Transcript
Speaker: My bulky blender was such a pain to use, I ended up hardly ever using it at all.
Speaker: But the BlendJet 2 portable blender makes blending so easy and convenient, I use it just about every day.
Speaker: BlendJet 2 is portable, so you can blend up a smoothie at work, a protein shake at the gym, or even a margarita on the beach.
Speaker: It's small enough to fit in a cup holder, but powerful enough to blast through tough ingredients like ice and frozen fruit with ease.
Speaker: Blendjet 2 is whisper quiet, so you can make your morning smoothie without waking up the whole house.
Speaker: It lasts for 15 plus blends and recharges quickly via a USB-C cord.
Speaker: Best of all, Blendjet 2 cleans itself.
Speaker: Just blend water with a drop of soap and you're good to go.
Speaker: With over 30 plus colors and patterns to choose from, there's a Blendjet 2 to complement just about any style.
Speaker: I absolutely love the Lisa Frank edition.
Speaker: What are you waiting for?
Speaker: Go to Blendjet.com and grab yours today.
Speaker: And be sure to use the promo code ANALYTICS12 to get 12% off your order and free two-day shipping.
Speaker: No other portable blender on the market comes close to the quality, power, and innovation of Blendjet 2.
Speaker: They guarantee you'll love it or your money back.
Speaker: Blend anytime, anywhere with the Blendjet 2 Portable Blender.
Speaker: Go to Blendjet.com and use the code ANALYTICS12 to get 12% off your order and free 2-day shipping.
Speaker: Shop today and get the best deal ever.
Speaker: You are now listening to This Week Explained.
Speaker: Hello, and welcome to This Week Explained.
Speaker: I'm Tiana with Kervin as my co-host, and together we'll help you understand the complexities of our dynamic, ever-changing world.
Speaker: But first, we need to get to what's on the agenda this week.
Speaker: So, Kervin, have at it, buddy.
Speaker: All right, we got Russia, Ukraine, Israel, Hamas.
Speaker: There's a lot going on in both of those conflicts that we are going to get into.
Speaker: But the big story of the week, I think it was the main story that everybody was refreshing their feed to figure out what was going on, is the helo crash that happened in Iran that killed the Iranian president, killed the defense minister, a few military people who are flying the helicopter.
Speaker: It is a tragic story, regardless of how you feel about the butcher of Tehran.
Speaker: You guys know how we feel about him, but still a tragedy for all involved.
Speaker: Then I want to get into how Saudi Arabia may be normalizing ties with Israel if we can get some peace deals going on in the Middle East.
Speaker: There was, so Tiana, very interesting that last week you brought up the Democratic Republic of Congo saying, I think this is a very interesting story and there might be some things that happen.
Speaker: After this in the future.
Speaker: Well, guess what?
Speaker: There was a coup in the DRC.
Speaker: It involved Americans.
Speaker: Oh, wow.
Speaker: Trying to overthrow the government of DRC.
Speaker: Were they trying to pull like a covert mission to, you know...
Speaker: This was not like a... Okay, I was just thinking about that movie that we watched.
Speaker: I think Ben Affleck was in it where he dropped himself into South America?
Speaker: Was it somewhere in South America to try to... Oh my gosh, I don't know.
Speaker: I know what you're talking about.
Speaker: I do know what you're talking about.
Speaker: I don't know what you're talking about.
Speaker: I could very well...
Speaker: Yeah, I'm probably misremembering the whole plot and trying to make it fit right here.
Speaker: So just ignore me.
Speaker: All right, let's move on.
Speaker: What else is going on?
Speaker: There was the coup in DRC.
Speaker: We'll get into that.
Speaker: I just wanted to mention how astute you were in identifying that this could be a flashpoint in geopolitics.
Speaker: We need to talk about...
Speaker: We need to talk about Africa more, I think, because we are definitely more honed in on the conflicts that kind of affect North America.
Speaker: Yeah, in general.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Yeah, something that affects America in general.
Speaker: But, I mean, obviously, every conflict on the planet affects everybody at some point.
Speaker: So, I don't know what I'm trying to say.
Speaker: No, so I'm very glad you bring that up because the last topic of the day...
Speaker: is what I dubbed as China 2027.
Speaker: And I know people are going to be like, can you stop talking about China?
Speaker: Like nothing is really happening.
Speaker: Don't don't talk about China.
Speaker: But guess what?
Speaker: Listen, the U.S. is saying China could invade Taiwan by 2027.
Speaker: And they are there are direct economic national security issues.
Speaker: implications in the United States based off of or and globally just based off of that conflict alone.
Speaker: And we are going to get into that at the end of this podcast.
Speaker: So that's the last topic on the rundown is China.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: What you dubbed China 2027.
Speaker: Question mark.
Speaker: Okay.
Speaker: Well, let's get right into it.
Speaker: What is the latest coming out of Ukraine?
Speaker: Let's start at the top, you know, with the longest running conflict in this whole scenario.
Speaker: So what's going on in Ukraine?
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Yeah, there's been a lot of activity and a lot of times we talk about the activity from the Russian side and Russia continuing to push forward.
Speaker: But there's been a lot of activity on the Ukrainian front.
Speaker: So this week, Ukrainian forces reportedly conducted successful drone strikes against Russian military infrastructure and oil refineries in the occupied areas of Crimea, Krasnodar-Krai and Leningrad.
Speaker: Well, what can you tell us about these operations?
Speaker: Well, I mean, these drone strikes actually represent a significant escalation in Ukraine's efforts to disrupt those Russian military operations.
Speaker: Let's not forget, Russia was the aggressor in invading Ukraine.
Speaker: But now Ukraine, by targeting key infrastructure in these Russian-held areas, aims to damage Russian logistics and military capabilities.
Speaker: So it's not a counteroffensive per se.
Speaker: But they are trying to push efforts to debilitate Russian military capabilities.
Speaker: I can say that these strikes are strategic as opposed to tactical.
Speaker: They aim to stretch Russian defenses across the entire eastern portion of Ukraine and disrupt those supply chains to the Russian military.
Speaker: I mean, it makes sense.
Speaker: I'm sure Russia was banking on the fact that Ukraine wouldn't try to attack any infrastructure within their or what they perceive to be their borders.
Speaker: But since they're occupied by Russia, Ukraine's probably like, all right, we got to do what we got to do to get this.
Speaker: Yep.
Speaker: conflict swinging but we need to get the pendulum swinging back in our direction so they're attacking the infrastructure in uh russian occupied territories because what difference does it make at this point it's not like their people are benefiting from those things yeah they're they're not and and you you bring up a great point it is russian well we would consider russian occupied areas right so ukraine would consider that the this is our land their land it's our land
Speaker: It's our land.
Speaker: It's our land.
Speaker: It's your land.
Speaker: And we're going to protect or we are going to try to defend our land, whether it's occupied by Russia or not.
Speaker: Well, I've read reports that Russian forces are concentrating limited, understaffed, and incohesive groups in the Sumit region.
Speaker: So what's the strategy behind this move?
Speaker: It doesn't make any sense.
Speaker: You would think, especially since it's in the Sumit region, it's in Ukraine, right?
Speaker: Yeah, yeah.
Speaker: Okay, so why wouldn't they want to put...
Speaker: you know, more people and staff it.
Speaker: More cohesively.
Speaker: More cohesively and just put... Because, you know, they just took the land.
Speaker: So, of course, Ukraine wants to get it back from them.
Speaker: It doesn't make any sense.
Speaker: What is the strategy behind this move?
Speaker: Are they just too thin?
