What to Expect from the Upcoming Putin-Trump Meeting?

All right, hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. Excited to be with you as always. I have an interesting topic for you, something I know quite a bit. I wrote articles about it back in 2017-18 when Donald Trump was elected president first time, and especially prior to the Helsinki NATO Summit in 2018. Second thing is I wrote a book about Russia in which I detailed a lot about Donald Trump's foreign policy, so to speak. So anyway, this is what I'm going to be addressing for you today, uh, providing you my own analysis as to why the upcoming meeting might not amount to much. Others are saying they will be, uh, the opposite of it. A lot of, a lot of things could change and so forth. And this is what we're going to get involved into discussing today. So, but before I do that, like always, like to say hi to our community. I know some people are impatient. They say, I don't take— I don't get away, right? I don't get it right away into the topic. Why? If the only people who learn to be patient a little bit. So, but to me, this means a lot when I say hi to our community because that's— to me, it's important. Uh, uh, uh, Zeke Fred, good to see you. Kevin James, as always. Hanging G, as always. Timeline Dunkley from New York City, Willie Holman, Juan Casey, Matt Becky, as always Francis Tango, good to see you as always. Who else is here? Let me see. Phil, good to see you. Army with Harmony, as always. Alex Talokin and Peter Alodino, good to see you. Watching you in Paris. Welcome from Paris. Uh, I think I might be visiting France, uh, sometime soon. So good to see you, Peter. Uh, Rumples One, Taiwan still as always. Emerson, uh, Bangura, good to see you. All right guys, let me first, uh, ask the key question regarding this particular topic we're gonna be, uh, discussing here. So now, who initiated the call? For this meeting. Remember, Trump is not a politician, and even for Trump to go about it this way, it breaks protocol. Why? Because Trump is not officially a president yet. So maybe could have the conversation stayed, uh, uh, sort of just between, uh, the two through some other channels. But anyway, any— who initiated the call for the meeting? Second question, How likely is the meeting to yield a good result or good outcome given what's going on around the world? All the geopolitical hot buttons will be part of this conversation during this upcoming meeting. So third question is, can peace be achieved? When I say peace, I am not talking just about Ukraine. I am talking about also peace in the Asia Pacific. For what lies ahead? Peace in Latin America, peace in Africa, and peace, of course, in West Asia or Middle East. That is, that's what I mean. By, by the way, guys, just for you to understand, a lot of people might think I'm referring only to Ukraine, but Ukraine is just part of it. And the fourth question is, what are truly Trump's intentions for this meeting? I mean, don't tell me the guy cares about the welfare of America or or humanity for that matter. I got nothing against Mr. Trump, you know, and I'll tell him to his face if I ever get an opportunity. But as far as foreign policy, the guy is clueless. I'll say the same about foreign leaders, same about ours. I don't shy away from that. But anyway, those are the questions that we ought to consider when we discussing this, and I'm going to be asking you some questions as we move forward. So Before I'll start here, some housekeeping items. Uh, I'm glad you guys liked the video analysis that I did about HTS reaching out to Russia for help. So I am going to be releasing another video tomorrow, analysis that is, about really what's going on in Europe regarding energy. You do not want to miss that, so check it out. I already released it for the members, channel members, which I'm very grateful for their support and yours as well. It just is the right thing to do. So, but be on the lookout for it tomorrow at 7:15 AM Central Standard Time. Second thing is my upcoming interview with Maria Lordestica, known as Malo, from Philippines. So it's scheduled for the, the 17th of January, meaning next Friday at 1900 hours. So, and third thing is I am working on a very interesting story for you from Africa. This will really, uh, need your attention to understand how geopolitics evolve in the dynamics within major powers or the key players, that is. So, and this is what I have to share with you. So let's get in into— but before that, by the way guys, please make sure to subscribe if this is your first time. We are about 7,000 subscribers from reaching 100,000. So if you guys can help me out with this, uh, I will be very, very grateful. So please make sure to subscribe if you have not done so already. So, all right, let's address now our key, and I'm going to be sharing some pictures with you guys, uh, also pertaining to this, uh, topic here, just to put it in perspective. So, so Mr. Trump is saying that there are now arrangements underway for an upcoming meeting between, uh, uh, Trump and Putin, that is. So, and of course, Mr. Trump made the announcement, uh, uh, uh, without specifying— and this is the key, guys— without specifying the details or the timetable for the talks. Well, of course, because if he does, first of all, as I said earlier, that will break protocol. He's not a president yet, so he cannot be speaking, uh, about a meeting with a head of state when he is not representing the US government at that time. So, and there is why there is no specifications regarding the timetable for talks or even the topics that's going to be discussed. But like I said, are we going to