Russia-Ukraine War: What Can We Learn from History? | Intelligence Squared
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 10. 2022
- What are the lessons that history can teach us about the Russian war in Ukraine? Three of Britain’s most distinguished and bestselling historians - Peter Frankopan, Max Hastings and Margaret MacMillan - share their insights into the conflict and its repercussions for the future.
In conversation with BBC news presenter Jonny Dymond, they examine the long road to war as well as the potential outcomes of the conflict. They explore how President Putin has been invoking the past to rally support among the Russian people for his actions, and the strengths and shortcomings of Western nations in support of Ukraine. And as the Russian leader threatens to use nuclear weapons to achieve his aims, they ask what lessons can be learned from brinkmanship during the Cold War.
✅ Click on this link to subscribe: czcams.com/users/iqsquare...
Intelligence Squared has established itself as the leading forum for live, agenda-setting debates, talks and discussions around the world. Our aim is to promote a global conversation that enables people to make informed decisions about the issues that matter, in the company of the world's greatest minds and orators.
👉 Facebook page: / intelligence2
👉 Twitter page: / intelligence2
📌 Website: www.intelligencesquared.com/
#IntelligenceSquared #IQ2 #MargaretMacmillan #MaxHastings #PeterFrankopan #JonnyDymond #russiaukrainewar
An extremely one-sided discussion by the panelists, reflecting the arrogance and "infallibility" of the Anglo-Saxons.
well, when you see Indian, Russian and Chinese media it's hard for these people not to be arrogant. The Indian mass media is pretty much owned by Indian politicians, Russian State Media is calling for nuclear strikes against London and The Chinese and their "wolf warrior" nonsense aren't terribly interesting.
Ironically the “comic” who leads Ukraine is an incredibly strong leader who is the right person for the times. Max Hastings please think about that.
I love what Peter said, "if you control of media, you can say anything is a victory". If I watch CNN/BBC/MSNBC, I will think now Moscow have been sieged.
Agree
oddly enough, mr putin is one of the few people who actually believes that moscow is under siege
@@hdevere8383 And Noam Chomsky, John Pilger, well... some people who like hearing different narratives, an not only the main stream ones.
No you merely search for the narratives you agree with
@@clydewmorgan Or maybe just complementary sources to have a broader picture in English. As for me, I watch many different news in 5 different languages since I am a polyglot linguist... it is extremely useful to have different views and mindset. as wekk as to make more nuances. In French, my favourite reference is our Perpetual Secretary of the Académie française, Mrs Hélène Carrère d'Encausse, who never speaks with such certainty regarding Russia, even if it is her area of expertise and even if she met Putin personnally and spoke with him in Russian, one of her mothertongue. (She is from the Russian nobility whose family used to live in Georgia before the Revolution)
3 panellist who all agree with one another. Would have been good to get some other points of view
Yup. They ignore anything that does not support the U.S. and U.K. official government positions. I suppose, even amongst independent minded, tenured Academics, only superstars like Professor John Mearscheimer, or Professor Jeffrey Sachs, or Professor Noam Chomsky, are moral and courageous enough to speak independently, based on their years of scholarship, and/or political experience, or powerfful enough, like Henry Kissinger, who himself even broke ranks and spoke out against U.S. escalation of the conflict. (A good way to test the panelists' intellectual honesty would have been to ask all three, if they believe the U.S. and U.K. government proclamations that Russia blew up their own pipeline, or if it is more probable, that the U.S. blew it up. Most neutral experts will admit it is more likely that the U.S. did.)
@@stevelang6990 neutral experts say the U.S. did it, huh? Who are these "neutral" experts that you speak of? I'm sure they're anything but neutral but your bias won't let you believe otherwise...
you must be joking
Kanye West is not welcome 😂🤣🤣
@@tj2636 Are you sure? Why's that, because you have looked into it? What was Russia's motivation to blow up their own pipeline? The U.S. has claimed for years that Putin was using the pipeline as a weapon to extort Europe, why would he blow up his own weapon? He didn't have to blow it up, he could have just turned it off. Promising to turn it back on again if there was a Negotiated Peace, was his leverage. Why would he blow up his leverage. The U.S. has been against the pipeline for years and Biden warned back in February of this year: "WASHINGTON, Feb 7 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden on Monday warned that if Russia invades Ukraine, there would be no Nord Stream 2, but did not specify how he would go about ensuring the controversial pipeline would not be used.
Speaking at a joint news conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Biden said, "If Russia invades... again, then there will be longer Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it." When asked how he would do that, he responded, "I promise you we will be able to do it."------------------------------------------------------------- But to answer your question, the most prominent neutral expert is Jeffrey Sachs. He is an internationally respected former faculty of Harvard and Columbia University, Advisor to the UN, Public policy analyst, and senior advisor to governments, specifically: "In 1989, Sachs advised Poland's anticommunist Solidarity movement and the government of Prime Minister Tadeusz Mazowiecki. He wrote a comprehensive plan for the transition from central planning to a market economy which became incorporated into Poland's reform program led by Finance Minister Leszek Balcerowicz. Sachs was the main architect of Poland's debt reduction operation. Sachs and IMF economist David Lipton advised the rapid conversion of all property and assets from public to private ownership. Closure of many uncompetitive factories ensued.[25]" "Sachs's ideas and methods of transition from central planning were adopted throughout the transition economies. He advised Slovenia in 1991 and Estonia in 1992 on the introduction of new stable and convertible currencies. Based on Poland's success, he was invited first by Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and then by Russian President Boris Yeltsin on the transition to a market economy." --------------Anti-globalist activists have called him a "cold hearted neo-liberal," which is why he was invited on corporate media news shows. "Professor Sachs told Bloomberg: "The destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline which I would bet was a US action perhaps US and Poland. But host Tom Keene interrupted: "Jeff, Jeff you've got to stop there, that's quite a statement as well.
"Why do you feel that that was a US action? What evidence do you have of that?"
Professor Sachs continued: "Well, first of all, there's direct radar evidence that US helicopters, military helicopters that are normally based in Gdansk were circling over this area." ""We also had the threats from the United States earlier in this year that one way or another, we are going to end Nord Stream. "We also have a remarkable statement by Secretary Blinken last Friday at a press conference, so he says this is also a tremendous opportunity.
