Confirmation the West vetoed Ukraine peace deal
Summary
TLDRThe transcript discusses the alleged interference by former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson in peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, as confirmed by Victoria Nuland. It highlights the US and UK's opposition to a peace deal that would have limited Ukraine's military capabilities and prevented it from hosting advanced US weapon systems. The conversation also touches on the broader geopolitical context, including the West's stance on Ukraine's neutrality and the potential for escalated military support to Ukraine, despite previous peace overtures.
Takeaways
- 🔍 The script discusses the possibility of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine that was allegedly disrupted by UK interference under then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
- 🗣️ Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Ukrainian representative Arami have confirmed that there were peace negotiations that were halted due to external advice.
- 🏴 The UK's involvement is highlighted as a key factor in the breakdown of peace talks, with Victoria Nuland's confirmation adding weight to these claims.
- 📜 Putin's main condition for the peace deal was the inclusion of limits on the types of weapon systems Ukraine could possess, effectively neutralizing its military capabilities.
- 🚫 There were no corresponding constraints on Russia, such as a requirement to pull back troops or limit its military presence near the Ukrainian border.
- 🤔 Questions were raised about the fairness and strategic implications of the proposed peace deal, leading to its eventual collapse.
- 🗣️ The script challenges the mainstream narrative that the US and its allies were not involved in preventing a peace deal, citing multiple officials' admissions.
- 🔥 The script suggests that the US's opposition to the peace deal was due to a desire to maintain Ukraine's ability to host advanced US weapon systems near Russia's borders.
- 🔄 There's a pattern of the US initially ruling out certain military support to Ukraine and then later considering or authorizing it, indicating a potential escalation in support.
- 💥 The script ends with a critique of the US's policy, suggesting that the decision to block the peace deal and continue military support is leading to unnecessary suffering and loss of life.
Q & A
What was the main condition of the peace deal according to Victoria Nuland's statement?
-Victoria Nuland's statement suggests that Russia's main condition was the inclusion of limits on the types of weapon systems Ukraine could have after the deal, which would effectively neuter Ukraine's military capabilities.
Why did the peace deal negotiations fall apart according to the script?
-The peace deal negotiations fell apart because it became clear that the deal would leave Ukraine militarily weakened with no similar constraints on Russia, leading to questions about the deal's fairness and desirability.
What role did the UK, specifically Boris Johnson, play in the peace deal negotiations according to the script?
-According to the script, Boris Johnson interfered in the negotiations, advising Ukrainians to stop negotiating and to pursue a military victory instead of a peace deal.
What was the US's stance on the peace deal as per the script?
-The script implies that the US, along with the UK, opposed the peace deal because it would have limited Ukraine's ability to host advanced US weapon systems near Russia's borders.
What is the significance of the statement made by Victoria Nuland in the context of the peace deal?
-Victoria Nuland's statement is significant as it is a high-level admission from a US official about the actual reasons behind the US's opposition to the peace deal, highlighting the geopolitical interests at play.
How does the script describe the reaction of progressive outlets to the idea of the US blocking a peace deal?
-The script describes progressive outlets as dismissing the idea of the US blocking a peace deal as Russian disinformation and mocking those who suggested the US stood in the way of peace.
What is the script's view on the narrative surrounding the peace deal and the war in Ukraine?
-The script suggests that the narrative surrounding the peace deal is being manipulated to sustain a proxy war, with facts and admissions from officials being buried to maintain this narrative.
What does the script suggest about the internal dynamics within Ukraine and the West's understanding of them?
-The script implies that there is a lack of understanding or acceptance in the West, particularly in Washington, of the internal dynamics within Ukraine, such as the rights of ethnic Russians and the implications of the Maidan coup.
What is the script's take on the potential provision of long-range missile strikes to Ukraine?
-The script suggests that the US is signaling a potential escalation in the conflict by considering the provision of long-range missile strikes to Ukraine, which could be used to strike deep into Russia.
How does the script characterize the relationship between the US and Ukraine in the context of the war?
-The script characterizes the relationship as one where the US is directing Ukraine to continue the war, sacrificing Ukrainian lives to maintain the ability to threaten Russia with US weapon systems.
Outlines
🔍 The Unraveling of a Potential Peace Deal
The paragraph discusses the alleged interference by former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson in peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, as suggested by Victoria Nuland. It highlights the skepticism around the peace deal's terms, which were heavily skewed in favor of Russia, potentially leaving Ukraine militarily weakened. The paragraph also touches on the criticism faced by those who claimed the US obstructed peace, and the broader implications of the peace deal's collapse on the ongoing conflict.