be expecting anything of substance from this? I'll let you be the judge on this one once I share, uh, some, uh, some images for you and so forth. So now there is one idea that, uh, the, uh, uh, Mr. Trump said, and I quote, he wants to meet and we are setting it up, meaning he, Vladimir Putin. Now that's to me The way you phrase this, because Donald Trump doesn't have that kind of diplomatic finesse in understanding how to word certain things. So that is going to come across as a superiority when you say he wants to meet. And what— that's he, he has a name. Usually you address individuals by the name in this setting here. So, but what's interesting about it, this one was, uh, the statement was made prior to the meeting of the governors in Mar-a-Lago, Mar-a-Lago in Florida, in Palm Beach. That's where his residency is. So, and the thing is, Mr. Trump has already made it clear as far as, uh, he wants to end the war. And of course, when Trump said, uh, when I am president, I'm gonna end the war in 24 hours, yeah, wishful thinking. That's just like, what are you talking about? Do you understand the complications of the conflict to begin with? And if you think you're going to solve it in 24 hours, that just shows arrogance, plain and simple. So, and this is what Mr. Trump is thinking about, uh, the, uh, Russian-Ukraine, uh, conflict, that is. So, uh, on the other hand, the Kremlin, on their, on their part, that there is no prerequisites for staging the meeting. In other words, there is no official request for the meeting to begin with. So however, the Kremlin issued statements to put it in perspective, and I'm going to share it word for word. Quote: The president— meaning Vladimir Putin, that is— has repeatedly stated his openness to contact with the international leaders, including the US president including Donald Trump, Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters, end of quote. It shows you also, of course, the Russian president, uh, he is a shrewd diplomat. He's been around long enough to know how to manage global affairs. And, uh, and please guys, correct me if I'm wrong, do you think that, uh, Putin is smart enough to understand how to play the game? Regarding geopolitics? Just put in the chat box yes or no, please. So, and this is where that, uh, the statement from the Kremlin is to highlight that to Putin, he's thinking in terms of, I'm ready to talk to whomever as long as my conditions are met. In other words, there are certain requests that the Russians are proposing. They've already proposed it. I read that the security plan that they proposed to NATO back then, the 12 points, and of course NATO rejected it, the US rejected it. I read also the proposal that China proposed, and of course the US rejected that. So in other words, the collective West headed by the US did not want to see an end to the conflict for a reason. So, and that's part of what this conversation is going to be about. And like I said, uh, uh, of course, uh, Trump has never made any concrete proposals for a ceasefire or a peace deal. You talk about, I'm gonna— I, in this case Donald Trump— end the war in 24 hours. Come on, guy, don't be too overconfident, or be overconfident, or too think— or thinking highly of yourself that you're gonna resolve an issue that is so complicated. So, and at the same time, there's no concrete evidence because when it comes down to geopolitics, you're gonna have to put the, uh, the dots on the letter, as we say, as far as what are you proposing, how you intend to solve this issue. So however, here is the key that I need you to understand. So that Donald Trump already floated the idea, or the proposal, that is. And the reason he's saying this is to pave the way for what lies ahead, just in case. I told you so, that's what Mr. Trump's gonna say later on. Here is what he's floating, the idea or the proposal to end the war with, uh, with the, uh, between Ukraine and, and, and Russia, is that the latter— the former, rather, Ukraine will have to cede large part of its territory to Russia for the foreseeable future. This is what Mr. Trump is saying. So, and as I said, as an analyst, I have to think, is Mr. Trump paving the way for his intentions of wanting to use military force to take over Panama and to take over Greenland? Which means what, guys? It means that if I am gonna— I, Trump, in this case, give in to the Russians, the Russians will give me something in return. See what I'm getting at? This is what I'm thinking that Mr. Trump is paving the way for once he inaugurates the office, comes January 20th, which is like a week from today or so. So on the other hand, the comedian, the comedian— where is his picture? The comedian president. The corrupted, as corrupted as he can get, uh, uh, uh, Zelensky. That is so— what he's saying is, oh, Mr. Trump is gonna be the decisive force in this conflict. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. What the comedian is doing is trying to strike the ego of Mr. Trump by saying, is Mr. Trump going to be the decisive force? It's not going to be Trump, it's going to be the Russian president because Russia have already its conditions. So, so funny how comedian Z is— well, the guy is comedian, what do you expect? He has no understanding of really what global affairs are, are all about. So now this way It's because Zelensky, he's saying that he's gonna have to have the, the, the, the, the territory that Russia occupied will have to be returned, uh, uh, or negotiated with the Ukrainians later on. I don't think so, because here is why. Mr. Trump has already frequently mocked Zelensky as a salesman, and I put this in quote, because it was in an article stated that way, and caused concern among allies for really criticizing Putin. This is what now Zelensky, the comedian Zelensky, is gonna try to take advantage of, is to create that wedge between European leaders and Mr. Trump. You know, do I agree with Trump foreign policy? No, I don't. Do I even think that Trump is qualified for president? No, I don't. But on the other hand, this is what some of us Americans wanted, so you're gonna have to live with what you vote for. But like I always say, the system is set up that way that you have only two options, either this or that, meaning either Republicans or Democrats, no third option. And in a democracy, that's a flaw in my opinion. In a democracy, you're supposed to have choices. But the system is not allowing that. So, so, and this is why, uh, uh, sort of, uh, uh, Mr. Trump's are already hinting and how his approach to this Ukrainian conflict is gonna go. For example, when he's saying that, uh, uh, sympathize with the Russian possessions. That Ukraine should not— is the key word— should not be part of NATO. No, because on the other hand, somewhere in this, the outgoing president, the incompetent Biden, he's saying no, they should be join NATO. Well, Biden doesn't know day from night. One who gets us into more conflicts to begin with. This is what I'm saying, guys. This is not about Democrats or Republicans. If you happen to be an American watching this, you all know what I am referring to. Two faces of the same coin. Simple as that. But till the American people wake up, they— nothing's going to change. So do you blame those politicians? No. Do you blame the people that voted for them? Simple as that. So enough of playing games with this, well, he is not qualified. What— beside the point is what have we done? For first of all, if you see that no one is qualified, why should you vote? Well, I vote for the lesser evil of them. No, it doesn't work that way. Doesn't work that way. So, so now here is the thing where, uh, uh, uh, Mr. Trump sort of often criticized the large— and rightly so. Now, I agree with him on this. He, he has been criticizing the large amount of military aid the US has sent to the corrupted government of Ukraine, let alone the money. Do you guys have any idea how much Biden sent to Ukraine? $175 billion for aid in Ukraine. Corruption. Because that $175 billion can be used right here at home. You all saw what's going on in California now with the fire. You all saw what's going on, or what happened in North Carolina, in some other parts, in Mississippi, in LA, in New York. And yet we are sending our money to Ukraine, corrupted government. But again, from one corrupted government to another. Let's say it straightforward, because truth matters. And it's my tax dollars, because I had to pay last year taxes to the government, only the government to take that money and send it. I don't mind if that money was spent right here at home on infrastructure that is crumbling before our own eyes, on a healthcare system that is crumbling, on education that is dysfunctional, on a corrupt tax system that is not even or fair to the middle class. And even our middle class, if you go back a few decades ago, we were in the above 60, almost 70% in middle class. Look at where, where it is today, almost at about 50 to less than 50%. That's how middle class is shrinking in America. Well, at the same time, an American president is sending money to Ukraine, $175 billion. Let that sit in. So, and that includes the $60 billion for security assistance. Where is that money? I went to the border and I crossed into Ukraine and I saw— what I saw was a track, trucks of Tesla vehicles going in into Ukraine from Poland. Why the heck is a truck, or are trucks of your— of Tesla vehicles going into a war zone? Who's gonna be purchasing a Tesla vehicle in a war zone? And where is the money for that? But here is where the concern now that this comedian Z is having, so is the Europeans, is is that Mr. Trump has no intentions of continuing this aid to the corrupted government of Ukraine. Why? Because he wants to bring the war to an end. But again, he has to be realistic about the aspiration of ending a conflict in 24 hours. So Trump has also persistently sort of complained that Washington which is a sort of NATO's partner. Washington is the one that put in the bill for the spending on Europe, on NATO. That is a relic of the past. And I am sure he's gonna be revisiting this issue. This is why now you have Europeans' concerns. So most European members, okay, because I mean, like Montenegro added to NATO, what does, No offense to Montenegro. What does Montenegro have to add to NATO? Why does NATO even exist if the whole purpose was to fight off the Soviet Union? Well, Soviet Union ceased to exist since 1991. Then what is the purpose? When I was in Afghanistan, there were NATO troops coming. Why the heck are you doing here? Isn't your mission was supposed to be about pushing back against the Soviet Union at that time. So, and this is why some European countries have moved now into increasing their spending to about 2% of the gross, gross domestic product, or GDP, that is, which is why what the minimum of NATO's recommendations. However, Mr. Trump is asking them to raise it to 5%. So You're going to be thinking to yourself, if you are a European incompetent leader, why would I increase that when I can have the Americans pay for it and use that money, meaning the increased one, use it for my own infrastructure, for my own education system, for my own healthcare? Let the American pay, meaning American taxpayers, me, you, if you happen to be an