Speaker: Are they spread too thin?
Speaker: Is that what's going on?
Speaker: Or... Yeah, that's... Do they have some other thought?
Speaker: And I don't... I just... That doesn't make any sense.
Speaker: If they just took it...
Speaker: Why would they put people who are just tired and then not put enough people to protect the area?
Speaker: Because then that kind of leaves the door open for Ukraine to take the land back.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: And so this is a very we'll go back to strategery, right?
Speaker: As George W. Bush once famously said.
Speaker: And we think it was Will Ferrell that said it was Will Ferrell as George Bush, I think.
Speaker: Was it George Bush?
Speaker: I really believe so.
Speaker: If not, I mean, George Bush, George Bush could have said it.
Speaker: And honestly, I would love a return to George Bush as president.
Speaker: We say strategery all the time anyways.
Speaker: But it's very strategic from Russia, what they're doing.
Speaker: So Russian forces, including Chechen units within the Russian military, like you said, are amassing in the Sumay direction.
Speaker: The likely objective of that is drawing and fixing Ukrainian forces along that international border.
Speaker: So you said it, Russia's being stretched thin along the border.
Speaker: But what they want to do is stretch the Ukrainian defenses along the border, stretch those out.
Speaker: And so even though...
Speaker: Those Russian units are understaffed.
Speaker: They do.
Speaker: They lack cohesion.
Speaker: Their presence can actually force Ukraine to allocate significant resources to those areas, stretching it all along the border, potentially weakening the Ukrainian defensive posture across other portions of Ukraine.
Speaker: So it seems like a tactical move to spread Ukrainian forces thin, right?
Speaker: Yeah, you're correct.
Speaker: It's not strategic.
Speaker: It's tactical.
Speaker: I was off on that one.
Speaker: OK, so how effective could this be for the Russians?
Speaker: Well, even so even limited Russian activity, which is like below the threshold of offensive operations, which we have seen them doing a full offensive operation in eastern Ukraine.
Speaker: But this is below that threshold can be effective.
Speaker: So by threatening multiple areas along the border, Russia can compel Russia.
Speaker: Ukraine to defend a broader front that stretches all those troops out and it dilutes Ukraine's operational strength.
Speaker: So the psychological impact of this dispersed defense can also play a role in straining Ukrainian military resources.
Speaker: So switching gears a bit, Russian President Vladimir Putin recently fired Deputy Defense Minister Colonel General Yuri Sadovenko and replaced him with Oleg Sabaleev.
Speaker: So what do you think is behind this change?
Speaker: Yeah, we talked about this last week, right?
Speaker: They're making significant changes there.
Speaker: And it's a significant shakeup in Russia.
Speaker: So Serebinko's dismissal, which is said to be linked to, this is what Putin says, it's linked to an anti-corruption effort, but it really reflects Putin's strategy to improve the wartime economy.
Speaker: We talked about this last week with how they had an economist campaign
Speaker: put into part of their military strategy.
Speaker: So Sebeleev's background is in economics, which suggests a focus on better resource management within the Ministry of Defense.
Speaker: And that's crucial for sustaining Russia's prolonged military engagement within Ukraine.
Speaker: So he's just replacing everybody in his, is it called cabinet?
Speaker: I don't know what he's called.
Speaker: Yeah, administration cabinet.
Speaker: Administration.
Speaker: Okay.
Speaker: Well, he's just replacing everybody with people who have backgrounds in finance.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Economics.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Listen, that's not something that is unique to what Putin's doing.
Speaker: We saw it in the Trump administration a few years ago, adding economists, people who are savvy with the economy into the defense industrial complex.
Speaker: So when you're having a recession or a bad economic crisis,
Speaker: You still have to improve your defenses, right?
Speaker: So adding somebody who knows the economy, who understands finances into your defense ministry is actually something to try to improve your military and improve your defense industrial complex.
Speaker: Yeah, except the money is just all funneled into defense.
Speaker: It doesn't go towards the people.
Speaker: It seems like it appears that way.
Speaker: I mean, I don't know.
Speaker: So do you think this could lead to broader changes within the Russian Ministry of Defense?
Speaker: Oh, absolutely.
Speaker: So this particular move indicates that Putin is not only addressing corruption, like he said, is an anti-corruption, but also trying to form a more efficient and loyal team around the newly appointed defense minister, who is what we were alluding to from last week, which is Andrei Belisov, right?
Speaker: So he's the economist.
Speaker: I guess he would...
Speaker: Yeah, he would probably work better with people who also had backgrounds in economics.
Speaker: Yeah, you don't want like a military general coming in.
Speaker: If you're an economist, right, you don't want them coming in and saying, hey, what are you doing this for?
Speaker: This isn't really efficient.
Speaker: Take this military portion out.
Speaker: I mean, it still doesn't make that much sense to me since it's literally the Ministry of Defense.
Speaker: It's not economics.
Speaker: But, I mean, hey, we all have our own things, I guess.
Speaker: I don't know.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: And listen, we're not policy people.
Speaker: No, not at all.
Speaker: As a military person, I would rather my defense minister or my secretary of defense to be a military person who understands...
Speaker: you know, the process, because the military is not efficient, right?
Speaker: You know that.
Speaker: As a civilian, you understand that.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: But in this regard, we can actually I can say that everyone listening, just get ready for more resignations within within Russia's defense industrial complex.
Speaker: And so more appointments that are geared towards Belisov as he consolidates his power and aligns the ministry's operations with the current strategic goals of the president.
Speaker: So turning our attention to the international response, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin reiterated that the U.S. does not support Ukraine using American-provided weapons to strike targets inside Russia.
Speaker: How does this stance affect Ukraine's military strategy?
Speaker: Because obviously they probably aren't going to listen to that.
Speaker: Yeah, and listen, Israel's saying we're going to do whatever we want with the weapons provided to you, right?
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: Which, I mean, once they're out of your hands, you can't control how they are used.
Speaker: Yes, you can try, but... I get it's like our country trying to wipe their hands of, you know, absolve themselves of any sort of responsibility in relation to how the weapons are used, but it doesn't help.
Speaker: Because they know, good and gosh darn well...
Speaker: that they are going to be used how the country sees fit.
Speaker: It's not up to them once they have transferred over to the other country.
Speaker: It doesn't absolve us of anything.
Speaker: We gave them the weapons knowing they were going to be used outside of what we asked them to use them for.
Speaker: It's just absurd.
Speaker: It's absurd, I think.
Speaker: Yeah, and in the court of public opinion...
Speaker: As soon as you give those weapons away, however they're used, you're going to be judged in the court of public opinion, and that has no basis on the real world.
Speaker: But this approach by the U.S., in my opinion, presents, like you talked about, don't use those weapons to strike targets in Russia, which is just the U.S. saying, hey, when they do, we told them not to, so Russia, you can't attack us for doing that.
Speaker: Yeah, they're like, it's on record.
Speaker: We're good people still.
Speaker: We're awesome.
Speaker: But, you know, Russia's not going to care either way.
Speaker: So Ukraine is going to try to do what the U.S. tells them because they're going to want continued support from the U.S. They're going to want those weapons to keep coming because they need them.
Speaker: And so we have...
Speaker: practical problems for Ukraine because of this.
Speaker: What this does is effectively create safe zones for Russian personnel and equipment around Russia's border with Ukraine, allowing them to conduct strikes because Russia has these weapons that they can send.
Speaker: They have the same weapons or the effectively the same weapons to strike Ukraine.
Speaker: without fear of direct retaliation.
