(25:39):
refused at that time to receive them. It was a
different phase of war and they really did not want
to highlight and that's my supposition. It's just my opinion.
I think they did not want to have at this time.
But we're talking about six and a half thousand corpses,
and they were did not know what to do with it.

(26:01):
They were at a fork in the road, they were
not sure. They want to add additional noise, and they
refuse to take them. But this number did not come
out of nowhere because Stumbul twenty five is basically answers
and controls to the questions that we posed back in
twenty twenty two. So this time, that's why you see

(26:23):
six thousand for six thousand and wu Zelanski, I think
everything is crystal clear and his politics. I think we
can look at humanitarian component of this war. Why is
Russian side now making these humanitarian gestures to give some
days to clean up the bodies and then to exchange them.

(26:45):
I think after three years of different trials and errors
in their aparat Apara check fight in Kremlin, humanitarian component
is somewhat prevailing. Now. We have talked about that that
this war is probably the most humane in relation to civilians.
If you take any war during the last eighty years,

(27:06):
none of the war had such a correlation between the
dead bodies on the civilian side versus military. I think
in Vietnam for twenty eight dead partisans, there were over
one hundred civilians dying, or out of one hundred, there
were maybe like twenty eight possible partisans, the rest were civilians.
I cannot really pull the exact number out of my memory,

(27:29):
but something like that. This war is very different, and
now we are facing a new humanitarian component where Russian
side is coming and saying, let's exchange the bodies of
the fallen soldiers. So one can ask a question, why
are they doing it? We're from do we have that
trend to humanize war? If you not, there is no

(27:54):
additional missile strike on Kiev, even though their z chats
are now really boiling with demands to attack Kiev or
other cities after the last attack on their strategy bombers.
Perhaps it will happen, but until this moment while we're
recording the stream, nothing major was used as a retaliation

(28:16):
in Ukraine and non civilians dying, of course, but in
much smaller proportion to the military dying in this war.
And now there is that humanitarian aspect to the fallen
soldiers and the bodies on the battlefront. So what Russian
Federation is demonstrating us? First of all, in this way
they're showing that this war and I'll be just making

(28:38):
my suppositions here careful ones, but I think they're pointing
that this war is somewhat special, and they very precisely
differentiate Ukrainian population from Ukrainian leadership, and also Ukrainian population

(28:59):
that was drafted to the army who died at the
front and now they're ready to return them as a
humanitarian gesture, I think this could be treated as a
step towards the thesis that they're not fighting with Ukrainian people,
that they're fighting with how they call it, the Nazi
power in the Ukraine leadership, and that action of offering

(29:24):
the bodies of that Ukrainian soldiers means a lot from
others of those soldiers, because it's always better to have
some closure, right. It's difficult to even address this topic,
but psychologically, biographically it's different stuff. Even direct financial by
the way, you get certain money for the one whose

(29:44):
mia versus much bigger payout for the one killed in
action in Ukraine, so a big difference for families, and
emphasizing the humanitarian aspect of actions related to this warfare,
this could be treated as part of that starting summer
autumn military campaign. It could be cynical, But what I

(30:08):
would recommend those who like to think or who still
remembers how to do that is that most likely such
a step announced that the level of the leadership of
Russian delegation. That means it was affirmed at the highest
level in Russia. This is just the first step in
a long chain of new narratives in dividing junta from

(30:37):
the people. What will be the end of it, how
it will come to a conclusion, we don't know. But
I suspect, strongly suspect that this vector will be built
upon and the story will be used as the woodcutter's
tool to separate the interests of people from the interests

(30:58):
of powers, just like in those seventeen moments of Spring
Movie that I like to recall, where Miller is advising
Sterlitz to not mix the interests of Germany with the
interests of fewer and Russia now is separating the interests

(31:18):
of Ukrainian populace from the interest of some national battalions
and some of the Zenansky anti project leadership, anti Ukrainian project,
as I call it. Most likely it will be not
just diplomatic efforts. It might be resulting in some changes

(31:43):
in the political goals and approach to these negotiations as well.
One of the demands they're already posting is obligatory ask
to give Russian language an official status in Ukraine. In
Stamboul they have four groups working economic, military, humanitarian and

(32:05):
diplomatic international relations and such. So humanitarian pays a huge
attention to these elements. And looking at this from the
intelligence point of view, whatever will be already is they're
already highlighting humanitarian component as one of the key elements
today and that implies the change of the approach to