"It's a strange way to talk if you're worried about piracy on international infrastructure of vital significance." "So I know this runs counter to our narrative and you're not allowed to say these things in the West but the fact of the matter is all over the world when I talk to people, they think the US did it." --------------------------------------------------------And the U.S. is now the country that Europe will be dependent on for gas. "Until Russia's invasion of Ukraine in late February, the Nord Stream 1 pipeline beneath the Baltic Sea from Russia to Germany was one of western Europe's main sources of gas." (From website) "Business Insider": "Energy companies and traders are raking in huge profits selling US natural gas to Europe as prices on the continent skyrocket, with a single shipment netting around $200 million of profit, according to industry experts. Aug 13, 2022"
Would love to see them debate John Mearsheimer, Noam Chomsky and Jeffrey Sachs to get a balanced perspective.
There is such a debate. And Mearsheimer lost by a landslide.
@@charlesfiddespayne7474 Not according to the public present. That was the point of the debate. You can pick a side in front of the computer, but that is not relevant, because you are just one person. Ofc, I'm not saying that one side is completely wrong and the other side is completely right. There are valid arguments, in my opinion, on both sides. Just that those present considered one side's arguments more compelling.
Any one of them would have seen this troika of twits off.
This is so unbalanced, you would find more depth in a puddle, I’m so disappointed.
A balance perspective would show that their arguments amount to ad hominem attacks and pure Russophobia with no actual self reflection about how this war actually started
This discussion should be called learning nothing from history.
You're too generous, there should be no reference to learning or history in the title. Truly an insult to historians.
name one non-factual comment that any of these Historians made! It goes against Putin's and the Kremlin's narrative but the truth often hurts.
😆
Unconstructive comment Harry
Spot on comments, Harry! Absolutely waste of time. Glad I only wasted 8 minutes of my time. The woman is so ridiculous and fake to call the war is between Russia and Ukraine. Is she blind? Hope her prayer will work.
The first response to the hosts question led me to believe that we are dealing with a square-root of intelligence... this seemed like a propaganda info war
It's not propaganda if it's the truth.
@@kkpenney444 this wasn’t that
Agree
@@kkpenney444 1/2 of it, unfortunately... the UK vision, obviously. I am French and I clearly do not share this point of view. I came because of Peter Frankopan, but I feel extremely disappointed... What was said about the French people clearly showed that they not only do not understand the Russians, but they don't even understand their neighbours! So... no need to go as far as Russia then! Understanding the European continent would be, in my view, a good start!
@@plumitive4105 What point of view?
BTW on their immediate reference to the Cuba crisis. We must not forget that Russia was going to put missiles in Cuba BECAUSE America had first put missiles in Russia's neighbourhood in Turkey. In fact Krutchev withdrew the missiles AND Kennedy (on the quiet) withdrew the american missiles from Turkey. Why did Russia agree to this agreement "on the quiet"? to preserve Kennedy's presidency. Sadly that did not last that long, did it?
Take your bs somewhere else.
No, because at that time the Soviet Union was a vastly, vastly inferior nuclear power to the United States. Krushchev knew it was a blunder and realized he had to get the problem resolved. He also had Castro being irrational, pushing for a nuclear launch from Cuba and pestering Kruschev for control if those missles and decision making on when to launch. Kruschev rightly refused to hand control over to Kennedy. Thus the deal on Turkey and keeping it quiet from Castro. It benefitted Kennedy and Catri both that the Turkey deal be kept quiet.
@@yam2050 "Take your bs somewhere else." He was right. Why do you angry?
America deployed nuclear missiles into the Soviet Union’s region because NATO did not have an adequate defense against the massive Red Army deployed on its border in the Warsaw Pact. The Red Army deployed immediately when the Nazis surrendered to grab as much land as possible and only American nuclear airpower (B-29s) made them withdraw from, for example, Iran. So only the west’s nuclear forces could deter regional invasions and coercion via the Red Army. That is why missiles were emplaced in Turkey, because the Red Army directly threatened Turkey. Everyone who has lived with Russia knows their game. If they can, they invade. If they can’t, they engage in subversion. It’s just what they do and all their neighbors know it intimately.
@@tommyrq180 Sounds like past UK and current US.
We can’t learn from history. We never have learned anything because we destroy commonsense the moment it appears. But people will always buy books and go to the movies in the hope of learning something to please their appetites for entertainment.. Seminars and scholars will also profit from their thesis that never disappoints illusion….!!
We can and we do learn from history. We learn that england was the violent country in the 19th century, and that the USA is the most violent country sinse 1950 TO THIS DAY.
We have learned so much from history, what are you talking about? Whether it be technology, tactics, logistics etc. In the moral aspect we now have Int. law, numerous pro-humanity laws to limit the destruction of war. It's a very nihilistic view you have, and also just a wrong one
Maybe a Russian (not pro war, but balanced) and a Ukrainian perspective would have been good?
False equivalence
Maybe a Russian who is pro war like English were pro war with Nazis when they threatened invasion …
Why is the only good Russian you can conceive of a push-over servile Western-stooge type of Russian?
Are the Russians not allowed to have a stance, different from Western imperialist worldview, that is valid!?!?
Bigotry in this discussion and commentaries is phenomenal here :)
Three establishment clowns, repeating establishment talking points to secure their place in the establishment. Myopic.
"Interview With Three Western Historians"
"Why no Russians?!"
🙄
MEABY SERBIAN TELLING YOU DO TRUTH,....WHEN YOU NAZI NATO ISIS TALMUD THERORIST ALLIENCE TRASH ARE IN RUBLLES PEACE WILL COME,...NOT A SECOND BEFORE
Just one question regarding proxy war. If I metaphorically supplied a weapon to a friend to kill Max Hastings, am I guilty of a crime ?