Speaker: So this restriction by the U.S. reduces Ukraine's capacity to properly defend itself.
Speaker: It also undermines Russian activities before they enter Ukrainian territory, because now Ukraine cannot strike those Russian units before they get in there.
Speaker: Well, it sounds like a tough position for Ukraine.
Speaker: They're like, do we...
Speaker: Attack Russia in the capacity that we want to or feel is necessary?
Speaker: Or do we listen to what our allies are telling us, the people who are funding part of this?
Speaker: Yeah, it is a very tough spot because they know if they do cross a line.
Speaker: Across the line, that is laid down by one of the countries that is giving them these weapons, they could potentially no longer receive any more weapons, and that would be detrimental to the Ukrainian cause, obviously.
Speaker: Yep.
Speaker: But there does seem to be a different approach from some European countries, right?
Speaker: Yep.
Speaker: Yeah, yeah, for real.
Speaker: For sure.
Speaker: For real.
Speaker: I said for reals.
Speaker: But the UK did announce that Ukrainian forces can use their provided weapons to strike Russian targets.
Speaker: They don't care.
Speaker: Do it.
Speaker: There's other European nations.
Speaker: I think France is one of them that are considering lifting those similar restrictions.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Like I said, I think it's France.
Speaker: Those officials are advocating for the right of self-defense to extend strikes on Russian territory, meaning if Russia strikes Ukraine, Ukraine has the right for self-defense so they can hit Russian territory.
Speaker: And this shift could significantly enhance Ukraine's strategic options, but it puts additional pressure on Ukrainian forces and Russian forces that are going through these battles.
Speaker: These contrasting policies between the U.S. and Europe could create an interesting dynamic.
Speaker: What wider ramifications might this have?
Speaker: So, I mean, to answer your question, a more complicated geopolitical environment could result from the policy differences.
Speaker: European backing for strikes inside Russia might give Ukraine more confidence, tip the scales in favor of Europe, which could then have a bigger say in how the conflict is resolved.
Speaker: Now, if they continue to disagree, they being the U.S. and Europe disagreeing on how to use those weapons or...
Speaker: important military support tactics, it might put a strain on U.S.-European relations.
Speaker: Moving on from the war in Ukraine, let's get to the war in Gaza and discuss the recent developments involving the International Criminal Court's pursuit of arrest warrants for high-profile leaders from both Israel and Hamas.
Speaker: This unprecedented move has significant implications for international law and global politics.
Speaker: What are the charges?
Speaker: Yeah, so the charges vary.
Speaker: For Hamas leaders, that's Sinwar, Dayep, and Hyenea, the charges include extermination, murder, killing, murder, hostage-taking, and rape because of the hostages.
Speaker: Now, for the Israeli leaders, Netanyahu and Gallant, the charges involve causing extermination, using starvation as a method of war, and denying humanitarian relief, and deliberately targeting civilians.
Speaker: And how has Israel reacted to these developments?
Speaker: I mean, they reacted with anger.
Speaker: Prime Minister Netanyahu termed it a, quote, moral outrage of historic proportions, end quote.
Speaker: He accused the ICC of prejudice, equating its actions with anti-Semitism.
Speaker: Defense Minister Galat shared...
Speaker: Him saying it's anti-Semitism, just he always waves that around.
Speaker: And it doesn't have, or I hope it doesn't have anything to do with that.
Speaker: But it just, I don't know.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: And then it's, you know, watering down a term that is, it's a very specific term.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: And it is something that should be called out, right?
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: Anytime, anytime, anytime somebody goes against what he wants to happen, he throws out anti-Semitism.
Speaker: And I don't know, it just rubs me the wrong way because I am not anti-Semitic and most people aren't anti-Semitic.
Speaker: But I don't know what, but don't let me know you.
Speaker: I know what you're trying to get to, which is keep saying it.
Speaker: If you keep going anti-Semitism, anti-Semitism, this is anti-Semitism.
Speaker: This is racist.
Speaker: This is sexist.
Speaker: This is homophobic.
Speaker: Like you said, it waters it down.
Speaker: It dilutes the word.
Speaker: And so when somebody is legitimately being an anti-Semite is legitimately being a racist, they could now go, well, no, because they've diluted the word anyway.
Speaker: So everything is racism.
Speaker: Everything's anti-Semitism.
Speaker: So you can't call me that.
Speaker: And I agree with you.
Speaker: That's exactly what he's he's saying here.
Speaker: Defense Minister Gallant said the exact same thing.
Speaker: So they're using the terminology against the ICC.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: Defense Minister Gallant called the warrants disgraceful.
Speaker: He called it an intrusion into Israel's combat efforts.
Speaker: Both leaders say that Israel is fighting a righteous war against Hamas.
Speaker: I'll put my opinion out there.
Speaker: I do think they are fighting a righteous war against Hamas.
Speaker: How they carry out that war may be not something that I agree with.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: But to fight against Hamas.
Speaker: You're right.
Speaker: The way they're going about it, it is not right.
Speaker: There have been plenty... I'm not going to go down that road right now because there's been several instances in which they have definitely overstepped and definitely did things that they probably shouldn't have.
Speaker: But yeah, just because the ICC...
Speaker: Okay.
Speaker: What?
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: No, I'm just saying, like, why do I think they're fighting a righteous war against Hamas?
Speaker: They're a genocidal terrorist group.
Speaker: That's what I think.
Speaker: Now, why do I think they're not going about it the right way?
Speaker: Because they are deliberately attacking civilian infrastructure and then saying, well, this is Hamas headquarters.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: It's not something I'm used to in fighting.
Speaker: And they are denying aid.
Speaker: They are.
Speaker: Every time they push the civilians into an area where they say they're going to be safe, they always wind up attacking that area and then saying, oh, we've got intelligence that there were Hamas leaders there or we heard there was Hamas there.
Speaker: And they try to act like, oh, we had no idea this is going to be this way.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: We're going to have so many civilians die, but it's just... Yeah, so two things you hate.
Speaker: Two things can be true at the same time.
Speaker: Like, I am going to put a ban on that fucking thing.
Speaker: I'm serious.
Speaker: My blood is boiling.
Speaker: No, that cannot be your catchphrase.
Speaker: My blood is boiling right now.
Speaker: I'm just so tired of that.
Speaker: I always thought, you know, I always would say, hey, my catchphrase is probably stay safe out there because that's what I say at the end of this.
Speaker: I tell people always to stay safe, blah, blah, blah.
Speaker: But I think it is.
Speaker: Honestly, it's two things can be true at the same time.
Speaker: And it is that's factual in this case.
Speaker: Israel can be fighting a righteous war against Tomas and be doing it in the wrong way.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: I think that is where we get into these fights with each other of taking sides, you know, free power.
Speaker: You can say free Palestine and Israel has a right to exist.
Speaker: You can say, right.
Speaker: I give everybody listening to this the ability to say that whatever that whatever that means.
Speaker: It probably means nothing to anybody, but you can say.
Speaker: It means something to a lot of people here, so shut your mouth, first of all.
Speaker: I hope it does, and I give you the right to say it.
Speaker: Israel has a right to defend itself, and also Palestine has a right to exist, and its people has a right to live in safety.
Speaker: I just think all people have a right to live in safety.
Speaker: But we can get back to the conversation.
Speaker: Okay, so...
Speaker: It's okay.
Speaker: So what about the international response?
Speaker: Okay, yeah, so that's everybody's main question, right?
Speaker: On both sides, Israel, the Israeli side, people go, well, internationally, everybody hates us.