American and others. So I say it out loud on the record, my tax dollar should not be sent to NATO, should not be sent to any other country for that matter. My tax dollar should be spent right here at home on the issues that matter to us Americans. And I look at, for example, the infrastructure that is, and I compare it to the one that I saw with my own eyes in China Couldn't believe that. Could not believe that. So when you have a, a sort of, uh, President Biden's kind of, we're gonna support Ukraine, it's nonsense. It's corruption. That's all it is. So now here's the thing, what I need you to understand. And by the way, this is just images from iStock. I give credit to the iStock here just to highlight to you where things are. As far as why the conflict will be very, very, very complicated, uh, for Mr. Trump to end in 24 hours. It's not going to happen. So, uh, I also have some, uh, pictures. By the way, the media here is not disclosing the full picture of where the conditions are in Ukraine, a massive devastation. So, and I give credit to Emilio, uh, this is a picture. Those are people under bridge After the Russian attacked one, they're hiding under the bridge because they want to move somewhere else. But infrastructure is done for. I just want to tell you this. And even when I crossed over into Ukraine and saw it, it's, uh, there is no way. And we are talking about rebuilding. So, so now what the comedian did, he signed a contract with none other than Blackwater. I'm sorry, BlackRock, not Blackwater, BlackRock, for rebuilding. You all remember, right? Nation building, nation buildings, or rebuilding, that is. We said the same argument in Iraq. Is there anything that is being built in Iraq? And by the way, shame on Iraq for allowing the forces, foreign forces, to be on their soil, because that's what paved the way also for what's going on in Syria. That's a conversation for another day. I'd be happy to do it for you guys should you be interested in this one. Yes. And, uh, so when, when they're talking about the, uh, Zelensky is very, very concerned. Comedian Z is very concerned about how Trump is going to approach this because Trump has no intentions of supporting, keep giving money to Ukraine. But on the other hand, don't be fooled by that. What Mr. Trump already mentioned about using force to acquire Panama Canal, and of course to force the Danish— the Denmark to sell Greenland, and to push on an economic pressure on Canada. Those are not— those are— this is not a behavior of, of so-called be a rule of law nation. You know, president shouldn't be talking like that. Otherwise we're gonna go back to colonialism, that is. So because that's what it means. If, if Trump saying the one that I am not for war, I am not, but you are saying you're gonna use force to take over Panama Canal, how do you think the world's going to read this? And this is why, why you having now the Europeans Uh, but the Europeans are weak anyway. You got the like of this guy here, Olaf Scholz, incompetent, politically so weak. That's all they're saying between him, this one here, the, the liar one, and this guy here, Macron. All of them. And this, by the way, give credit to Getty Images for this picture here. So, uh, what they're saying is that the idea that we have to push back against Mr. Trump assertion that he's going to take Greenland and all that, you know. Funny, so funny how weak the Europeans are. And I disclose this in my, in my book, and I'm going to share some script with you from that, uh, or excerpt rather, from, uh, uh, my Russia book, because I did address this European issues, uh, for you to understand. What I found very interesting— let me get a picture here for you too. Uh, even what's her name, uh, the, the, uh, the, the sleazy Meloni, which by the way had dinner in Florida with Mr. Trump a week ago or so prior to the statements. So do you remember her when she came to power and saying we shouldn't be sanctioning Russia and all that because Italy does business with Russia? And all of a sudden she was flipped. You know, the same thing she did about, uh, China when she decided, oh, I am not going to agree to the BRI. She flipped because we pressured her. European leaders have no gut whatsoever to stand on their feet, politically speaking, you know. And if you only know the amount of corruption this woman was involved in with certain entities. Yeah, they quashed that investigation. You don't hear much about it. And this guy is like, wasn't even qualified to be a president. Even his predecessors— Sarkozy now is involved in a corruption that took place with, uh, uh, uh, with, uh, uh, Libya. So, and now you have the like of Meloni here. So And, uh, for my, for my own analysis, guys, I wanted to do this for you in, in on three levels. On a global stage, okay, that's one. Second one, on the European position. And third one, on the Russia-U— on the Russia-China friendships. So this is part of why I wanted to do this analysis for you. So Now, I had a chance to read— of course, you know me, I, I have to read the analysis from other entities and so forth, and, uh, just to put things in perspective for you. So, and I had a chance to read one, uh, from, uh, uh, I think it was, uh, Foreign Policy, if I am not mistaken. Yeah, that's what it was from the foreign policy aspect. So basically, when you have to think about it, and this, this report that I read was written by Robin Dixon, Catherine Belton, and Francisca Ebo. What they are arguing, they're arguing that Mr. Putin seeks to conclude a grand deal on European security, which leaves Ukraine at the mercy of the Kremlin, weakens NATO, and enhances