🗣️ US Policy and the Escalation of Conflict
This section delves into the US's stance on the Ukraine-Russia conflict, suggesting that the US opposed a peace deal to maintain the ability to position advanced weapon systems in Ukraine. It critiques the US's strategic interests and the impact of its decisions on the conflict's escalation. The paragraph also addresses the internal dynamics within Ukraine, including the treatment of ethnic Russians and the influence of nationalist movements, which are overlooked by Western policymakers.
🚀 Potential Authorization of Long-Range Strikes
The final paragraph speculates on the US's potential decision to authorize Ukraine to carry out long-range missile strikes into Russia. It connects this to a broader pattern of escalating military support and the influence of US political figures. The paragraph also highlights the irony of the US's stance, given its own extensive military exports, and criticizes the decision-making process that leads to continued conflict rather than peace.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Peace deal
💡Victoria Nuland
💡Boris Johnson
💡Neutrality
💡Weapon Systems
💡Propaganda
💡Proxy War
💡Escalation
💡Long-range missile strikes
💡Donbas
Highlights
Aaron discusses the possibility of a peace deal and the involvement of various political figures in its collapse.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Nala Benet's account of peace negotiations being close to a successful end.
Ukrainian representative Arami's confirmation of advice from Boris Johnson to halt peace negotiations.
The revelation that Putin's main condition for a peace deal was the limitation of Ukraine's military capabilities.
Criticism of the West's role in preventing a peace deal, with a focus on the US's stance.
The Gray Zone's coverage of the peace deal and the backlash they faced for suggesting US interference.
Victoria Nuland's confirmation of the West's involvement in the collapse of peace talks.
Discussion on the narrative surrounding the peace deal and its impact on the ongoing proxy war.
The claim that Russia's main demand was Ukrainian neutrality, which was a simple and not radical request.
The US's opposition to the peace deal due to desires to maintain Ukraine's ability to host US weapon systems.
Analysis of the internal dynamics within Ukraine and the West's lack of understanding of the situation.
The potential for the US to authorize long-range missile strikes with US weapons into Russia.
The pattern of the US ruling out certain military actions, only to later consider or authorize them.
The irony of the US complaining about other nations sending weapons to Russia while being a major supplier of arms.
The potential authorization of long-range strikes by Ukraine as a significant escalation in the conflict.
The implications of the peace deal's failure and the sacrifices made by Ukraine for the sake of US interests.
Transcripts
Aaron there could have been a peace deal
there were certainly peace discussions
you've been talking about this for
months and months and
months and now you have confirmation
from none other than Victoria nuland
there was a story first told by former
Israeli Prime Minister Nal Benet that
start was a story first told by former
Israeli Prime Minister Nala Benet that
that boss siid were really close to the
end to the the successful end of the of
the negotiations and then prime minister
Boris Johnson interfered and
stopped uh ukrainians prevented
ukrainians from from signing signing the
deal and then uh Ukrainian
representative arami kind of confirmed
it that yes he said in in an interview
that there was some kind of advice from
Boris Johnson to uh to stop negotiating
and to win this war militarily where is
the myth where where is the truth
relatively late in the
game um the ukrainians began asking for
advice uh on where this thing was going
and it became clear to us uh clear to
the Brits clear to
others that Putin's main condition was
buried in an Annex uh to this document
that they were working on and it
included limits on the precise kinds of
Weapons Systems that Ukraine could have
after the deal such that Ukraine would
basically be neutered as a military
force and there were no similar
constraints on Russia Russia wasn't
required to pull back Russia wasn't
wasn't required to have a buffer zone
from the Ukrainian border wasn't
required to have the same constraints on
its military facing Ukraine um
and so uh people inside Ukraine and
people outside Ukraine started asking
questions about whether this was a good
deal and it was at that point that it
that it fell
apart people inside and people outside
yeah yeah this is an extraordinary
statement for many reasons first of all
this is not news to people who watch The
Gray Zone we've been talking about this
from the start uh and of course uh we
we've been attacked uh for saying that
the US stood in the way of a peace deal
people like Progressive proxy Warriors
like former Bernie Sanders adviser Matt
D has called us out for saying that the
US stood in the way of a peace deal and
mocked the idea that the US did some
Progressive Outlets have published
articles basically dismissing this as
basically as Russian disinformation um