Speaker: And then the Palestinian side, internationally, everybody hates us.
Speaker: Well, that's because the international reaction is mixed.
Speaker: U.S. President Joe Biden called these warrants that happened from the ICC outrageous.
Speaker: He claimed that Israel and Hamas are not equivalent, but human rights organizations...
Speaker: have praised the ICC's decision.
Speaker: They noted that it holds all parties to international law accountable.
Speaker: So we don't make a difference of who you are and who your allies are.
Speaker: If you do something wrong, we're going to hold you accountable to it.
Speaker: Well, OK, didn't they put out a warrant for Putin, though?
Speaker: Yes.
Speaker: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker: Nobody said anything about that.
Speaker: Nobody said anything about that.
Speaker: Well, I'm not talking about us, Karben.
Speaker: I'm talking about the international response.
Speaker: We're talking about the international response.
Speaker: The international response to the warrants between Hamas and Israel, there's been mixed response.
Speaker: But I remember whenever there was...
Speaker: um there was a warrant put out for putin everyone just kind of shrugged their shoulders everyone gets to pick and choose which like when it when it's considered outrageous right and and it you know i think when that came out people were like oh this is the icc it's just symbolic uh china and he still traveled and he still traveled
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: So the South, right.
Speaker: South Africa, China.
Speaker: He went to China a couple of weeks ago.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: Went out to Beijing.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: So, you know, should I say who cares?
Speaker: No, I'm not going to.
Speaker: I shouldn't say that publicly, but this is a podcast and it's not private.
Speaker: I get it's public, but who cares?
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: Nothing's going to happen because of this.
Speaker: It's it's symbolic.
Speaker: Very symbolic.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: So before we dive deeper into the broader implications, let's discuss the Rafah operation.
Speaker: How has this operation impacted the dynamics of this conflict?
Speaker: Yeah, I mean, it's heightened tension significantly.
Speaker: Listen, this is why Hamas came out and was like, oh, we agreed to the ceasefire.
Speaker: Well, we just we just found out this week that Egypt deliberately gave Hamas a different ceasefire negotiation to try to get it approved.
Speaker: Neither none of the parties involved wanted the Rafah operation.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Egypt think that was going to work, like they weren't going to figure out.
Speaker: They both had different like they both had different agreements.
Speaker: Eventually, they were going to have to come to the table and see what aligned in these agreements.
Speaker: Israel's going to have to approve it.
Speaker: And also, like, maybe Egypt shouldn't be part of it if they are going to play things that way, if they're going to float a different agreement to one country and float a different agreement to another country and say, obviously, one that's more favorable to each country because they're obviously sending agreements that are more favorable to the country they're trying to get to sign them.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: And so the same thing can be said for Qatar.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: Qatar is not really a pro-Israeli country.
Speaker: They are harboring harboring Hamas terrorists in their country, but they are playing the role of mediator.
Speaker: And we said it on this podcast.
Speaker: You and I have talked about this.
Speaker: We believe not trying to speak for both of us, but I know you believe this, too.
Speaker: An unbiased party needs to be involved.
Speaker: We don't need governments of all the countries to come together and say, hey, agree to this.
Speaker: Find an unbiased mediator because we do not have one.
Speaker: And I don't know who you can find.
Speaker: I'm not going to put my name forward because you know I'm unbiased in this.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: So how do we do this?
Speaker: I don't know.
Speaker: But the Rafah operation, what I wanted to say, it's just so important to Israel and Hamas.
Speaker: Israel that this operation happens, Hamas that this operation does not happen.
Speaker: And why is that?
Speaker: Well, first of all, it's cut off one of the few supply routes for Gaza.
Speaker: That's exacerbating the humanitarian crisis.
Speaker: Additionally,
Speaker: It's drawn international criticism for potentially violating international law because Israel's targeting civilian infrastructure.
Speaker: They're also restricting humanitarian aid that's coming in to the area.
Speaker: But what are the overarching implications of the ICC's actions coupled with the Rafah operation?
Speaker: I mean, to begin with, and we just talked about this with the Putin warrant, the ICC's actions are just symbolic.
Speaker: So we can huff and haw about all that, but it's just symbolic.
Speaker: The U.S., though, has jumped to Israel's aid.
Speaker: They've spoken about imposing those...
Speaker: dreaded sanctions that everyone just cannot get past.
Speaker: If you put sanctions on us, we can't live.
Speaker: The U.S. wants to put sanctions on the ICC.
Speaker: That could damage Israel's relations with some of their allies, like the U.K.
Speaker: and Canada.
Speaker: who are pro the ICC warrants on Netanyahu and the defense minister, Gallant.
Speaker: But the Rafah operation is, I think, could force all parties to take more extreme stances.
Speaker: So to go, we're going to be extreme on this side to we're going to be extreme on this side.
Speaker: And it's going to hamper efforts to negotiate what we on this podcast believe is important, a ceasefire, or more importantly, a peace agreement in this conflict.
Speaker: How might this affect the situation on the ground in Gaza and in Israel?
Speaker: Well, it's going to make things more tense on the ground.
Speaker: But I'll say it also supports Hamas' narrative of victimization.
Speaker: And they say that they're just resisting Israeli oppression.
Speaker: Now, it might strengthen support from within Israel, from the population of Israel.
Speaker: the harder they go at Hamas, but it's going to make diplomacy more difficult abroad.
Speaker: Additionally, it can affect the dynamics of the hostage talks.
Speaker: That's the most important thing is get the hostages back to Israel.
Speaker: Return the hostages, whether alive or unfortunately perished, back to the families.
Speaker: This whole thing, this whole situation is going to lead to a hardening of attitudes between Israel, Hamas, Gaza, Palestine, the entire international community.
Speaker: While that doesn't sound very hopeful at this point, it does seem like a decent spot to shift the conversation into the recent development surrounding the sudden death of Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi.
Speaker: What are your initial thoughts on this event?
Speaker: Because I know we held back for a good bit to not, you know, post it anywhere.
Speaker: We did very good, even though you had an itchy trigger finger for a bit.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: What am I going to do?
Speaker: When do I post it?
Speaker: What do I do?
Speaker: When do I post it?
Speaker: What do I do?
Speaker: And you like refresh, hit refresh over and over and over again to see if the news changed.
Speaker: And obviously it's heartbreaking for the families of people who are deceased.
Speaker: Who were not really involved with Raisi.
Speaker: They were just, hey, I'm Iranian military and I'm flying.
Speaker: Yeah, they're the ones tasked with transporting these people.
Speaker: And we saw a lot, I don't know if anyone else has seen the videos, where the weather was not appropriate for a helicopter flight.
Speaker: You couldn't see anything.
Speaker: It was windy.
Speaker: It was very, you know, it's much the same here right now.
Speaker: We're having an influx of crazy storms.
Speaker: It just didn't seem, it didn't seem safe at all.
Speaker: Yeah, and on a personal level, I have stopped.
Speaker: You might not know this.
Speaker: I don't think I've spoken about this publicly.
Speaker: I have stopped multiple operations due to weather because helos were involved in those.
Speaker: Understanding that the weather may not be
Speaker: It's terrible right now, but it's going to get terrible in the foreseeable future really soon.
Speaker: And I've stopped operations.
Speaker: I think that's what should have happened here.
Speaker: I think somebody should have been involved that is not a yes man that said, hey, we just cannot do this.
Speaker: Do not fly.
Speaker: Yeah, I get you want to be back in Iran, but you need to hunker down for a little while and wait for this time.