Metaphorically? - ill-conceived analogy
Depends on what you knew at the time, but as it stands, of course.
pro tip for IQ²...if you're going to feature your store offerings on the screen between the video info space and the comments space, include any books touted by one of your speakers (e.g. Orlando Figes' The Story of Russia)
Thanks - good suggestion. We will be releasing a new video with Orlando Figes on the channel soon too.
this panel discussion is 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Kennedy displayed one thing in the Cuban Missile crisis - he pulled the US Nuclear Missiles out of Turkey that he’d previously deployed
This panel was very disappointing.
I think the bit about being led by comics ,is a perfect own goals.
They may as well call this unintelligence squared, 3 guests and the host on one side and Mr nobody on the other ?
The situation is never the same. A worthwhile analysis has to look at the current complexities.
True. The cost of going war with Russia - unless absolutely necessary - would be far greater than anything 1939-1945 was. I don't see how there could be parallels between the stakes then, and the stakes now.
@@irvin701 The problem is that nowadays there is far more at stake for both parties as there was in the past ..... the list is endless.
It's different times if one doesn't adapt to new situation we all will suffer miserably.
I just don't like intellectual dishonesty....I will always go for Jeffery Sachs of Columbia University....Let truth prevail....and stop seeing yourself as superious ...times have changed...
It was very nice to hear 3 knowledgeable panellists, however it felt a bit like an echo chamber. It would have helped to have one person with a different perspective to enhance and prove those 3 people right, instead of a group of people mirroring each other. I disagreed with Max that ideology is not a factor in this war. Maybe during the cold war the ideologies were defined with clear parameters but contemporary ideologies with their blurred lines are definitely playing their roles in this conflict as well. Again someone from a different perspective would have been able to point that out. Although i prefer a debate, i did enjoy this talk :)
I agree, Maester. This discussion was so one sided it was an echo. No one is charting a path to peace, just arrogant justification for their ridged view. I see a very biased view of history without nuance. What is left out is the promotion of NATO and support of the military-industrial's profits and its impact on Russia. MacMillan's comment on Germany in WW11, implying jealousy of England trade competition was a cause of the war - what a joke. Oliver Stone's Untold History of the United States would be an excellent beginning for this group to learn some real history of the West.
❤ to Russia from UK stay safe ✌ Hasta La Victoria Siempre
Your comment resonates with me. Certainly none of the panelists have cognitive empathy taking Russia's perspective, not to mention saying that JFK withdrew putting a base in Turkey to show good faith leading to de-escalation of the Cuban crisis. Is there a parallel with this Ukraine war? America's military industrial complex is working, especially after Afghanistan withdrwal.
@@ele81946 someone said a few weeks back everything happening is a war against the working class, I'd not heard it put that so distinctly before.
@@0150Tricia there is no peace with Russia as it’s a terrorist state
"We have hopefully a wonderful audience" (??). Rule number one for a moderator, never insult your audience at the beginning of a talk.
The clowns don't see the obvious.
They are not "Intelligence square", they are Intelligence into -100 power.
This would be a fascinating conversation if I was an anthropologist, from the perspective of watching a group of people, very impressed with themselves, giving the perspective from their hermetically sealed academic bubble. It is amazing how professional historians can pontificate so much on something while leaving out at least half the story.
I think you give them too much credit the you include the word 'academic' and 'historian' in any reference to these people. Even propagandists seem too generous a term.
@@stevel9200 I totally agree with you; I was just using the titles they give themselves so they'd know I was talking about them. These people are just oblivious, and they congratulate each other for it.
Perhaps you'd like to indicate the key elements they've missed? All three are quite well credentialed, yet you dismiss them as academic. The onus, therefore, is on you to show your credentials & argument. Will you please do so.
@@chrisfreebairn870 they will not because they cannot ;)
@@leenglishman1605 I suspected as much, just being polite .. see my comments beloe for a more assertive expression of my views ..
My thought is this conflict is very more deeper that you are guys discussing on this platform.
You are so right elenaalgazina5213 .... the conflict is pretty unfathomable and even if it is sorted out one day ? You can't take individual thoughts and the very essence of what makes a person think or believe out of the equation. It's a sad time we are living in and will end in disappointment and ruin. I believe we should take responsibility for our own brains and decisions but how do you get the horse to drink after you've taken him to the water ?
@@maryearll3359 Thank you,Mary Early for the comment. The religious question was not touched yet. It will make the conflict deeper.All the best.
ok, it just went from vapid to downright stupid.
With the multiplication of words comes the greater and dangerous folly, "One could argue."
The surest way to start wars is to have lots of meaningful discussions.
What’s the point of having a discussion with all panelists who are already on the same page? Waste of time…
Because it’s a marketing campaign, not a real discussion. This is for the pseudo intellectuals that are on the fence.
True
It's called brainwashing
Because they like to praise each other and reaffirm each other's idea and view.. it is a jokes
Maybe you do have an alternative point which I would hope would add another dimension ?
The title should be "Should the west really pipe down and listen to the east time to time, basically to stop pretending that they know it all?"
Exactly
Yes, a 100%!
Agree
Why? The East wants all of our money and all of our property leaving us with absolutely NOTHING... Putin desires to destroy the European Union and NATO... Why should we let him do so?
@@ronclark9724 the west has stolen our resources and enslaved our families and culture. Time for tables to turn.
It gets boring when all the guests think the same thing.
Boring is a good thing idealistically, like having stability, & sanity in life, a boring blessing to say the least. Peace could be a very boring proposition of the way to live for some, But a good peaceful life that's null & void of drama, conflict & confusion compounded & driven by endless emotional debates & arguments concerning personal, philosophical, social , religious & political differences, can be quite boring and a peacefully predictable way to live & think about the same things.without the drama..etc etc.
Again, as a lot of the western part of Europe media and intellectuals discuss central and eastern European issues they do forget to takeoff their perspective and their hats the bean shaped by the Russian empire for about 2 1/2 centuries.
The Muscovite and Russian issue is a much deeper problem to solve or completely isolate from the part of the euro Asia. More context would’ve been nice to see in the panel
Poles understand us perfectly. Moscovia must be defeated, demilitarised including nuclear weapons, divided into free national states.
Westerners completely underestimate danger of mongolian Rus' which successor is Moscow.
They'll don't stop, they must be stopped.
Absolutely agree.
Exactly this
It would be good if someone here wasn't a biased believer in yet another crumbling western narrative.