(32:29):
this war and the change of character of this war
that will be more visible later. By autumn, we may
hear a very different ultimatum, second revised or third revised
edition that will have a much bigger humanitarian component to it,
and that in turn means that they have defined the

(32:50):
projectivity for Ukraine or the space that used to be
Ukraine after the war period. We don't know what will
be out of it, but you did ask me what
will happen if Ukraine disappears. In my view, they're going
to create three Ukraines. Ukraine occupied by Russia, the Eastern Ukraine,

(33:11):
Imperial territories like Shelan mentioned in one of the streams recently.
And then there'll be also the western component where all
the collegian components should be moved out to Leive and
all the western districts and some neutral Ukraine. You can
call it rus Ukraine, you can call it Kivan rus

(33:33):
or Kievan Ukraine. But the logic is pretty clear. Russia
wants to take the imperial Lens where Empire had invested
a lot. It has historic character, it has access to
transportation lines on in certain territories that help them to
further their imperial agenda. They also need to address somehow

(33:56):
the bandera as they call them Bandarits, so they need
to be pushed out to the west of Ukraine. Nobody
wants to kill all of them. I just want to
remove them from these territories that they occupy and perhaps
have some neutral territory something like Bosnia with the minimal army,
neutral in the political status that exists in a certain status.

(34:19):
That's a very interesting supposition, Alexey, I just want to
clarify one thing here and important question. I think that
Western Ukraine, with your easy nomenclature, actually other experts are
also calling it the Ukrainian insurgency Army dugout. Do you

(34:40):
think it'll let the central neutral Ukraine go? I don't
think they will, Alexander, they will not be asked. It
will continue exacerbating. And I know Babel Shellen, whom I
respect to a degree. We did discuss with him a
theory and that misspoken instance when Presidential Advisor of Russia

(35:07):
did mention USSR as the single country regathered, and he
was addressing the perspectives and how will Ukrainian people treat
the solution to this war For those who have not
watched the stream, popularly saying that the main idea is

(35:30):
that nothing in Ukraine belongs to its people anymore. And
the only way to annul all these deals that sold
a lot of lands and resources to Black Rocks and
the like of the world is to acknowledge that USSR
fell apart illegitimately. It doesn't mean to rebuild the USSR,
but that it requires to annul all the contracts and

(35:52):
deals that were signed during the last thirty years, and
that basically returns on the lands to Ukraine ownership, anything
that was what could have been signed during these years.
So for me, look at this from what will be
already is this is a serious sign of the paradigm,
and I am paradigm to come and I am trying
to grow it into a logical structure. And I can

(36:17):
almost guarantee to one hundred and one percent, especially that
it's being reflected in the negotiations mode that in Moscow
they already came to some conclusion in the projectivity for Ukraine.
And that's the direction that everything is going to. Now.
The guarante for existence of neutral Ukraine will be Russian Federation.

(36:40):
The fellows from the insurgency army, dugout or narrow project
will be offered a very simple alternative to leave, because
otherwise they will be eliminated. Nobody will be taking pity
on them, because those that will move to the western
Ukraine will not be considered brotherly nation. It will be
those who they don't care about. You can dump kinjal

(37:03):
or Yshnik or other ballistics on them if they misbehave
the probability or likelihood for this country to survive and
seriously resist Moscow. Between Poland where elections were just very
interesting recently, and Moscow and their encroachings on the east,

(37:26):
that's a very questionable proposition. Therefore, the main question, the
main two questions that we can see is indeed have
they planned something like that? Is it true? Too many
little signs indicate that it might be true, and especially
knowing how they make decisions in Russia, Midnsky cannot bring

(37:48):
anything to negotiations. He cannot even give away one single
body of Ukrainian soldier unless Puttin approve that. So it
is all very hard driven from the top. And second,
whether Russia will be able to support all these agreements
if they come to life, but in order to provide
for ownership in Ukraine for that piece deal, because they've

(38:13):
went through that trap before, when Prushank and Zelinski were
saying that, sure, we'll agree to these terms with you,
but our Congress will not sign it. We can ratify
it and sign it here with you, but then Congress
and Ukraine will not do that because people in Ukraine
and some national battalions will basically push the buttons of
all politicians, so they cannot sign it. That's why don't