Russia's position as global power. Do you guys see the— can you see between— can you read between the lines, the intentions of this word choice? I'm gonna repeat this. Those three authors stated that Putin, and I quote, "Putin seeks to conclude a grand deal on European security, which leaves Ukraine at the mercy of the Kremlin, weakens NATO, and enhances Russia's position as a global power," end of quote. So, and their argument was before any talks between the US and Russia, It is already foregone conclusion that the Kremlin has carefully assessed what the message of Trump is, because when you think about it, the Russians have already made their own assessments and they are smart enough to know how to read the intentions of foreign leaders. So, because here is the thing, according to a Russian analyst This Russian analyst concluded that Trump's message and the ambitions and the weaknesses, all of them converge onto— in the— converge onto how Mr. Trump approached geopolitics, because that geopolitical naivety is the short attention span and tendency to rely on intuition rather than reason. This is what the concern about when Trump says something like, for example, I am gonna go buy Greenland, I am gonna use force, military force, to take Green— uh, to take Panama. Yeah, it's because this is not thought through. There is no logical reasoning to the statements like this. And this is what this Russian analysts are saying. They said, and I quote, I think Trump is deliberately keeping quiet because he doesn't know. This is what, uh, his name is Konstantin Remikov. He's an analyst. And they conclude that throughout the campaign they were watching, they Russian analysts were watching that Mr. Trump is not a deep thinker on geopolitical issues, end of quote. So, and once again, like I mentioned, because you think about it, how much the US has sent— when we think about the global stage, the US sent money, $175 billion, including the $60 billion for security assistance. You know, basically it's corruption. That's all it is, guys. I need you to understand this. There is no nation building, there is no help, there is nothing. That money was given to just circulate because that money is making a circle and coming back in a different setting. You can use a whatever term that comes to your mind as far as what do we mean by when we do that. You all know what I mean, right? So now here is the thing that I need you to understand. So if we are to think about the upcoming summit between Trump and Putin, could this mean— and I'm going to ask you a question— could this mean that they gonna divide the world? Meaning Could Putin, President Putin, and President-elect Trump, once he is— once he inaugurated the office, could they— and please answer yes or no— could they agree to dividing the world according to their own interests? Yes or no? Let me see on, uh, on, uh, on the chat box. I'd like to see your answer. Uh, Alan S, you say no. Phil, you say yes. Ramples, you say yes. Uh, pardon me, who else? Cap, you say no. Prata, you say— where are you, Prata? You say yes. Spheres of influence, I see. Hang and G, you see no, bipartisan. Uh, Muhammad Kari Karim, you say collective EU leaders are totally liar colonials. That's correct. So Clude 55, you say yes. Muhammad Karim, you say no. Okay, I see your point, guys, but there is the possibility that one of these things is going to be the sphere of influence if they can work out their details as far as, hey, we'll conclude the Ukraine, you'll give us something in return. Let's say, let's say in Latin America, let's say in, uh, uh, uh, West Asia, Middle East, let's say in some other parts of the world. So because here's the thing, if and when Putin and Trump agree to divide the world into spheres of influence. That will ensure, on one hand, this— the Russian superiority over Ukraine, because Russia made it clear that non-negotiable, the admission of Ukraine into NATO, that's not— that's a done deal, ain't gonna happen ever. So, but that will give also Russia the upper hand on Ukraine, Georgia, and former Soviet neighbors. Who are not NATO members. So, and this could in reality change the dynamics for Europe. Why? Because you're gonna have some entities inside Washington selling the narrative of fear as to the security architecture of Europe. What do I mean by this? Meaning they're gonna be hyping up the reports and analysis that how much now Russia in a better position to invade Europe. We've heard this before, which you and I know it's a lie. First, Russia has no intentions of doing this. Two, Russia will not afford to do so because it's not about having nuclear stuff, whatever. No, it's more than that. And this is why, uh, uh, uh, to those around Mr. Trump, so they, they are arguing far more than just this when you look at the global stage. And this one has to do with the division they want to create when it comes down to Russia and China. And I will address this as I move forward. As a matter of fact, Trump himself said, and I quote, I would have to dismantle the alliance between China and Russia. Good luck with the— end of quote. Good luck with that, Mr. Trump. So, so it's, it's not going to work because Russia and China moved on. So now comes the Europeans. Which are clueless and useless and whatever you want to term you want to use. So here is what the Europeans are saying, and I quote: We must stand together. European leaders warn Trump over Greenland, in this case, threat because Trump's refusal to rule out the usage of military force, economic coercion to seize the islands cause the disquiet, uh, uh, for the Europeans. But you and I know the Europeans can do