I cannot agree more.
Margaret, this war is not just between Ukraine and Russia ! If it were , it would have ended a long time ago . This war is between Russia and the Western world supported by US military might ! And that expansion makes it nearly a World War or bordering it .
not really
@@autemniaequinoctius2030 Care to back up your stance ? 2 words don't make a response ! The whole world has recognized this conflict as a ' Proxy war " between US ( Europe hardly counts ) and Russia .
@@narayanprasad4008
yes, the whole third world and even the fourth world, where people adore Putin as a "strong leader", like Stalin. Not a single normal civilized country in the world would agree to believe in such crap
Before Gorbachev lefdt office, he signed an agreement with Hans-Dietrich Genscher of the OECD, that Warsaw Pact contries would not be taken into NATO. Within about 18 months they were all in, the US was planting missile-sites all over the place and accusing Russian of aggression. Two years ago UNHCR listed 1.5 million ethnically-Russian Ukrainians had fled from persecution to take refuge in Russia. For whatever reason, that figure has disappear from that website. At the same time, Russia`s lease on Sevatopol which still has 30years to run was torn up unilaterally. Ukraine was part of Russia even before Ivan IV drove the Mongolians out in the mis C16th and then Cathering the Great built all Ukraine`s main cities. Ukraine has been part of Russian for at least two centuries before Scotland before allied itself with England. A big part of the problem has been firstly the historians who have completely obfuscated the history of 1914-1917 and secondly , the West`s vigorous attempts to portray Putin as a Stalinist. In 2017 he went to the Gulag Memorial to denounce formally both the Gulag and the Revolution itself. That was courageous, given that many of the Oligarchs want a return to Stalinism. Other than them and CP members, no-one could take iny interest in national politics or economics, so the Oligarchs stepped in to fill that vacuum. He tried to reach some kind of rapprochement with NATO but was rudely shrugged off. Anti-Russian feeling in Warsaw Pact countries is understandable but not at all helpful. As far as Russia is concerned, East Ukraine, with its high proportion of ethnic Russians, is Stalingrad 2.
Man, Peter can make his guitar talk and discuss geopolitics and war. Truly a renaissance man!
renaissance was afforded with gunpowder.
I can't take him seriously as he is a historian with a fake name to claim Croatian nobility status. Although his family has nothing to with the Frankopan and they have changed their last name from a normal Croatian last name from Dujmić-Vukasinović to de Lupis, and then to Frankopan just to try and claim medival castles after the fall of communism. The last Frankopans were executed by the Austrians in 1617. Imagine now being a historian and carry a fake historic name. LOL
@@gregoryjames4474 And born on the back of the Islamic Golden Age.
The non violent answer could lie in collectively raising awareness in regard to any illegal tactics commonly used, including by Chinese or Russians, in all other jurisdictions. Educate all leaders and populations on ethics in these countries. Welcome Ukraine war survivors and Russian refugees who declare to resist the war, as refugee migrants by giving them dual citizenship, provided they assist to end the war. These three strategies could help drive to peace.
Anglo Saxons again tieing themselves with war horse. Have they found WMD in Iraq?
not to worry, there are few in the west who have any memory. All attention is on the latest fashionable cause of the moment.
that western nations have almost continuously been invading other countries is known by few.
Yup, that is why they are suffering because of the same stupid mistakes that they had gone through in the past like WW1 & WW2. This is another propaganda talk. The west deserved to be screwed and the pain that they are experiencing now is not painful enough to wake up.
Good job Russian comrade-bot! You ll have more vodka per post
British humor is great! ty
This panel consists of three atlanticists propounding NATO orthodoxy. Would have appreciated greater diversity of thought represented on this panel, with opposing viewpoints actually challenging each other's narratives.
Why do people like you spam the comment section with complaints, such as these, rather than calling attention to something said in the video that is objectively incorrect. Instead you complain when anti-western voices aren’t included… why should they… they’re anti-western regardless of the topic.
@@nicholasjohnson778 it's not spam or a complaint, it's an objective observation that there is little to no disagreement expressed between the panelists. If that is not self-evident to you, then that is your own problem.
I personally agree with the majority of the viewpoints expressed in this video. Unlike you perhaps, I prefer a little more intellectual stimulation via a conflict of ideas. The world is not geopolitically dichotomous as you imply, and there is certainly room for a greater variety of opinion on this subject than your "Western v. Antiwestern" trope of a worldview.
@@nicholasjohnson778
I happen to support Ukraine, but I do not consider it "anti-Western" to question Western involvement in the war.
That is the way of censorship.
@@stephanoskaravas5405 This was a panel interview not a debate, objectively. There are plenty of debates most feature John Mearsheimer but there are others.
I also find it strange, the Kremlin’s causus belli has shifted from one month to another, Russian soldiers are not at all enthusiastic fighting this war, and hundreds of thousands of military age males have fled Russia.
But you would like to have more academics, that side with Putin’s perspective, explain why the situation is far more complex than it appears. I’ve listened to these arguments, they don’t link up well with the facts. But if you have an interesting point, I’m interested in studying it.
What if this war is straight forward? What if Russians are generally politically apathetic? What if Putin gambled and has lost? And what if these historians summarized the situation accurately?
The problem I have with these “oh it’s one-sided” spammed comments is that they bring nothing to the table… AT ALL.
@@TedATL1 Well it is anti-western to complain that a panel interview (which wasn’t a debate) should have included a contradictory perspective. I’m all for debates, but this was not a debate.
Also, censorship is the blocking of ideas from being expressed. Intelligence squared has provided plenty of debate forums for an anti-western or realist viewpoint. You demanding that every discussion on the topic include a Kremlin friendly perspective is anti-western and is in fact illiberal.
We are in an information war with Russia and Russia is trying to crush liberalism in Ukraine… maybe you should put your money where your mouth is and ACTUALLY combat censorship. Censorship in Russia, Iran, China, etc.
An intelligent discussion of this war, this is not.
That question about the humans element in major conflicts and having the right people in charge (e.g. JFK)and and not having the wrong people in charge (e.g. Max Taylor and Curtis Lemay too) and the responses was gold
Gold . Exactly .
So true.