(38:34):
demand it from us. We can or we might sign it,
but Ukrainian people will won't and Russians don't take it.
They basically say if you take an obligation, you are
in charge of executing it. Otherwise, don't sign it. If
you cannot control it, you're not a signatory. They have

(38:55):
eaten that three times and different Meansk agreements from their
point of view, and I think now most likely what
will happen is when in some capacity they'll sign a
ceasefire agreement with the current power with a new power,
they'll be talking about a system of agreements between countries
that the system of collective security that will be established

(39:18):
between Russia, Belarus or Ukraine, whatever part of Ukraine or
several Ukraines as the result of this war. Their main
goal is that Russian owned territories or Russian occupied territories
should be safe from Ukraine aggressions encroachments, and that's why

(39:39):
they're demanding no foreign armies, no European arms, no mass
destruction weapons to limit Ukrainian capacity to suddenly attack Russia.
And by autumn, I think we'll see more demands that
first they will not allow military personnel to be part

(39:59):
of the negotiations and second any of the political national
organization with nationalistic component. How much do you think it
is possible to do in a whole Ukraine that is
not split into portions. No, that's absolutely possible, Alex say, right,
And in the neutral Ukraine, do you think that can
be done? Depends what do you consider to be neutral,

(40:22):
what kind of Ukraine is well what Shaalan says, take
nine or ten central districts that used to be Gettmann
state before. Everything that is in this region, everything opposing
and vehemently fighting Russia will be pushed out to Galicia,
to the west and the middle Ukraine will likely be though,

(40:44):
of those composed of those that want to live normally,
I'm by the way one of them, right, me too,
area that will be warm and sunny. And for such
a buffer state, it's much easier to implement these demands.
No holistic representatives, no military in the negotiations. So many

(41:06):
plans announced as the plans for their special military operation,
which are historically politically and technically are impossible to be
implemented in the whole Ukraine, are very easy to be
implemented in case Ukraine has split into three different states.
And if they did not forfeit their goals, which they

(41:28):
seems they won't very likely they won't. One can ask questions,
what would be the way to execute that, and the
level of politician is determined by ability to inherit his
decisions or her decisions by the next generation of politicians.

(41:49):
Because if one says that I signed something, and after
me somebody else comes and resigns it, then one can
ask a question, why did we agree to anything, because
now we need to fight over that thing again since
you denounced the previous agreement. So they don't want that
and they want it to be inherited. They want political
decisions to have some route. I'm not saying they will

(42:11):
absolutely go this way. We don't know, but there are
some signs that indicate that this is where they're heading to.
And it's a very logical path. That is part of
Ukraine owned by Russia, some of the North East and
some of the south, Middle buffer state and the insurgency

(42:34):
dugout in the west. Nobody invents anything new that was
already done in Yugoslavia. Very cursory roughly, but you basically
can say that Serbia and Croatia were separated by Bosnia,
which is more neutral. Russians were reviewing Yugoslavian experience very diligently.

(42:59):
Their actions and molder over Georgia and Ukraine relies on
the experience in Yugoslavia and then cost of a precedent
and the way that the West treated Yugoslavia, and there's
some historic experience. Finish, one can remember Finnish leadership in

(43:20):
exile and they're playing this chess game three Ukraine's I
think it's with a very high probability. Ale say, I
was planning to put this big topic towards the end
of the stream, we'll talk about it about today's attacks.
But since we're add it here, since we already said A,

(43:41):
let's say B. I want to say thank everybody for
watching us. Thirty five thousand watching us live on my channel,
forty thousand plus watching an Alexis channel. Please, guys watching
the stream, do not forget to click the like button.
That absolutely helps our sanctioned voices to be heard both
in and overseas wherever you guys are watching it, regardless

(44:04):
what VPN and how method you're using to watch the stream.
If you're watching the original one, any like helps and
side note from privateer station, please do not forget to
click the like and subscribe button if you have not
done that yet, that definitely helps our work to get
wider audience. So thank you for being active and staying

(44:24):
with us, all the viewers. And let's conclude this part
of a stream with the following. You know, all these pollings,
what will happen with Ukraine? Ukraine will be no more
what we started with. I have one older friend who
is also sanctioned. I'm not going to name him, but

(44:45):
we have argued with him for a long time already,
we work together, We've been colleagues, and we argued a lot.
He's basically for Russian Imperial project and that was more
pro independent Ukraine. I had very interesting debates. And he
knows me as a person who loves Ukraine. And recently