Speaker: fog this insane fog to go yeah it was like the videos when we looked at them you and i it was incredible yeah how foggy it was you couldn't see you couldn't see at all
Speaker: And a tragedy happened.
Speaker: Regardless of who's involved in it, it should not have happened.
Speaker: And quite honestly, nothing's going to change because of this.
Speaker: That's probably another aspect of it.
Speaker: But the death of Raisi adds an additional layer to Iran's already difficult political environment.
Speaker: So he was a major figure.
Speaker: He was noted.
Speaker: You know this.
Speaker: You met people who...
Speaker: their family he was a yeah he would he was a potential um candidate to replace the ayatollah right yep the supreme leader ayatollah ali khameini um yeah you you understand it you know he was supposed to be the next supreme leader i mean i the butcher of tehran
Speaker: Yeah, because they, for a while, it was at the end of last year, they had a lot of people that were... Yeah, the demonstrations, and they were heartbreaking.
Speaker: We already told you guys about this, but I...
Speaker: literally stood outside of the White House, hugging this beautiful woman who was crying, and we were both crying because she had put up pictures of all these people who were murdered by Raisi's regime.
Speaker: It was, how many, I can't remember how many thousands of people it was, but it was jarring seeing the amount of pictures they had in the lawn.
Speaker: Yeah, it was the entire National Mall.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: If you go on Google Maps, look up the National Mall.
Speaker: Was it the National Mall?
Speaker: All I know is that it was a lot, and it was overwhelming, and they were playing some beautiful Iranian music over it, and there was a man who came over and explained, because I didn't under, at that point, I didn't know...
Speaker: Yeah, for the UN.
Speaker: Yeah, they were upset about it.
Speaker: And I was really grateful for them to, you know, t ake a step back, come talk to us because we were kind of walking through all the signs and kind of looking at all the signs.
Speaker: And I get upset anyways, especially whenever there's you can see the faces of the people.
Speaker: And so it was very impactful seeing all these faces and these names.
Speaker: And at first I didn't know what they were referring to.
Speaker: I mean, I knew it had something to do with people who had passed away, but they came over and they explained everything to us in detail.
Speaker: And then I started bawling my eyes out and the woman just held me while I cried for like 10 minutes.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: And yeah, we explained it on the podcast a year ago.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: And and so it was it's just so much geopolitical change.
Speaker: And we talk about this on the podcast all the time, how we can make predictions.
Speaker: We could try to make predictions about what's going to happen.
Speaker: But this is one of the things that can make a flashpoint unpredictable.
Speaker: No one can predict.
Speaker: hey, the president of Iran is going to decide to shove a helicopter in the middle of the worst fog storm you've ever seen.
Speaker: And so now we can't find him because it's in the middle of all this fog.
Speaker: And so he's died because of this.
Speaker: And so this abrupt death, along with the foreign minister, has left Tehran wrestling with issues of leadership secession, which you acutely brought up.
Speaker: about how he was supposed to be the next supreme leader this is very the president may may just be a figurehead and not very important to iran but ibrahim raisi is very important to iran he was going to be the next uh the next supreme leader right
Speaker: So speaking of succession, what can we expect in terms of Iran's next steps?
Speaker: Because obviously nobody was planning for this.
Speaker: No one thought it was going to happen.
Speaker: It just came out of left field and threw everybody off.
Speaker: I mean, I know all the...
Speaker: The statements coming out of Iran said things are just going to continue as normal.
Speaker: We have no issues.
Speaker: Everything's fine.
Speaker: And that's basically the only details we have gotten out of Iran since then.
Speaker: Yeah, that was probably... So I think that's the moment I turned to you and said he died before anything came out.
Speaker: I was like, Raisi is dead because I'm not trying to make... I'm not trying to, you know, be frank or anything like that.
Speaker: I knew he died at that moment because the Supreme Leader, the Ayatollah, said, put out a tweet and he said, regardless of what happens...
Speaker: Iran has a secession plan, right?
Speaker: And that's what you're alluding to with your question.
Speaker: And that was the moment I said, yeah, I know he's dead because he's saying we have a secession plan.
Speaker: So what is that?
Speaker: Iran has a pre-established secession process.
Speaker: So Vice President Mohammed Mokhbar has officially taken over as interim president.
Speaker: And then Iran's going to hold elections within the next 50 days.
Speaker: I believe July time frame is when that's going to happen.
Speaker: I'm super glad that we're adding another election.
Speaker: It's another.
Speaker: 2024 is the year of elections.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: Whether you want them or not, they're coming.
Speaker: Yeah, whether you...
Speaker: Now, I do want to say that it's crucial to emphasize that the presidency in Iran is symbolic.
Speaker: I don't think Mohammed Mokhbar is going to be the next Ayatollah.
Speaker: But the supreme leader is the one who has ultimate authority.
Speaker: And he's still alive.
Speaker: He's still making the decision.
Speaker: So as a result of that policy direction changes, that's going to be heavily influenced by Khomeini's direction in all of this.
Speaker: Well, that is obviously, it's a very important factor to keep in mind.
Speaker: Now, shifting gears slightly, how do you believe Raisi's death will affect Iran's ties with Israel and the wider Middle East?
Speaker: Well, we know how Israel and Iranian ties are, right?
Speaker: So let's talk about what the Israelis said as this was going on.
Speaker: Yeah, Israeli politicians responded with indifference to Raisi's death.
Speaker: Some publicly expressed satisfaction.
Speaker: I can go out on a limb here and be very firm in saying that
Speaker: Every leader in Israel was satisfied with what happened.
Speaker: I don't think anybody's going to disagree with that.
Speaker: But publicly, some of them were just indifferent.
Speaker: There were some expressions of satisfaction.
Speaker: There was a great AI photo of an Israeli helicopter or a helicopter that was just emboldened with the Israeli flag and all of this kind of stuff that was like,
Speaker: Yeah, we did this.
Speaker: Israel had no.
Speaker: Yeah, that was disgusting.
Speaker: That's gross.
Speaker: Israel did not have any part in this.
Speaker: That's really gross.
Speaker: I can't believe they willingly posted that and paraded it around.
Speaker: That's gross.
Speaker: Now, there were other memes where you could think they're disgusting or not, where it showed the CIA.
Speaker: The last purchase from the CIA was 999 fog machines off of Amazon.
Speaker: So it's hilarious, but is it disgusting and gross?
Speaker: Yes, at the same time.
Speaker: Yeah, yeah.
Speaker: Now, this is unlikely to alter Iran's regional policies because the supreme leader influences all of Iran.
Speaker: So Iran's support for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as its stance towards Israel, are deeply entrenched.
Speaker: It's not going to change.
Speaker: It's unlikely to change, whether overnight or over the last few years.
Speaker: Now, can you touch on the broader implications of Raisi's tenure as president?
Speaker: Like, how do you assess his legacy, particularly in terms of domestic and international affairs?
Speaker: Yeah, I mean, anyone with the nickname the Butcher of Tehran, it's easy to vilify.
Speaker: I don't want to be known as the butcher of anything, but Raisi's administration was well known for tightening morale laws.
Speaker: We talked about that with the protests last September.
Speaker: They were killing women for protesting.
Speaker: They cracked down on protests.
Speaker: They have a tough stance in nuclear negotiations with international powers.
Speaker: But internationally,
Speaker: Raisi was condemned for his involvement in mass murders and human rights violations that gave him that nickname.
Speaker: So his death may mark the end of an error for some.
Speaker: So that was a little, sorry about that, that was a little Freudian slip.
Speaker: I said error, end of an error.
Speaker: Mm hmm.