"First time since the Cuban Missile Crisis, we have a direct threat of the (use of) a nuclear weapon if in fact things continue down the path they are going." Joe Biden
"Above all, while defending our own vital interests, *nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war.* To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy, or of a collective death-wish for the world." John F Kennedy
If not, history will simply repeat, and the entire Cold War "sh*tshow with death and destruction with return.
"Sleepy Joe" is a bit late with his realisation.
You can definitely put McArthur in the same bunch as Taylor and Lemay
US nukes in Turkey, unknown to Russia were to be pulled out of Turkey, the fact that nukes were within easy range of Russia is interesting.
Mind you, one can hate a leader, but to hate the country,, is to hate it's people.
Curious is the NATOs evolving and expanding, through out the world, a once defensive force that of recent as become offensive.
Totally Democrats speaking
This is not a debate as all are against Russia and Putin.
Did you expect an illegal occupation of a Sovereign Country to be considered as acceptable ?.Do you understand the gravity of human suffering Russia have caused ?. Have you thought about the millions of civilians who are now left without their homes/jobs/villages.? Do you have a job and home?.I'll bet you do.
I always listen to the whole thing...why wouldn't I listen to the whole thing? 🙂 merry Christmas friend ❤️
The lady in this debate is talking cadswallop. Putin is ranked as the most honest leader on the international stage according to the "Why Politicians Lie" by John Mearsheimer.
Would have been nice to include Stephen Kotkin in this panel.
Why not get some Russian geopolitical experts on to give a Russian perspective. In 2014 UK news regularly had pro-Russian guests on. What’s happened.
In 2014 the USA and the UK organized a coup in Ukraine to Instal a Nazi government in Ukraine and the western media and these fat intellectuals are propagating for their governments which are just evil.
Trump/Brexit dérangement syndrome.
Who would want to share a stage with a ruzzian?
@@canadiangemstones7636 certainly none of these guys. When Russians commentators with good English were allowed to appear on UK debates and TV in 2014 they often gave highly nuanced points of view and insights which were largely hidden from Western audiences. They were more than able to handle themselves and often left neoliberals Western media anchors and commentators.
These are vetted British slaves to the official western narrative. Russia bad, West good.
Totally nonsensical debate is no longer an intelligent discussion.
Not impressed with the alleged "intelligence", pretty much at CNN/BBC caliber. Wasted 6 min.
Learning from history is a sane use of it (rather than glorification and dry sequential chronologies). Soon history will be divided into Before Enlightenment* and After.
"as provided by the Philosophy of Broader Survival
I thought this was a debate platform. Ah well.
"The terrible thing, that all dictators should be warned about this, the longer you stay there, the more isolated you get, and you only hear from people that are flattering you, telling them what they want to hear..."
That is exactly what people in the Western world are telling each other about politicians personalities. People in the Western world do not vote for their leaders logically, rationally in the best interest of their country future. No, people vote mostly on the basis what their social and peer groups vote for. Most often it is based on personality biases. They wag their tongue all day and every day talking on the phone and talking at work and talking in the pub, about their pet pees. Karl Marx Socialism has also got a foot hold in the Western peoples minds.
U government is evil group..they go to war almost a very year,,Libya war, Afganistan war,Irak war for the sake of humanity they say..
And when we tire of our leaders we change them. Quite frequently if necesary. Can you change yours?
The differance is that Western political systems allow for the replacement of leaders who may not be doing a satisfactory job. If Russians look at their leaders "special military operation" and realise the long term consequences of it ...what can Russians do about this dreadful leadership?...their political system does not allow for replacement of a bad leader.That is the moral of this entire debacle.
Can you change yours ?
CAN YOU CHANGE YOURS ???
Peter is the most nuanced and strategic from the panelists.
BS
It’s incredible that so many informed people can be legitimately surprised and unable to comprehend anti-Americanism. In fact, that fallacy is not having a politics of grievance, but associating ones grievances with national identity, rather than the underlying structures and systems. Liberal democratic capitalism, while successful at some things, is blind to internal contradictions that plant the seeds of its own antagonism.
Russia does not pay any attention to agreements, treaties, or negotiations.
This discussion reminds me of a movie made in 2016 "World War Three: Inside the War Room". And we are not at the end of it yet. Scary.
It's nearly at the end for Russia.
Have u guys looked at a map of the Ukraine lately!
Thank you audience for not disrupting the discussion with applause every 30 seconds
Prof Macmillan' emotional and personal commentary devoid of the Russian context trivializes her intellect.
The cold war has poisoned her intellect
Not good discussion at all....
Left and socialistic neo-marxistic...
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah,
Fabulous !
You can’t finish the job without having the tools needs to be taken seriously by leaders of the free world. We can’t leave Ukraine without the tools, being heroic is not enough
Historians usually have a poor understanding of the current political context. This panel is no exception. I'm going to say something which is not popular: Ukraine doesn't need Crimea and the occupied parts of the Donbas. This is where most of the Russians in Ukraine live, and Ukraine could live just fine without these. After retaking Kherson city today, not much left from the initial Russian occupation. The only major pro-Ukrainian city left under the Russian occupation is Melitopol. The biggest damage is done to the city of Mariupol, and Ukraine doesn't need to hurry in retaking this city. Even if Russia manages to freeze this conflict in the Donbas and Crimea, it can't freeze the Ukrainian path toward the West, which is already happening. Ukraine would be more stable without pro-Russian Crimea and Donbas. Ukraine has already become a candidate member of the EU, and it could live just like Cyprus which has an even bigger territorial dispute with Turkey. Or like South Korea and happily play a long-term game. Russia can't just unfreeze the conflict at will and start a new campaign, because the next time it will face a technologically superior enemy. The Russian army had been living on the old Soviet stock and the components coming from the West - both of which are gone by now.
Пішов за кораблем. Там наші люди і не тобі вирішувати що нам треба а що не треба. Ні сантиметру священної української землі рашисти не отримають.
Їх треба розгромити і не дати перегрупуватись. І ті регіони не повністю проросійські, є люди які нас чекають.
If your neighbor decides to take your back yard you’ll be ok? Let it take. It is easy to have an opinion that doesn’t touch you directly. Right?