(45:07):
in conversation he did ask me, Alex, is that Ukraine
that you loved still around? Does it exist? A million
dollar question? Right, Alex, Our Ukraine is not existing anymore.
It's been trampled upon, and you and I are sanctioned

(45:29):
and probably waiting to be called traders and treason as
fellas as well. And let me open my cards here
for those who might not have understood my position earlier.
I am for a meta civilization of ruts for me, Ukrainians,
Russians and Belarus Belarussians are three groups of dummies who

(45:57):
are failing to achieve the history or ideal symbolic status
of Russians ruts as I see them as civilization of
good and light and positive things, and they have a
long way to go there. And I'm opening my cards
here completely. Ideally, I'd want to have some of the

(46:20):
midday world like Stovatsky described, only with God present in it,
with Jesus Christ, because without God you cannot build it.
And I'm looking at three brotherly nations equally, because each
of them has their own deficiencies, has their own drawbacks.
But for me, the war is a huge tragedy. It's
a humongous tragedy because a brother is fighting a brother

(46:42):
in this war. And for those who do not think so,
I want to remind that, and that might be screaming
before they go to that dugout, screaming what brother is
he talking about? I want to remind them that ten
million Ukrainians have immediate relatives in Russia, and it's not cousins.
It's brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, grandmother's grandmothers. And likewise, on

(47:05):
the other side, whatever other politically you can append to
that it's still there. Ten million citizens have the closest
ties between each other, and that's why it pains me
to see what's happening between these three countries. I feel
for all three of them. And when one group of
my own is killing another group of my own, this

(47:28):
is a huge tragedy. Even though the world is full
of civil warfare, and to some degree, the development of
bigger Russia has been a chain of NonStop civil warf
but it doesn't make it easier when one bunch of
your own is killing another. How would I formulate it? Here?

(47:55):
Give me a sec when it is done. Because somebody
on the West hired one group of relatives to kill
another group of relatives or provoke them, I'm not even
saying which ones. Because Russia also played its negative role.
They played their experiments with joining with the West. They've
been begging Europe to join them. They've been very pro European.

(48:19):
Putin suggested to create missile defense jointly. NATO had a
base on Vulgar River. Yeah, from Lisbon to Vladivostok, exactly.
They were lying down for the West and they really
wanted to join, and we also, of course did in Ukraine,
only Belarus was somewhat taking a separate position, but they're
also split. Part of them are very pro Western, the

(48:39):
others are with Lukashenka. And now that we are like
those Indians proverbial Indians killing each other for the trinkets
and the blankets. This is a huge tragedy. Another side
of that tragedy is that we have to conduct negotiations
peace negotiations between our two countries in Istanbul. I admire
modern Turkeyman Empire was interesting before, but the politics of

(49:03):
today's Turkey is also very very interesting because there were
times when at some point in history Belarus, Russians and
Ukrainians jointly had won twenty six wars over Turkey, and
now in Turkey we're asking them to help us strike
peace accord. I have a question to all that meta civilization,

(49:26):
to all these relatives. I want to ask a question,
why did we fuck down to mice Alexai. Perhaps we
did not have this meta civilization anymore, Maybe it's already dismantled.
Oh it exists, are you sure? Absolutely? It depends upon

(49:47):
how you understand the wholesomeness. Look, the talking head or
political leader or a citizen of a country can work
to a certain integral goal that has a symbol and
ethical character. Because even in Europe they do change borders.
We have an illusion that after war Europe was very peaceful.

(50:08):
Now they had thirty three conflicts within the countries of NATO.
The most obvious is Turkey and Greece. The lease of
this is Gibraltar or Anglo Icelandic wars over Fish, Czechia
and Slovakia, Yugoslavia. Germany since nineteen nineteen had changed its
government form nine times. There's nothing more flexible as governmental

(50:33):
shape as the country shape post war per Second World
War was somewhat a slower time when they had just
two pieces of Germany. That's why the thesis about immovable
borders is idiotic in my view. From the beginning, the
goals are usually symbolic, the values are very symbolic. And

(50:53):
if one says that there is no value in all
these symbols, I do not even have to relate to
the church and spiritual things. But I will use one
argument here and I'll use it again. Minimal losses among civilians.
This is a miracle. During the last eighty years of