nothing. Europeans will do what they are told whether they like it or not. Why? Because they are not independent. Here is what I argued back then, guys, and I did right. About this one within the context of, uh, of the Europeans' division and directions at that time. That is what I wrote in my Russia book. You know, after the fall of the Union, uh, of the, of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic, uh, USSR, in 1991, many in the United States and Europe claimed that the Cold War ended. And that the capitalist system has triumphed. For much of the post-Cold War era, the assumption among Washington elite circles and Europe was that the Russian Federation, which is Russia today, no longer had the power it once did. That thinking among Washington elite persists even today. However, when Russia took over Crimea he sent a strong message to the West, letting them know that Russia will forbid Western actors from dictating the orientation and direction of the post-Soviet states, known in Russia as its near abroad. In my opinion, in his 2014 speech, Putin laid the groundwork for seeking a new security and political arrangements with the West, a new Yalta, if you will. Doing so allows Russia to redefine its sphere of influence, which in the Kremlin's eyes should extend in Europe and Euroasia, once within the boundaries of the Russian Empire and later the USSR. It became evident to Putin that after the fall of the USSR, the West deliberately ignored Russia's interests. Then when NATO started to expand eastward, it sent a strong message to Moscow that time is of the essence for Russia to plot its global strategy in the hope of achieving its goals no matter what. End of quote. That's what I argued back then, because it makes more sense to me. Now, when you think about the third level, which is Russia-China friendship— because remember, I told you I'll divide this analysis into three levels: one on the world stage, one on the European front, and the third one, which I'm going to discuss now, is between Russia and China friendship. Once again, just to remind those who just happen to join us here please make sure to subscribe to my channel. I will greatly appreciate your support. So when it comes down to Russia and China, very, very interesting dynamics. Why is this? It's because— and again, I, you know, one thing about when you are a writer and you write about geopolitics, you know, your positions tends to change over time. You know what I argued 15 years ago, there are some of it still holds till today, but some other things have changed, and that's okay, that's normal. That doesn't mean you are flip-flopping, that is not the case. All it means, guys, is that the event— because geopolitics is not a constant, is evolving. I mean, think about it, just think about it. Whoever thought that we will hear an American elected president saying, I will use force to take over a land, or do this, or do that. And to those in the West who said the invasion of Russia to Ukraine, it was no invasion, it was a military operation, because of a reason. Because the West never respected the wishes of the Russians that there should be no NATO presence near Russia's doorsteps. The same argument China is making in the South China Sea or in its— on its island Taiwan, that is. And you all see now what's going on in the Philippines. Australia is gone because Australia has no sovereignty. We are dictating the policies for Australia. As a matter of fact, as one who works in Washington, I was aware of that the decisions regarding Australia are made in Washington, not in Canberra. The same arguments I make about Japan and South Korea. And you are all aware of the sanctions that the US imposed on Japan, right, regarding the steel. We sanctioning Japan is the same thing we did about 5 years ago when we threatened— and I did a video on it— guys, or 4 years ago, something like that. I did a video on it about how we were threatening Germany if he moves forward with the Nord Stream 2. Speaking of Nord Stream 2, before, while I'm thinking about it, I saw a tweet or something regarding the involvements of Poland and the US. It's wrong. Poland has nothing to do with that. It was a naval asset unit in Norway. And this according to credible sources. So, uh, and, and it was disclosed anyway. So, so Poland has nothing to do with this. So whoever that, that, uh, tweet that I saw, I— and I should have responded to it right away. Sometimes I don't respond, but for a reason. But anyway, now you come back to China Russia friendship, which moved beyond. So if Mr. Trump is thinking about breaking up this alliance, that will be wishful thinking. And the reason being because their friendship will be hard to break. It was a great article by Alexander Kapuev, and I'm going to share it with you guys. No, because the one thing you never want to happen is never want Russia and China uniting. This is what they argue, the, the author argue, and Alexander. So what kind of— it's too late for that. And, and by the way, this wasn't the, the, the writer. The writer just put it in his article. This is Donald Trump stating in an interview, the one thing you never want to have to see happen is you never want to see Russia and China uniting. I am going to have to un-unite them, and I think I can do that, end of quote. Donald Trump boasted in an interview with the political commentator Tucker Carlson in October. How delusional that can be. And I think if I were Tucker Carlson, I will push back against— because Rationality suggests that you're gonna have to bring some common sense into the interviewee if he or she saying something way out of the