here's Novara media Novar there we go
yeah no the West no the West didn't halt
Ukraine's peace talks with Russia okay
yeah um well I I doubt even Victoria
nulan confirming that actually the West
did Will get them to issue a retraction
because because the facts don't matter
listen we've had so many officials admit
this now uh the top Ukrainian negotiator
said that all Russia wanted was
basically Ukrainian neutrality that was
their main demand another Ukrainian
negotiator said that Russia made a very
real compromise he said Putin did
everything possible to make peace the
admissions of all these people does
nothing to put a dent in the propaganda
narrative because the claim that there
was a peace deal undermines The
Narrative needed to sustain the proxy
war so it just all this gets buried um
but what's so this is just more evidence
for those who uh didn't need it because
we all know that this was the truth but
anyway what I think is really
significant here is I do think for the
first time we've gotten a high level
official to admit the actual reason why
the deal didn't go through previously
we've gotten a bunch of excuses remember
when the deal first collapsed and then
news of it came out that Boris Johnson
came over and told zalinski not to reach
the deal uh with Russia the EXC we got
was that this was because of the alleged
Russian atrocities in bcha and Ukraine
was so upset that they had they could
not make peace with Russia who would
carry out such horrific crimes now
there's plenty of reasons to question
that argument uh namely the fact that
even after the alleged uh atrocities
Creed up by Russia emerged zalinsky said
himself this is all more reason why we
have to make peace is to prevent more
atrocities now I'm not even weighing in
on what actually happened in bcha not
something I've looked into and even if
for all true as zinski said the way to
prevent more atrocities is stopping the
war so that claim never really uh
withstood scrutiny um and then you had
another excuse which emerged recently
which this was in the New York Times
article that came out uh recently which
for the first time actually published a
draft of a Ukrainian Russian peace
treaty it was very detailed and the
excuse we got then was that Russia tried
to insert a clause at the last minute
that would basically allow Russia to
insert to invade Ukraine at will and as
we've talked about before here on the
gry zone and I've written about that
also doesn't withstand scrutiny because
the whole deal was premised on uh peace
and no country being allowed to invade
Ukraine and basically Ukraine uh
Ukrainian officials and proxy Warriors
basically took some language that Russia
wanted about a joint consensus on how to
respond to Future aggression and they
tried to paint that as Putin trying to
sneak in some clouds about being able to
invade Ukraine but it just as we've
discussed that also didn't hold well now
we get Newan saying a brand new thing
notice how she doesn't mention bua she
doesn't mention this clause about Russia
being able to invade Ukraine she said
it's because Russia wanted limits on
what weapon systems could be placed in
Ukraine
no yes so you mean that you that Russia
after seeing Ukraine go through a coup
in which the US helped overthrow a
government calling for neutrality uh and
seeing that um there were that coup
government uh had a war on the donbas
because they didn't want to respect the
autonomous rights of ethnic Russian
ukrainians there after all this Russia
didn't want to have Ukraine basically
hosting Advanced us weapon systems right
on its borders uh so that's basically
Newan admitting that the US blocked this
treaty or opposed it because they want
to preserve the right of Ukraine to
basically be used to threaten Russia
with us weapon systems so I think
actually we're getting refreshingly for
the first time a candid admission as to
why the US blocked this deal what also
shows how she ex exists with within this
politically hermetic chamber where
there's no understanding of why anyone
would see any problem with placing heavy
weapons
yeah brought there from thousands of
miles away on a powerful country's
border to threaten that country yeah I
mean she doesn't she she she thought she
was like actually just laying to rest
why anyone would think that that peace
deal might have been a legitimate decent
offer because the thing that no one in
Washington or especially London or
Brussels in the realm of Queen Ursula
vand will accept is that Ukraine should
be neutral is that ukrainians had it
better when they were neutral uh and
they that that means they also can't
accept the internal dynamics of
Ukraine Sergey
lavro foreign minister of Russia
recently said that this is isn't about
territory it's not about us and our
desire to have territory it's about the
abreg of the rights of some 35% of
ukrainians who speak Russia who had
their rights completely erased after the
maidon coup which is correct and you can
see like what what's been happening
there Russian language stripped as an
official language not taught in schools
anymore the worship of Bandera the uh
jailing of Russians speaking critics of
the of the government The Disappearance
of hundreds of them hundreds of Human
