Confirmation the West vetoed Ukraine peace deal

Summary

The 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

00:00

🔍 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.

05:02

🗣️ 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.

10:03

🚀 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.

Keywords

💡Peace deal

A peace deal refers to an agreement between conflicting parties aimed at ending hostilities and establishing peaceful relations. In the video's context, it discusses the potential for a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine that was allegedly disrupted by external influences. The script mentions that there were 'peace discussions' and that a deal was 'close to the successful end' before being interfered with, highlighting the theme of missed opportunities for conflict resolution.

💡Victoria Nuland

Victoria Nuland is an American diplomat who has served in various positions within the U.S. Department of State. In the script, Nuland is mentioned as a source confirming the existence of peace negotiations and the interference in these negotiations. Her role is significant as it underscores the involvement of U.S. officials in the geopolitical dynamics of the Ukraine-Russia conflict.

💡Boris Johnson

Boris Johnson, mentioned in the script, is the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. The transcript suggests that Johnson played a role in advising against a peace deal, which implies a broader Western influence on Ukraine's decisions regarding the conflict. This keyword is tied to the narrative of external manipulation in peace negotiations.

💡Neutrality

Neutrality in the context of the video refers to a state's non-alignment with any major power bloc, aiming to maintain an impartial stance in international conflicts. The script discusses Ukraine's potential neutrality as a term of the peace deal, which would have significant implications for its military and political relations with other countries, particularly Russia and the West.

💡Weapon Systems

Weapon systems mentioned in the script refer to the military hardware and technologies that a country possesses or is allowed to have. The discussion around limiting Ukraine's future weapon systems under a peace deal is a central point of contention, as it would affect Ukraine's military capabilities and strategic autonomy.

💡Propaganda

Propaganda is a form of communication aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position. In the video, the term is used to critique the narrative that dismisses the possibility of a peace deal, suggesting that certain outlets and officials are spreading disinformation to maintain a particular viewpoint on the conflict.

💡Proxy War

A proxy war is a conflict in which two states or groups indirectly engage in combat through third-party non-state actors. The script implies that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine is being sustained as a proxy war, with larger geopolitical interests at play, which is why a peace deal is resisted by certain parties.

💡Escalation

Escalation in the context of the video refers to the increasing intensity or severity of the conflict. The script discusses the potential for further escalation, such as the provision of long-range missile systems to Ukraine, which could significantly alter the dynamics of the conflict and potentially lead to more severe consequences.

💡Long-range missile strikes

Long-range missile strikes are military actions involving the use of missiles capable of hitting targets at great distances. The script suggests that the U.S. might authorize Ukraine to use U.S.-supplied weapons for long-range strikes, which would be a significant escalation in the conflict and could potentially target areas deep within Russia.

💡Donbas

The Donbas is a region in Eastern Ukraine that has been a focal point of the conflict between Ukraine and pro-Russian separatists. The script mentions the status of Crimea and Donbas as part of the peace deal negotiations, indicating that resolving the situation in these regions is a key aspect of achieving a comprehensive peace agreement.

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]