@@katherinemunoz4138 I'm not trying to say what Ukraine should do; I'm just saying Ukraine is fine without Crimea (economically, politically, and militarily). Russia won't be in a position to restart the attack in the future. After all, it's easy to say Ukraine should "take the land back". That will come with a huge price. If the West stands behind Ukraine as long as it takes, the time is on the Ukrainian side. Russia can't play this game in isolation forever. But of course, it's on Ukraine to decide what to do, and my comment doesn't imply in any way what Ukraine should do.
Did you have a similar session on Iraq 🇮🇶, Afghanistan 🇦🇫 and other countries where similar butchery that the west created?
The Rest of the world has changed its course of direction leaving the West behind.
Continue Sitting and chatting all day or night with your lack lustre stuff, with none from the East lending their ears to you.
The new formula for the East is:
“The Grace of the East will rise and rule while the beasts of the West butchers the world.“
They’re not having one on Iraq or Afghanistan at the moment but I hear they’re organising one to discuss that brilliant NATO triumph in Libya. The West bludgeoned a country with the highest per capita income in Africa to one where there’s open slave markets. All because Gaddaffi wanted to accept currencies other than the petro-dollar. The arrogance of these three panelists beggars belief.
These people are propagandists. They are “ Political Scientists”.
@@dipakbose2677 The befitting name for these kind of people is “Political Satans” not ‘Political Scientists’.
You do realize that these other conflicts have very different political backgrounds?
Might wanna rename this one "Echo chamber Squared"
This debate is about as balanced as 1 elephant on a see-saw. Seriously what was the point? Turned off after 10 mins of utter horse plop
would be nice to have some Ukrainians on the panel to talk about … Ukraine, the subject of this talk. 🤷🏼♀️
And some Russians just to make it fair
Not necessarily. You don't necessarily invite an obese person to talk about the health problems of overweight, you invite an expert in the field, who may be stick thin. Unless a personal perspective or insider perspective is relevant and/or desirable, there is no need to invite someone who has a personal connection to the subject discussed. In a free society, anyone can talk about anything.
@@wh5254 OK, so bring Poles or Lithuanians, they exactly know what monster russia was and is.
It's a genocide and to stop genocide you can only by defeating agressor.
Problem is that Germany was occupied and hadn't nuclear weapons. russia is hard to occupy and they have weapons.
Society is fascist, some adequates are in brutal pressure of police.
Only victory of Ukraine can save the world.
Maybe it's better to hear from ethnic Russians who live in eastern Ukraine.
@@wh5254 Nothing about someone should be discussed without them
I enjoy hearing Max Hastings as much as I enjoy reading him.
Dodgy History
It’s what he leaves out that’s important which is he’s bias
Wow!! The level of echo chambering is out of the world.
I love the way it works. The rest of the population perish in the wars while Anglophones do the talking, writing and making money over it. Good business indeed.
Where is the space for freedom and not being kill on the street, in Your mind?
Good business is to buy bloody oil from dictatorships like Russia but still call your country 'biggest democracy'
Counter to intelligence.
Please keep these 3 on your side of the pond.
Brilliant discussion…
Are these people talking about the America that had initiated, financed, and created hundreds of wars, big, little and in between for over 200 years that I know of?
As if the British and Germans haven't.... Duh!
Yes, a comment has been made that Germany, France and Italy haven't given over much weaponry but this was put down to merely that they still want Russian gas-very simplistic . The fact therefore is proven that the US coerced them into the war for its own objectives. Of course, the US is never to blame it seems.
Dushen, US didn't wage war . it's Russia
@@77kromah Spot on! This is Putin's War....
I thought this channel was about debates, not parroting MSM talking points.
11:06 "The West was not ready to fight, prior to 1939 to fight the 3rd Reich" , was a pretty loaded statement, considering the massive support Hitler had among the western elites.
I predict the war in Ukraine will not turn into a frozen conflict just because Russia has frozen conflicts in other areas. Those other frozen conflict areas are small and sustainable. A frozen conflict which eats up manpower and is an ongoing wrecking ball to your economy is unsustainable.
Precisely. Why is everyone ignoring the economic abyss Russia is sliding into, an irreversible calamity?
@@richardcory5024 I don't see that anyone in the Western World is ignoring this abyss. The problem for Russia is that Putin appears to be ignoring it.
I won't predict. But this could well turn into a frozen conflict. Agreed that the economic and manpower problems make it unsustainable for Russia. But I don't think Putin himself recognizes those facts. As far as frozen conflicts go, having one with Ukraine would by far be the most important to Russia.
@@michaelbee2165 I agree Putin is ignoring it, but most commentators in the West don't don't take it enough into account, that the war against Russia is being waged and will be won on the economic front and the actual fighting is supplementary to that rather than the other way round. World War 3 is being fought by financial legislation. The US as good as rules the world economy.
@DEATH TO THE URAINE NAZIS Where is Uraine? I think you must be the idiot here, and illiterate as well! I suspect you are one of the few Russian trolls who has managed to evade conscription. Face it, you are a coward who is afraid to defend Mother Russia. You should face the same fate that awaits all Traitors to the Motherland!!
This discussion is like a drama. The fight in Ukraine is like a world war 3 already because of nations are involved on both sides. What they are talking about?
Good point. America's using Ukraine like they use their grunts- let them put their body on the line while they sip 🍸
If NATO would be involved then it would have been long over.
Just remember at the beginning of WWII, Hitler’s goal was Soviet Union (Jewish communist), only changed after Poland refused to help it.
Intelligence only make you an expert of the past.
When Putin refers to the "Anglo-Saxons," I always laugh. But watching this total waste of time I see he has reason to sleep with one eye open. There is a deep hatred and fear of Russia in the Brits, and vice versa! Jeez, they weren't kidding when they made most Hollywood baddies Russian. These people's thinking has reigned supreme for 30 years and what did it bring us? War, utterly avoidable war.