norm. Not that to put them down, but to just put the dots on the letter. So I think, um, Mr. Carlson— and he knows better, so— but anyway, that's what happened at that time, so And here is what I argued in my book regarding this, because I discussed it back then for what I saw might lie ahead. And here we are once again, uh, to those who got a copy of my book. And if you, you can get a copy of my book, and here is the link for it if you are interested, uh, of wanting to read a little bit about Uh, right here, here's the link, guys, if you want to get a copy of this book and my other books as well. So you can get a copy there. So here is what I argued back then. I am not surprised at the rapprochement between China and Russia. It serves their interest to, A, keep the US away from the Pacific realm, and B, further undermine US global leadership, which is already declining anyway. So I am growing concerned, however, that if and when this rapprochement turn into strategic alliance, which is moving into the direction— remember one thing, guys, remember one thing, uh, Russia and China have not signed any strategic instrument. Yeah, the friendship is exist. And when I say I'm growing concerned not out of fear, but concern as to how the US might react to this down the road, because we could embark on some ill-conceived policies. And here we are now with Mr. Trump saying that I am gonna disunite this one. So, so this is why I use the term specifically, I'm growing concerned, however, that if and when this rapprochement turn into strategic alliance with military dimensions It will impact the global balance of power and therefore the international order as we know it. I continued the arguments, for example, when I said, look no further how, for example, the Republican Party has lost its moral standing as it stays silent while supporting a president who bends the law and shred the Constitution. Mr. Trump's America First foreign policy and impulsive decisions mired in murky logic reveal his need for much deeper understanding of global affairs. And as I mentioned before, you all remember, to those who follow geopolitics, the July 2018 NATO summit in Helsinki serves as evidence to my claim. So, so, because in my opinion, as I argued in my book, Mr. Trump, who lacks a deep understanding of foreign policy and is unpredictable, could cost the United States dearly by making reckless decisions and dangerous concessions. So, and it was, uh, it was an analyst from Russia, her name is Elena Napolyakova, and I uh, uh, provided a reference to her, uh, uh, articles in my book. And she works for the Brookings Institution. And if you know anything about the Brookings Institute in Washington, it's the back door of the US. She wrote, and I quote, we still have no agenda for the Trump-Putin meeting. It's unclear what the United States thinks it can get from Russia, or what it even hopes it can get. For Putin, that ambiguity is an asset. For Trump, it's a liability. End of quote. And this is what I need you to understand, the big picture as to what all this means. Yes, the hypes of the meeting, and even for Mr. Trump, because he's also a salesperson, He's no different than, uh, uh, comedian Z, because Mr. Trump is for Mr. Trump. Look no further. And the nominees for the cabinet, that just, that gives you an idea. And I keep going as to, for example, what I argued, uh, uh, later on as far as the argument about Russia's global strategy. Because if to those who think that Russia doesn't think that way, you're mistaken. So that will be for the, for the strategy in its neighborhood, the strategy for the Baltic Sea, the Caucasus region. So, and because this is why I argued back then, you have to ask the following questions: what is the long-term objective of Russia, for example, intervention in the Middle East? Why did he go to Syria? You know, why is Russia rebuilding a spy base in Nicaragua through a startling Cold War-like military and intelligence presence? What is Moscow strategy for the Baltic States? What trajectory might a Chinese-Russian military and diplomatic cooperation take? What are the foundation and implications of these cooperations? So these are questions I strongly believe that we need to have answers to, as I argued back then, few years ago. So why is— because you want to put Russia's global strategy in the right context. And this is what Mr. Trump needs to understand, or his advisers needs to tell him. But I think they are either nervous or scared to tell him what he doesn't want to hear because they want to tell him only what he wants to hear, and that's usually always the wrong thing. I remember for consulting, for example, and I am allowed to consult for foreign governments, meaning I can advise foreign governments. I don't work for Washington, so I can advise any government I want. And the first order of business, you know what it is? Whomever I'm dealing with, I tell him or her, do not expect me to tell you what you want to hear, because if you do, we are not starting to begin with. I will withdraw, uh, uh, from doing this project with you. Straightforward. Now, if you like my objective assessments, then I'll sign the papers. If you don't, then I'm not your right guy. Thank you very much for the offer. And this is where the advisor to Mr. Trump needs to tell him But I don't know, because the fear about power, possession, and all that stuff, uh, but anyway, this is what you have to place, uh, the Russian global, uh, strategy in the right context. US policymakers, global affairs, security, and intelligence analysts, and even academia are pressed to categorize the shifting winds of geopolitics as