Speaker: That's my opinion coming out.
Speaker: End of an era is what I meant to say.
Speaker: There are a lot of Iranians who have celebrated.
Speaker: They think this was something great that happened.
Speaker: But the larger geopolitical dynamics that molded his presidency are likely to continue.
Speaker: Well, I'm sure the months ahead, we will have plenty of discussions on the future of Iran.
Speaker: So let's shift our focus to the recent meeting between President Biden's National Security Advisor and Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Speaker: Can you shed some light on what was discussed and its implications?
Speaker: Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker: So the summit focused on concluding a comprehensive security deal between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, and Israel for that matter.
Speaker: This agreement seeks to strengthen the two-nation strategic cooperation, especially in light of regional conflicts, Israel, Iran, Iranian proxies, but also...
Speaker: These differences caused by Iran's nuclear program in previous wars that Iran has injected itself into, such as the one between Hamas and Israel.
Speaker: Interesting.
Speaker: So what exactly does this agreement entail?
Speaker: It's complicated, but the first thing is it discusses the Palestinian dilemma, specifically calling for a two-state solution and humanitarian relief for Gaza.
Speaker: Now, the potential challenge is balancing Saudi Arabia's support for Palestinian statehood with Israel's unwillingness to support such a settlement owing to internal, so internal Israeli political factors.
Speaker: Well, that sounds like a delicate balance.
Speaker: What else is on the table?
Speaker: So beyond the Palestinian issue, the agreement involves bolstering Saudi Arabia's security capabilities, possibly through access to advanced weaponry that only the U.S. has and intelligence sharing that only the U.S. has.
Speaker: Also, there are concerns with nuclear cooperation, where Saudi Arabia is seeking the ability to enrich uranium, which is raising alarms about proliferation in the volatile area that is the Middle East.
Speaker: Since there is likely a long way to go before the Middle East is stable, let's move on to another difficult geopolitical location and talk about the most recent coup attempt in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Speaker: Can you provide us with an outline of what transpired since we last talked about the rise in violence in the area?
Speaker: Absolutely.
Speaker: So early this week, armed assailants, including American citizens, launched a coup attempt targeting the residents of Congolese politician Vital Khmeri and the presidential palace.
Speaker: Now, the leader of this coup attempt, Christian Balanga, is a former Congolese military captain.
Speaker: He is also a U.S. citizen, I believe, from Utah.
Speaker: And he was actually killed in a gun battle with presidential guards.
Speaker: He's from Utah?
Speaker: I see your face right now.
Speaker: I seriously did not know that.
Speaker: We've talked about Christian Malanga a couple times, and I don't think you've ever mentioned that he was a United States citizen from frickin' Utah.
Speaker: Yeah, I believe it's Utah.
Speaker: I'd have to go back and look at my notes.
Speaker: Either way, he's a United States citizen.
Speaker: He's a dual passport citizen.
Speaker: Blows my mind.
Speaker: Okay, well, obviously this is intriguing and an unsettling development.
Speaker: Why did Malanga and his supporters try to pull off this coup?
Speaker: Yeah, and I'm sure everybody's thinking, well, the CIA told them to.
Speaker: I can tell you from everything that I know that the CIA did not have any involvement in this one, as far as I know.
Speaker: Now, 25 years from now, when everything's declassified, and it comes out that the CIA did have involvement in it.
Speaker: It was outside my purview.
Speaker: So don't hate me for that.
Speaker: But...
Speaker: Everything I've looked up, this was not on the radar of U.S. intelligence or the CIA, which may come outside of the U.S. sometimes.
Speaker: But his so malangas motivations, which is what you asked about, seem to stem from dissatisfaction with the current government, which is honestly I'm not saying anything that people don't already know.
Speaker: That's what happens in a coup.
Speaker: You become dissatisfied with the government.
Speaker: He accused them of, whether rightly or wrongly, mismanagement and corruption.
Speaker: He expressed a desire for change within that country's government.
Speaker: Well, were there any significant repercussions from this attempted coup?
Speaker: Yeah, there were, even though the coup was eventually foiled.
Speaker: This highlights how precarious the DRC's political stability is.
Speaker: But Africa as a whole, this is not the first coup that has happened even in 2024.
Speaker: You were rightfully worried about the continent of Africa.
Speaker: You talked to me about it on a daily basis, about what is going on in that continent and how these consistently, these coups occur.
Speaker: Well, Africa has been a big part of our lives.
Speaker: I mean, I have never had the honor of setting foot in the continent, but you have been to multiple countries.
Speaker: I love every single one of them.
Speaker: Yeah, every single one you've been to, you always had lovely stories to come back with.
Speaker: Or, I don't know, you've had some scary stories too.
Speaker: But even the scary stories, it's my history.
Speaker: It's a part of our history.
Speaker: Yeah, I mean, not many people can say that they were also in country during a coup.
Speaker: I mean, that had been very scary.
Speaker: But, I mean, I feel like I said earlier in this podcast, we tend to focus on conflicts that affect America directly.
Speaker: or that we are involved in, whether it be directly or indirectly, by giving weapons to the people in the conflict.
Speaker: And, you know, I think it's important that we touch on as many continents as possible.
Speaker: I don't think we need to stick necessarily to, like, the big conflicts.
Speaker: We need to bring awareness to other conflicts that will also eventually affect
Speaker: Many other people, whether it be outside of, you know, other countries in Africa or extending outside of that into the Middle East or extending outside of that into Europe and Russia.
Speaker: And I guess Russia is part of Europe, but, you know, into Asia, like we don't know where these things can go.
Speaker: So I think it's important to acknowledge them.
Speaker: Yeah, you're exactly right.
Speaker: I do think that I, even though I've been across the African continent, I kind of gloss over some of the stuff that goes on because the entire continent has been destabilized.
Speaker: So when this kind of stuff happens, in my mind, I think I go, well, this is what happens because it's a destabilized region.
Speaker: I don't
Speaker: I try to, like, I understand, like, South America, I gloss over a lot because I don't understand it.
Speaker: I've never been there.
Speaker: I feel like we need to talk to Ricky about that.
Speaker: And I do think we need to talk about... Yeah, that's what I was going to say.
Speaker: Yeah, we need to bring in more...
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: And honestly, if we, you know, when we bring up South America, he should be the person who is the one who talks to you about it, because I don't know anything about South America.
Speaker: But I've also been, what, seven years away from my last deployment in Africa?
Speaker: Five.
Speaker: Okay, five years.
Speaker: Even then, it changes so much that even five years being apart from that, I have lost that focus.
Speaker: And I need, like, listen, if you are...
Speaker: If you're listening from Africa, please get in touch.
Speaker: If you understand the continent or if you are deploying consistently on the continent, I would love to hear from you because I'm not an expert anymore on the African continent.
Speaker: And I will admit that.
Speaker: Yeah, I'm an expert on geopolitical relations, on the intelligence within various continents.
Speaker: I'm an expert on annoying Kervin, so if you have any ways that I can ramp that up, please reach out to me.
Speaker: I would love to tick him off more.
Speaker: Yeah, if you're listening right now, pause it, go in the show notes.
Speaker: I'll put my email.
Speaker: Well, I'll put our administrator email in there so that we can all see it.
Speaker: I would love to hear from you if you're in Africa or you are an expert on it.
Speaker: This is what I think is important about intelligence is that it is not... You pull your resources.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Yes.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Not one person who's an expert on everything because you can't be.
Speaker: If you are one person who's an expert on everything.