(51:14):
warfare Iraq, Afghanist and Salvador Honduras, Syria. There was never
anywhere a time when civilians were not dying in numbers
more than military. The only exception would be Folkland Diale's war,
but there were no civilians there. And now we have
the war on both sides in Russia and Ukraine. Its

(51:37):
pills to both countries, and yet the civilians are not
leading in casualties. And this is one of the best
indicators that this war is following very different principles that
are different from any other kind of war. However, much
in Ukraine people would be giddy online when Russian tourist

(52:02):
was eaten by shark somewhere, or in Russian some Z
channels they would be screaming about killing everybody in Ukraine.
We still have a material fact that needs some explanation,
even if you're atheist and believing in symbolic capital. Why
civilian casualties are so low in this war? Nothing like
that existed in the last nearly complete century. And this

(52:25):
is a very sad indicator that this is a special
ethical process. Here and space here and there are two
forces fighting within this space that are fighting between each
other mercilessly as military, but overall they're trying not to
harm civilians too much. This is a negative example, but

(52:48):
this is still an example of a special war in
a special territory. That means there are some goals and
some values behind it. So the question would be who
works for which value? And there is a joke, an
anecdote about the difficult destiny of Ukraine that the same

(53:09):
family lived in Hungary and Czechoslovakia and Soviet Union and
now in Ukraine without leaving Mugatcheva. That's an illustration into
our example. There is a special space that can change
governmental forms, but its destiny and culture remains the same.

(53:29):
So that family or the Jews version of the sync
that is talking about a rabbi who's living in that township.
So they have changed passports right when the countries were changing.
Every time they needed to declare the allegiance to the

(53:50):
country to the political body. One existed for four years,
another for ten. But one can post a question here
what is the goal of Ukrainian citizen these days? For example,
what is the goal of Aristovich to achieve the statehood
of nineteen ninety one. We'll never get back to nineteen
ninety one. That Ukraine that I love, that the way

(54:12):
we could have created it. I love it, but it
doesn't exist much anymore. And now I am essentially denounced
the right to be a citizen because I cannot come back.
I am denounced all the financial operations in the country,
and I'm under special sanctions. They just have not taken

(54:34):
my passport away, but otherwise, de facto they expelled me
from citizenship. Somebody can ask Aristovich why you're not fighting
on the front. Why would I fight on the front
against my own, with my own against my own for
what for temporary government state that is sanctioning me and

(54:57):
forbidding me to speak my language? What the heck for?
This is absolutely illogical. In nineteen eighty two, I made
my choice when I saw the mosaics and one of
the subway stations, a golden gate station in Kiev. I
saw that this is my nation, a historic mosaic about

(55:19):
the leaders of the past. And I do have the
passport of Ukraine right, but it doesn't change my deeper value.
This war will continue until Belarus, Russians and Ukrainians will
come to realize that there is a special ethical and
cultural space within which they should not be killing each other,

(55:42):
regardless of how many countries exist within that space. A
good example is Arabs. They have single cultural space and
I have nineteen different countries within that space. Israel back
in the days, had Israel and Judea at two pieces

(56:02):
within one culture. How many English speaking countries are in
the world united by the same cultural space, from Australia
to Canada. And in the world of special operations are
there's a joke about British special ops who are basically

(56:25):
managed to convince the world that British Empire doesn't exist anymore,
while all indicators are that it does. America to some
degree is a part of this space. We can argue
about its destiny, but still is somewhat related. So for me,
the goal and the values have never changed. When people
are accusing me of changing my clothes in a jump,

(56:48):
or you know, changing my political views on a whim,
I'm not. It's not my responsibility or not my guilt
that we're going through three different federal forces in this
country during my lifetime. Tomorrow there may be six of them,
and maybe they join again into one eventually. I do
care about symbolic and unified phenomena that is called rush.

(57:16):
End of the first hour

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

24/7 News: The Latest

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

The Charlie Kirk Show

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}War in Ukraine, Analytics. Day 1194: Has Russia Decided on the Plan for Ukraine's Future? Arestovych, Shelest

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}24/7 News: The Latest

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

The Charlie Kirk Show

All Episodes

War in Ukraine, Analytics. Day 1194: Has Russia Decided on the Plan for Ukraine's Future? Arestovych, Shelest

24/7 News: The Latest