the United States' credibility and leadership have been waning for years. Similarly, American foreign policy is lost in a maelstrom of conflicts as it reacts to one problem after another. It does not help matters when a sitting president fights mounting legal troubles and, and casts grave doubt about his ability to not only lead but also to think strategically about protecting US interest long term. And how could we think that Mr. Trump will think in a long-term well-being of the United States when he evaluates almost everything in terms of monetary gains? Is the truth and the fact. This is not about criticizing Mr. Trump. Once again, if I ever get an opportunity to meet him personally, I will tell him straightforward. But again, there is no reason for me to meet with him personally. Simple as that. So, and this is what I want you guys to understand about all this. And that's my— concludes my analysis. So let me see if there are any, uh, uh, super sticker questions. I'm going to answer from you and just go from there. First of all, I need to express my thanks to many of you guys I'll start with Daniela Madoskater. Thank you so much, Daniela, for your Super Sticker. Truly appreciate your kind support. So also E82, thank you so much for your, uh, Super Sticker. Uh, Free Mazzi, who is unjustly imprisoned despite court orders and held bail. Dr. O, keep up the great work. Justice and freedom will prevail. Oh, I, I do not know about this, E82. I'm gonna take a look at this. You know, I'm glad you brought something up. Justice matters, and we all know how the system is in the collective West. So, so thank you very much, E82. Appreciate you. Danny, Danny Tadashi, thank you so much for your super sticker. Greatly appreciate you. Army with Harmony, as, as always, much appreciated. Will it not embolden others? Yes, it will. That depends again on which context you're referring to, uh, with this question, Army with Harmony. If you can elaborate a little bit more, so I will be able to answer that more, more specifically. Uh, I want to go to quickly, if you allow me here, guys, because I need to say thank you to, once again, to those who do not like me to take time to say this, please. Sign off and take off. Simple as that. Because to me, if you don't show gratitude, uh, there's something wrong with that. So first of all, I want to say thank you to Harris— David Harris for becoming a member again. So I appreciate you, David, for your— for your membership on Buy Me Coffee and for your continued support. Ramzi Abdurrahman, thank you so much for my birthday gift. I know I answered you privately, but I want to give you a shout out on the screen here. Thank you so much for my birthday gift. Same with Jane Yuan, thank you for my birthday gift, so many cups of coffee. Same thing for Raycom123. Ray, by the way, to those who do not know, Ray is the gentleman I met with in China. Yeah, so thank— it's— I consider Ray a friend, so thank you very much, Ray. Uh, and also Low Baron Thank you very much for your, uh, uh, uh, support for buying me coffee. And the last person is Wshirl2002. Thank you very much for your, uh, buying me cups of coffees for my birthday. So I'm, I'm very, very grateful. So, all right. Oh, Army with Harmony, you put a, uh, Oh, I see, I see what you mean. Army with Harmony: if the US gives into Russia's demand involving others— no, no, it won't. Here is why, here is why. Because what Russia is asking for is the same conditions they put 2 years ago prior to sending their military, uh, uh, forces into Ukraine. So all they are asking for is that NATO forces do not expand eastward beyond the, the Dan River, that Ukraine will never join NATO. You know, to me those are concerns because geographically, when you look at the map, I can see why Russia would be concerned. No, it's not going to embolden others. It's because NATO did not respect the wishes of the Russians, even though, even though James Baker, the former Secretary of State, went to St. Catherine in Moscow and stated unequivocally that no NATO forces will expand an inch eastward. And we went, we went back on our word. This is when we convinced— we meaning we at that time, Ronald Reagan— convinced Mikhail Gorbachev to just agree to the unification of the Germans. East and West, but we didn't respect his wishes by asking no expansion eastward. And I think— and please guys, correct me if I'm wrong— I think Mr. Gorbachev made a strategic mistake. That's my thinking. So, so thank you so much, Army with Harmony, greatly appreciate you. All right guys, I am going to sign off. Once again, please hit that like button, I will greatly appreciate it. And be on a lookout tomorrow for my analysis about Europe. Uh, uh, I'm sure you're going to like it. You guys liked the one I did about HTS, Hayat Tahrir Sham, begging the Russians intervention or support behind closed doors. So take a look at that video tomorrow. I'm working on some other stories for you. Those are topics that's going to shape, uh, the trajectory for 2025. I am even doing at the moment, I'm working on compiling my own analysis about the trends that I see moving forward this year and how they will impact you. Don't even think those things happen separately from you. Never make that mistake, guys, because there are changes going on right now. And, and to me, what I see going on here in the US is very concerning. So I might do this on the other platform at some point. So in any event, wish you a good Saturday. Thank you for being here, appreciate your kind support, and I look forward to seeing you next time. As always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, guys, bye-bye.