In the last 22 years, I have watched countless Putin speeches where he all but begs the West to consider Russia's security interests when making European security decisions. At the Munich Security Council of 2007, the man literally said, "We have a right to ask, against whom is this NATO expansion?" Instead of recognizing the danger of a total breakdown in trust between the West and Russia, Merkel and Sarkozy were bullied into silence as NATO opened the door to Georgia and Ukraine. That was the final straw, Russia has gone to war to thwart US/UK goals three times since: Georgia, Syria, and Ukraine. If they foresaw the dishonest conduct of the UN sanctioned No Fly zone that instead resulted in bombing Gadaffi's ground troops and tanks by the US and France, I'd bet they'd have fought in Libya too.
I saw those speeches, heard his arguments, and it will take a monumental effort to persuade me that Putin acted in bad faith. In fact, if I were Russian I would fault him for not going further in 2014 or launching the current effort in May 2021 as he originally planned. Instead, he looked on while the West armed Ukraine to the teeth and trained their troops across the border while promising to make Kyiv implement the Minsk agreements. Even now, he hesistates to devastate Ukraine and had to be humiliated (the attack on the Crimean bridge) into the recent air campaign on Ukraine's power and rail infrastructure. Only when the hardliners, news sites, and bloggers began openly criticizing his military did he jump into high gear.
The only person with some brain cells.
I mostly agree, but would not whitewash and idealize Putin. It is quite possible that the attack on the Crimean bridge was initiated by him, in order to later justify the strikes on the energy infrastructure of Ukraine. However, he acts quite logically according to the laws of war, although the war has not yet been announced. Just a special military operation for now, you know.
Kievan Russ, shortened to ‘Russia’; named because of the red headed Vikings. Not named by them, named because that’s who lived there. ‘Russia’ is a very recent political entity.
It wasn’t who live there so to speak. The Vikings came there and they were invited to be the rulers they became the ruling class the polities stayed the same until they were overrun by the Mongols
What an extraordinary discussion!
This is more like Ignorance2 or Obfuscation2. They cite the 2014 invasion but not the 2014 coup, and the 2008 invasion but not the 2008 Nato expansion.
Absolutely correct. Agree.
Such a bright minds, brave people. Having the same brilliant opinion.
Fighting the evil. Protecting the good.
This is so important to manage dialog only with people sharing the same opinion.
Sharing dialogue with people sharing the same opinion is the fastest way to learn nothing at all and to also ensure that your mistakes get bigger and more profound.
Ah freedom. Wonderful wonderful biased freedom.
They are corrupt fools.
'Same opinion ' dialogue is called ....a monologue.
@@Englishman999 Exactly. When only we talk and agree, we learn nothing
Regarding the "Putin's made up history" remark, this is exactly what the Anglo-Saxon/Anglo-American Empire also does as well. I am sure they are not taught how their forefathers "civilized" other cultures. If they are, there is always a larger noble perspective to that or it is not taught in details. I am sure the Chinese have their own version as well. It is the same for every culture. Nothing odd here.
Well in that you are most incorrect. Most of the most dissenting views on European colonialism are in fact written and communicated by British and European historians/ academics. The UK in particular has gone a long way to try and redress the issues of its past (Windrush, voting rights, restitution etc) but there is still work to be done. However, no one is shying away from the UK's imperial past in all its gory glory. Its taught in schools here and its taught in schools around the world (particularly in the commonwealth).
But yknow, your idea of saying "well okay, everyone does it" is a nice bedside method of leveling the playing field. It is however entirely incorrect and preposterous.
@@dynamo1796 Pretty sure everything Putin says will be confirmed by Russian historians as well. Now, you might say that is because fear. My point is no government wants alternative viewpoints. Look at what they're doing to Julian Assange who provided evidence and explained an alternative view to the NATO wars. The West is a bubble. Russia is a bubble. China is a bubble. The viewpoints and narratives are different between each of them and the people mostly live in echo chambers. You're true and noble in your bubble. They're true & noble in theirs.
@@rpnrko3612 While its very hard to get a true and objective history of anything, there are sources and research that come a lot closer than others -this applies to both Russia and Europe. Alternative view points is an interesting remark. Commonly governments pick a popular and defensible narrative and stick to that. However in western cultures this has had to change on the grounds of new information, inquiries or otherwise.
In Russia or China however no such thing happens. There are no inquiries, there are independent research bodies and there are no non-state affiliated media or historians. You cannot compare what happens in totalitarian places like Russia and China to what happens in the West - they are orders of magnitude further apart on the scale of democracy.
@@dynamo1796 not quite. UK and US are trying to "correct" the past with political correctness getting into idealism and not real politik many times, but in the anglosphere the spanish importance in civilization it still totally undermined or denied because Spain was the great power to defeat. Even after more than 150 years of the spanish empire collapse they continue to tell lies and diminish or exagerate things. This is only with one sphere: the hispanics. imagine ALL the rest. Now, I am married with an ucranian, so dont think i am pro-russian in any way. But yes, making up history is as old as the sun, and keeps repeating it self everywhere. (France and Italy for example denied the roman empire existed after the western part of it collapsed and they "invented" the bizantine empire. there was never a bizantine empire. It was Rome. until the end. Even the Turks called themselves "Rum" in the modern age. Everything is made up.
@@dynamo1796 Well every British percent I met considers Churchill a hero. I will say no more.
It is the Americans that started talking about nuclear war. The Russians have confined themselves to saying they are ready to respond with their own nuclear weapons.
Where is the intelligent discussion?
did everyone get together in the green room and pat each other on the back. boring discussion and praise of the US seems like the denial of history. such a smug discussion....no lessons here.
Scott Ritter? Jefrey Sachs? John Mearsheimer?.......
Bunch of useful Putin idiots
Balance is important and it's fair to say...
Sachs is very smart and knows a lot about many things, but he knows next to nothing about international security, nuclear deterrence, or Russian and Ukrainian history. He is simply unqualified, and anyone with a little formal education in the area sees it immediately. Unfortunately, his pretentiousness is unwittingly supporting Russian propaganda by inaccurately attributing the war to Western provocation and badly misunderstanding escalation risk in a way that's favourable to the Kremlin.