Rights activist from the donbass just
killings of people across the donbass
all of that is not respected as a
grievance by Victoria Newland or anyone
in Washington I don't even think there's
an understanding of it um and so a war
is taking place to bring things back to
that point and it never will
and all we hear are calls for
escalation and it looks like uh Ukraine
actually will likely get its latest
request uh from the Biden Administration
which is for long range missile strikes
with us weapons into Russia it's not
simply saying oh should they have this
weapon system or that weapon system
there are a lot of things that go into
it do they know how to use it and some
of these sophisticated systems take
training and that's one of the other
things we've done can they they maintain
it because if you give them something
that falls apart in seven days because
it can't be maintained that doesn't do a
lot of good and then is it part of a
coherent strategy to achieve a very
clear objective all of those things have
to go into these decisions but what I
can tell you is we've adapted and
adjusted every step along the way we'll
continue to do that so not ruling out at
this stage we we don't we never rule out
but when we when we rule in we want to
make sure it's it's it's done in such a
way that it can advance what the
ukrainians are trying to
achieve uh how do you interpret that and
by the way I got a hard stop in about
two or three minutes okay well this is
follows the pattern first the US
actually does rule out certain steps
they did rule out attack thems they did
rule out cluster Munitions they did rule
out letting Ukraine use Us weapons to
strike across the border and every time
this is always the pattern Tony blank
comes along and says actually okay we're
not ruling it out now we're considering
it and then it gets authorized so this
is the latest step in the escalation lad
so if we're going by established pattern
so far I think this is Blink and
signaling that yes this permission will
be granted to Ukraine for long range
strikes and there's a quote circulating
from Mike McCall the chair of the house
Foreign Affairs committee saying that
blinkin told him that he's going to give
this authorization so I mean we'll see I
mean like you never know but uh if we're
going by established pattern I think
it's there there's a lot of reasons to
think that actually yes Biden is going
to authorize or whoever is making the
decision is going to authorize this step
I shouldn't say Biden anymore because
who knows knows what he's actually doing
and you know the irony they're
using allegations that Iran has sent uh
exported ballistic missiles to Russia as
justification for sending long-range
weapons to the ukrainians which can
strike Moscow Iran has denied this I
don't know what the case is but it's
it's so funny to hear the US complain
about North Korea or Iran uh sending
weapons to Russia when the US is the
like just so far outpaces anyone in
shipping weapons thousands of miles
away yeah well and the fact that that
allegation is being made that's a pretty
good sign that that as as you say will
be used as a pretext to let Ukraine uh
launch these long range strikes it's
just unbelievable especially in light of
Nan's admission that all this could have
been avoided had the US and UK just let
its client in keev reach a peace deal
that it negotiated itself with Russia
which was pretty simple one it was to
for Ukraine to declare neutrality which
is not a radical demand it was enshrined
in Ukraine's founding Constitution uh in
exchange Russia would withdraw to the
pre-invasion lines uh the status of
Crimea and donbas would be worked out
directly between Putin and zalinski and
especially given that you have many
elements of the alter nationalist
movement inside Ukraine who don't even
want the donbas because it has all these
ethic Russians who want to speak Russian
and want closer ties with Russia I mean
like the fact that the us basically
ordered zinsky to continue this war and
sacrifice his country how many hundreds
of thousands of people have died just so
Victoria Nan can sit there with a smirk
on her face now and say what a wonderful
thing it is that we block this deal
because it would have prevented Ukraine
from hosting advanc us weapon systems
inside its territory it's uh it's
unbelievable it's unbelievable and this
is why Dick Cheney is supporting the
Democrats this is why the McCain family
whose McCain Institute has actually
cashed in on Ron sales of Javelin
missiles to
Ukraine this is supporting kamla Harris
this is why the neocons have come home
to the Democratic party this is why
[Music]
Weitere ähnliche Videos ansehen
রাশিয়ার বিরুদ্ধে কেন যুদ্ধের প্রস্তুতি ন্যাটোর? | Russia-Ukraine | NATO | Somoy International
D.L.Sky dọa c.Âu, trùm LA TÔ "bơm đểu" H.Kỳ! "Hãy để Pu Tin thực thi trọng trách Chúa giao"! | 29-1
How PM Modi Tried to Broker Peace Between Russia & Ukraine: What Went Wrong? World Affairs
"Soros is FULLY controlling Ukraine and Zelensky is finished" | Redacted with Clayton Morris
Rusya, Ukrayna'yı Kursk'tan Çıkaramıyor
Điểm Nóng Cuối Tuần: Zelensky Âm Mưu Loại Bỏ Zaluzhny, Nga Tấn Công Kiev Dữ Dội || Bàn Cờ Quân Sự
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)