Speaker: No, you'd have to you'd have to claim like it would be you personally claiming it because no one's going to say, look, this is this is an expert on everything on the planet, every country, everywhere.
Speaker: And then immediately I would ignore them.
Speaker: Yeah, that's why I like I know Cole promotes us a lot and I really appreciate that.
Speaker: But I will always promote what he's doing in the Indo-Pacific because I know for a fact he knows what I do in the Indo-Pacific.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: He's in New Zealand.
Speaker: But you're not going to get me to say I'm smarter than that, dude.
Speaker: on anything in the Indo-Pacific.
Speaker: You're just not gonna... I know I'm smarter in some things than some other people, but I'm also going to give everyone their due who is smarter than I am on a lot of things.
Speaker: That includes you, Tiana, who is smarter than me on a lot of things.
Speaker: Oh, whatever.
Speaker: Okay.
Speaker: All right.
Speaker: Let's move on.
Speaker: Move on.
Speaker: We'll get back to what's happening in the DRC, which I think what is very important about that is the participation of U.S. nationals, which buddies diplomatic ties between the U.S., the DRC, raises concerns about possible foreign influence.
Speaker: I was thinking of Florence Pugh, maybe?
Speaker: I don't know.
Speaker: So were they like his frat brothers or something since he's an American citizen too?
Speaker: Were they like his buddies, his little preschool friends?
Speaker: You got it there.
Speaker: I don't know if they're frat bros or anything like that, but yes, they are part of his network.
Speaker: And so within that network, he was able to influence those people to come out.
Speaker: Now, when I say it was U.S. nationals, it was like three U.S. nationals who were involved.
Speaker: I mean... That's still U.S. nationals.
Speaker: Initially, whenever you said there were U.S. nationals involved, I kind of bristled at it and I was confused.
Speaker: I was like, why are there Americans...
Speaker: you know, inserting themselves in this conflict that nobody asked them to insert themselves into.
Speaker: And then whenever Christian Malanga was also a U.S. citizen, it made sense.
Speaker: All the puzzle pieces clicked into place and I thought, oh, he had his buddies come help him.
Speaker: That's what I thought immediately.
Speaker: Well, I mean,
Speaker: It's a significant point that you made whenever you say that the participation of U.S. nationals muddies the diplomatic ties between the U.S. and the DRC.
Speaker: So how has the international community responded to these events?
Speaker: Well, the African Union condemned the coup attempt, but they also commended the DRC's security forces for their response with no mention of the United States involvement.
Speaker: So they have separated those two.
Speaker: It's not a U.S. government involvement.
Speaker: It's a U.S. citizen who's also a DRC passport holder.
Speaker: who got involved in it.
Speaker: So I will say there are concerns that remain about the broader implications for regional stability, but that's in Africa all over Africa.
Speaker: And that's why I want to go back to, yes, Deanna, I should focus more on that continent and that region.
Speaker: Kind of surprised, though, that the DRC didn't latch on to the fact that there were U.S. nationals involved in the coup.
Speaker: Because I can assure you, if we had any U.S. nationals sneak into, you know, the Russian border, you know, kind of like that soldier that had his girlfriend supposedly...
Speaker: You know, I mean, that was international.
Speaker: That was international news.
Speaker: And if we had, you know, any sort of U.S. national cross into the Russian border, but be part of the Ukrainian conflict, Russia would it wouldn't matter if it was legitimate or it was just them using their free will to fight against oppression in their minds.
Speaker: And they were just trying to protect Ukraine.
Speaker: It wouldn't have mattered.
Speaker: It would have been looked at as an act of war by the United States of America.
Speaker: And the fact that the DRC didn't look at it that way, it's impressive.
Speaker: You know, I agree with you.
Speaker: And yeah, you're right.
Speaker: Russia is waiting for that.
Speaker: one time.
Speaker: They're hoping, they're like, please, please let somebody be buddy-buddy with somebody who's about to come over here because that would be the coolest thing.
Speaker: That would be so great.
Speaker: They want U.S. special operations to be, to go into Ukraine
Speaker: And to legitimate, well, they don't, not just Ukraine, they want them to cross the border into Russia and try to do something because then that's an act of war.
Speaker: And I think if that does happen, Russia has a legitimate gripe to say, hey, on the international community, why is the U.S. allowing this to happen?
Speaker: We are able to now...
Speaker: have put sanctions on the U.S. and whoever sanctioned that U.S. special operations.
Speaker: So that's why special operations boots on the ground is not happening in Ukraine to move over into Russia because of that kind of stuff.
Speaker: And you're exactly right.
Speaker: The DRC is doing an incredible job of being diplomatic about it.
Speaker: And mature and not just making assumptions about things or use it using that to further whatever their cause is.
Speaker: You know what I mean?
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: To cross to pursue open borders and try to in, you know, broader their influence on the African continent.
Speaker: Right.
Speaker: Well, we will absolutely be discussing the DRC and more countries on the African continent for the foreseeable future.
Speaker: But for now, let's get to the final topic and discuss recent remarks by U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken.
Speaker: Which have stirred discussions about the evolving military balance in the Taiwanese Strait.
Speaker: Can you break down the significance of Blinken's acknowledgement that China may have the capability to invade Taiwan by 2027?
Speaker: Absolutely make a very good distinction there.
Speaker: China may have the capability.
Speaker: That doesn't mean they will do it at 2027.
Speaker: But Lincoln's acknowledgement aligns with my own assessments, as well as those from other U.S. intelligence agencies, which highlight the growing concern over China's military modernization and assertiveness in the region.
Speaker: Listen, we are in the middle of 2024 right now.
Speaker: As we're recording this, we are May 23rd, 2024.
Speaker: That means we are further in years from the start of the COVID pandemic than we are from the probability of a conflict with China, meaning 2027.
Speaker: Well, that is certainly a sobering assessment.
Speaker: Blinken also addressed a substantial backlog in arms orders from Taiwan amounting to 19 billion United States dollars.
Speaker: What are the implications of this backlog and how is the U.S. responding?
Speaker: Well, I mean, the backlog, first of all, reflects Taiwan's urgent need for defense equipment amid growing Chinese military threats.
Speaker: It is my opinion that it's imperative that the U.S. guarantee Taiwan self-defense readiness and accelerate arm sales.
Speaker: This is my opinion.
Speaker: Everybody can differ about that.
Speaker: we can have a conversation about it.
Speaker: This is not, for me, it's not about the U.S. or the West or Western Europe being the world's police.
Speaker: There are economic and national security implications to a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
Speaker: It's not about just chip manufacturing.
Speaker: It's about the free flow of maritime travel that would disrupt supply chains.
Speaker: So in order to
Speaker: To strengthen Taiwan's security posture and stave off possible attack, the U.S. must clear this weapons backlog.
Speaker: I see.
Speaker: Well, now U.S. Senator Bill Haggerty raised concerns about the limited funding proposed in President Biden's budget for Taiwan's defense.
Speaker: How does this funding shortfall impact U.S. support for Taiwan and what steps are being taken to address it?
Speaker: So as tensions with China rise, the funding deficit calls into doubt the U.S. commitment to Taiwan's security.
Speaker: If you're not going to help them defend themselves.
Speaker: I mean, we still openly say that we are one.
Speaker: We are part of the one China policy, right?
Speaker: Yes.
Speaker: Like as far as people know, we're one privately privately.
Speaker: Taiwan independence publicly.
Speaker: It's it's one China.
Speaker: Don't do it.
Speaker: It's basically saying China don't do anything and we won't mess up.
Speaker: But Xi wants that reunification.