Mearsheimer is also very smart, but a bit different in that he does know a lot about IR, security, and nuclear deterrence. He still makes the very obvious error of attributing the causes of the war to Western provocation and NATO expansion, however. So what's going on here? It can only be three options (I think): 1) he's stupid and cannot weigh very simple evidence (unlikely since we know he's not stupid and he's produced good work in the past); 2) He's so egoistically invested in proving Structural Realism (his theoretical baby) paints an consistently accurate picture of IR that he simply blinds himself to the overwhelming amounts of evidence that contradicts his theory in the Russo-Ukraine context; 3) he is knowingly promoting Kremlin propaganda. I'd put my money on it being number 2.
I cannot really comment on Ritter as I'm less familiar with him - I'd just caution against assuming every former serviceman remains loyal to his nation and isn't susceptible to bias, bad education, or bribery.
Scott Ritter is a convicted paedophile.
@@azhivago2296
Correct on Sachs. However, one can reject the Mearsheimer blame-NATO excuse but at the same time conclude it is not a war for the West to join. Consider Eisenhower in Budapest 1956 and LBJ in Prague 1968.
@@azhivago2296 total nonsense. sachs knows more than these three stooges together.
Margaret MacMillan makes a very good point about 'realists' who sees states interests and they can be measures etc 16.30 > . People like Mearsheimer have a huge following for those who like a clear narrative and someone to blame. There has been tremendous social change in eastern Europe and in particular Ukraine. They can travel freely and they have the internet giving them a window on the world few had even 40 years ago. Ukraine is moving to a European future but Yanukovych tried to keep the country linked to Russia. The people of Belarus voted for pro Europe parties but Lukashenko crushed the result by force-with Putin's full approval.
He refused to go along with brain dead austerity measures that would have disadvantaged the least well off and was overthrown in a fascist backed coup
This deserves much better audio. The sound quality is terrible.
I think the problem is quite clear. One power wanted something, other power didnt want it to happen. Maybe all these discussions had to happen before, then maybe all these atrocities wouldnt happen.
Shut up you dumb Americans
The West offered Putin many off ramps to this war, and continue to do so. Unfortunately, in his isolation in the Kremlin, the narcissistic Putin refused... This is Putin's War...
What Max Hastings was speaking of the anger and resentment that Russia holds for the US. I think that Russia needs to be reminded that every year that they celebrate their success in defeating Hitler, that that would not have happened without the support of the US. Russia, and Putin in particular, want to continue to rewrite their history in a way that shows them the valiant winners. It is fine to do so, but it is also hard to hide the facts. If Russia does not want to acknowledge this, I think that it should be a serious part of the conversation about Russia's ability to claim that they are a 'self made country.' There is no such thing any more that there is such a thing as a 'self made man' or a 'self made woman.' AND I am not saying that the US is perfect. You can look at our chaos right now and find plenty to talk about.
Here are two videos that will show what the US offered to 'Russia's defeating the Nazis.' czcams.com/video/wtSigplwQ6Y/video.html and czcams.com/video/jltytoh1RbA/video.html You will want to pay attention to the relative numbers of pieces of equipment as well as the number of tons and gallons of fuel that were shipped to Russia. If it had not been for the US, Russia would not have very much to claim about defeating Hitler and the Nazis in WWII.
your comment is not entirely fair. the first most difficult years, we had to fight the Nazis virtually one on one.
if it's not Russia, then US needed to fight Hitler themselves, not much to brag, really.
Are you insane? US has not joined WW2 until 1943, at that point USSR already broke Germany Army backbone and was pushing them back through Europe.
These panelists are insane
Peter Frankopan - interesting historian. As for the war, if Ukraine manages to threaten and even evicts Russian forces from Crimea then anything is possible.
I used to think history repeats itself, now I don't. I think times change, situations change, people's perceptions change, circumstances change ...... I love history, it's a valuable tool for understanding the world and where you came from. I think all this posturing ( this is one of the better posturings by the way, in my opinion; I actually understand what is being talked about. ) is for academia and the history books of the future. . I have this very naive view point that countries should be each to his own in peace. Invasion ? Why would you want to be where you're not wanted ?
History always repeats itself.
I think there is an implicit assumption in your line of reasoning, which is that every modern day country is made up of homogienous people (at least dominantly, mostly). But they are not. Take Ukraine, if 2/3 wants to live with EU, 1/3 wants to live Russia, should the 1/3 be IGNORED? (the debate about minority rights among academics), and what if the 2/3 tries to FORCE the 1/3? I think there is no black/white answer, its best for all sides to be considerate. The challenge is when one party acts belligerently, it causes a chain reaction and EVERYONE becomes belligerent.
@@Ajox191 not exactly but it often does rhyme.
You'd want to be where you're not wanted to gain money
History repeats itself yesterday, today and tomorrow. This’s the fact and that your opinion.
Blowing smoke up A holes springs to mind
Peter Frankopan is the most nuanced of the three.
Well..done..guys...
I am not sure how the emotion argument adds to the post-hoc explanation of why the invasion took place. I think the argument of Frankopan also is not particularly that Putin was trying to be opportunistic. This ignores a number of facts that preceded the invasion and the evidence that Ukrainian army had effectively become a well oiled NATO proxy and time was working against Russia, not in its favour.
Why was it not possible to implement the Minsk Accords and why is it so wrong to dismiss the Russian Federations legitimate security concerns?
The US / UK duo has prepared Poles' most bleak future. Poles love to fight "for our freedom and yours!" They still do not understand that the T-shirt of the "leader" in this armed conflict with Russia, has a yellow colour on the front, but a shooting target sign is printed on the back!
Because Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, fought over 8 years of war against Ukraine, and invaded Ukraine again in 2022. Ukraine's security concern can only be satisfied with a demilitarized Russia.
@@TorianTammas What a twat! The medusas survived with no brain for thousands of years, there is your chance...hopefully they are not allowing you to vote! Another victim of the "mockingbird operation", LMFAO - by western standards you can be promoted to the position of an EXPERT & or a PROFESSOR!!!
@@TorianTammas Because the U.S. 'invaded ' (coup-ed') Ukraine in 2014, the Ukrainian army fought 8 yrs against its own ppl in the Donbas, and NATO provoked Russia's intervention in 2022. Russia's concerns can only be satisfied with a demilitarized Ukraine.