Speaker: Now, although Taiwan received one hundred thirteen million dollars.
Speaker: from the projected budget.
Speaker: That amount, I would say, and Bill Haggerty, who you brought up, says it's insufficient to cover Taiwan's urgent defense needs.
Speaker: So in order to strengthen Taiwan's defense capabilities, efforts do need to be made to obtain greater financing and make use of tools like a recent act that was approved, which is the Taiwan Enhanced Resilience Act.
Speaker: So closing the financial gap and meeting Taiwan's defense, their defense needs could go a long way in delaying China's plans for an invasion.
Speaker: Well, thank you for providing clarity on that issue.
Speaker: You talk about delaying plans, but Blinken discussed the importance of deterrence in preventing potential Chinese aggression towards Taiwan.
Speaker: Do you think the U.S. can still deter China or has that ship sailed?
Speaker: No pun intended.
Speaker: Sorry about that.
Speaker: That was almost too lame.
Speaker: Yeah, because it's going to be a naval war.
Speaker: You had to do it, you know.
Speaker: Yeah, I mean, my assessment is that we're well past deterrence.
Speaker: Last year, I thought maybe we could keep down that path of deterrence.
Speaker: But nothing that this current administration, which I am neither pro or against the current administration in the U.S., but I will call them out when they do the wrong things.
Speaker: They have done nothing that has offered me any hope that G's plans for a violent reunification can be deterred.
Speaker: Now, what I'm saying is that means the focus should be shifted to delaying.
Speaker: Why delay?
Speaker: Well, a delay gives Taiwan and its allies like the U.S. a better opportunity to increase defense capabilities while also giving all players involved time.
Speaker: to get as prepared as possible.
Speaker: I go back to the statement from Donald Rumsfeld while I was deployed as an active duty member of the U.S. military, where he said, you go to war with the military you have, not the one that you want.
Speaker: As long as we can delay it long enough, we can get as close to the military we want than the one that we currently have, which I am very...
Speaker: I don't think we have an opportunity to defeat China right now with the military we have.
Speaker: Well, fascinating insights.
Speaker: Thank you, Carvin.
Speaker: Is that all you have for us?
Speaker: That's all I have.
Speaker: This is the end of the geopolitical portion of the podcast.
Speaker: And if you stayed with us this long, we appreciate you.
Speaker: But now we're going to ramble for a little while.
Speaker: Yes.
Speaker: Even though we've been rambling, I guess, technically for a while.
Speaker: But this is non-geopolitical ramblings.
Speaker: Yeah, next week's podcast will involve me recording from Oklahoma.
Speaker: Yes, it may be delayed.
Speaker: I mean, it may be a solo podcast if you can't do it.
Speaker: Yeah, that's true.
Speaker: It might be solo too.
Speaker: I don't know.
Speaker: Or maybe you can get Ricky on.
Speaker: I don't know.
Speaker: We'll figure it out.
Speaker: We'll figure it out.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: I mean, Internet and cell phone service is not the best on the reservation.
Speaker: I'm not staying on the reservation, but I will be spending.
Speaker: But you will be there until like midnight.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Yeah, you go there by like 8 o'clock in the morning and stay until 10 p.m.
Speaker: at night.
Speaker: It's long.
Speaker: And lunch could take all day.
Speaker: Okay?
Speaker: Okay, guys?
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: We're going to lunch.
Speaker: Just like when I'm in Vegas.
Speaker: Yeah, well, yeah.
Speaker: And that's going to happen, too.
Speaker: Yeah, and you're also going to be in Vegas, so hopefully the internet will be... It's not going to be better, but we can try.
Speaker: We'll try.
Speaker: Some of our podcasts might be a little weird through the summer because there's a lot of traveling that's coming up.
Speaker: It's a summer of change for us, honestly.
Speaker: Yeah, there's a lot going on, which some of the stuff we can't get into yet.
Speaker: We'll probably be able to divulge things by September.
Speaker: Yeah, by the middle of August.
Speaker: Well, not middle, end of August, I guess.
Speaker: Beginning of September.
Speaker: Yeah, we'll figure it out.
Speaker: We'll know by then.
Speaker: But yeah, there's a lot of traveling going on.
Speaker: I don't know how consistent we're going to be able to be yet.
Speaker: Yeah, there will be, there could be, very well be a couple of weeks.
Speaker: Especially if there's a big lull in geopolitical events.
Speaker: I feel like everything's in...
Speaker: ramping up you know i know there's some ramping up this podcast was supposed to be about two hours long and i had to cut back on the oh yeah explanations it wasn't i didn't take events out i just took more of the explanations out of what we were supposed to discuss
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: I mean, obviously, if there are things that you guys want further clarification on, you can email us and we can shoot out explanations to you if you so desire.
Speaker: I don't know.
Speaker: I don't know.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: That is something we do if you, like Tiana said, if you contact over email and you say, hey, there are two ways.
Speaker: And I've had people that we're close to do one of each.
Speaker: They go, hey,
Speaker: hey, can you wait to answer this on the podcast?
Speaker: I will do that then.
Speaker: And then there's been, hey, I really need an answer to this geopolitical event right now.
Speaker: Can you do that?
Speaker: And we'll do both of them.
Speaker: Yeah, if we have time.
Speaker: Let's be honest.
Speaker: We're not going to necessarily always be able to do it, but we will try to give it out to you in a timely manner.
Speaker: I'm trying to think of what else is going on with it.
Speaker: I mean, obviously, we have a lot going on this summer.
Speaker: But I just don't want to divulge too much too soon.
Speaker: You know what I mean?
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: You get it.
Speaker: And then when it does happen, like these things do happen, you'll realize when we do put it out, you'll go, oh, now I get it.
Speaker: That's why you couldn't put this out.
Speaker: There's a lot of things we can't say for certain events that are happening.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Very cool things, though.
Speaker: They're very cool.
Speaker: All right.
Speaker: I think we may have wrapped up everything we need to talk about.
Speaker: I mean, I didn't have too much to talk about anyways about my personal life.
Speaker: Well, if you guys are worried because we haven't talked about food, we ate previously to this podcast.
Speaker: Oh, yeah.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: We didn't talk about food.
Speaker: I did not cook today because our child had a baby.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: Well, never mind.
Speaker: I guess it didn't matter what our child was doing.
Speaker: But yeah, we already ate, even though I'm still kind of hungry right now.
Speaker: So there's that.
Speaker: That's why we got dessert.
Speaker: You shouldn't have mentioned food.
Speaker: That's true.
Speaker: Now that's so that's we ended the geopolitical portion.
Speaker: We ended the personal portion.
Speaker: Yeah.
Speaker: That's all I've got.
Speaker: Do you have anything else you want to add?
Speaker: I'm hungry and that's it.
Speaker: Okay.
Speaker: After saying we didn't talk about food.
Speaker: No, you're hungry.
Speaker: Well, I mean, you mentioned food.
Speaker: I'm going to get hungry.
Speaker: So that's how it works.
Speaker: Okay.
Speaker: All right.
Speaker: Well, thank you for listening to this tiny little independent geopolitical podcast.
Speaker: We hope you found it informative and engaging.
Speaker: If you have any feedback or suggestions for future episodes, please let us know.
Speaker: And if you would like in-depth coverage of these stories and more, follow us on Instagram at Oakland Analytics.
Speaker: Tiana, thank you so much.
Speaker: And until next week, stay safe out there.
Speaker: This podcast is a production of Unfiltered Studios.
Speaker: If you would like to know more about joining Unfiltered Studios, please visit our website at unfpod.com for more information.
