Latest / UK Column Radio / China, Russia & Iran Just Changed the World Order? | Silk and Steel

Transcript

China, Russia & Iran Just Changed the World Order? | Silk and Steel · UK Column Radio

0:02
Speaker 1: We are live huge news. The Chinese stock market seems
0:07
Speaker 1: to have crushed. Also, President Putin went to visit President
0:13
Speaker 1: in China. What were the ramifications? This was only a
0:16
Speaker 1: few days after Trump went to visit China. In addition
0:21
Speaker 1: to that, they discussed a wide range of deals and
0:25
Speaker 1: has China betrayed Iran? Are they going to continue supporting them?
0:29
Speaker 1: What does this all mean for the geopolitical landscape? We
0:32
Speaker 1: have Carl Zar, geopolitical expert on the show and also
0:37
Speaker 1: a historian. If you watch his history details, he details
0:41
Speaker 1: the entire history of China in detail in his patreons
0:44
Speaker 1: or if I was you, I would definitely be watching
0:46
Speaker 1: and following his channel. But I'm just gonna get him
0:48
Speaker 1: on right now. Kyle, thanks for joining us. How are
0:51
Speaker 1: you hi?
0:53
Speaker 2: How are you? Uh? Is my image not showing up?
0:56
Speaker 2: No showing?
0:57
Speaker 1: You're showing I can see you.
0:58
Speaker 2: Oh okay, okay, fine, how are you woman?
1:00
Speaker 1: I'm doing great. I'm doing great. How are you doing?
1:04
Speaker 2: I'm doing well.
1:05
Speaker 1: So let's get into it. So President Putin went to
1:10
Speaker 1: visit President g This was after the Trump visit. What's
1:12
Speaker 1: the thoughts on what happened there?
1:15
Speaker 2: Well, this is not a so so people like to
1:22
Speaker 2: compare the Trump visit and Putin visit, but they're actually
1:25
Speaker 2: fundamentally different because this is a second time Trump visited
1:28
Speaker 2: China in his capacity as a US president. This is
1:31
Speaker 2: the twenty fifth times that Putin visited China. So this
1:36
Speaker 2: is the This is just a regular touch up between
1:39
Speaker 2: the China and Russia leaders because they have China had
1:49
Speaker 2: and Russia president famously said on his last trip to Moscow,
1:54
Speaker 2: He's told President Putin, now we're witnessing changes that we
1:59
Speaker 2: haven't seen in one hundred years, and you and I
2:03
Speaker 2: are the one who is going to drive these changes.
2:06
Speaker 2: And Putin agreed, and before Putin's trip to Beijing, President
2:11
Speaker 2: Putin also said, China and Russia will together collaborate to
2:17
Speaker 2: preserve peace and stability around the world, and we will
2:20
Speaker 2: uphold international law and you and Charter. This is obviously
2:25
Speaker 2: a dig to United States. You know, right now US
2:29
Speaker 2: is whiching illegal war on Iran, who is no respect
2:33
Speaker 2: for sovereignty or international law. And Putin brought with him
2:41
Speaker 2: who is who among the Russian bureaucracy because there was
2:45
Speaker 2: a lot of government to government deals to be signed.
2:48
Speaker 2: This is in sharp contrast with Trump's visit to China
2:52
Speaker 2: again because Trump, other than a Secretary of State and
2:57
Speaker 2: Secretary of War Pete Headset, he brought his son and
3:01
Speaker 2: daughter in law and a bunch of American oligarchs, right,
3:05
Speaker 2: and in comparison, there's very little preparation actually for Trump's
3:10
Speaker 2: trip to China, at least on the American side. This
3:13
Speaker 2: is how Chinese perceived it, because this was a trip
3:16
Speaker 2: that was requested by Trump repeatedly, whereas Putin to China
3:22
Speaker 2: trip is more like a routine touch up between two neighbors.
3:26
Speaker 2: So these these are fundamental differences. And Putin also did not,
3:31
Speaker 2: unlike Trump, did not use this merely as a photo
3:34
Speaker 2: op because he was here on business. He has been
3:37
Speaker 2: here before. He is very comfortable in Beijing, where he
3:42
Speaker 2: has a very a good personal rapport with the President.
3:45
Speaker 2: Hijimpain and Russia China tie is even more important in
3:51
Speaker 2: today's world, especially in the face of US aggression, and
3:56
Speaker 2: there is a certain level of coordination, I believe among Russia,
4:01
Speaker 2: China and Iran. If you notice the timing of the visit,
4:04
Speaker 2: Iranian Foreign Minister Arachi visited Beijing first and followed by
4:09
Speaker 2: Trump and now followed by Putin. I think China, Russia, Iran,
4:14
Speaker 2: they are touching bases, They're coordinating, They are trying to
4:18
Speaker 2: figure out a coordinating strategy how they can deal with
4:22
Speaker 2: the United States. There's actually a recent paper that's put
4:26
Speaker 2: out by one of the major think tanks, back by
4:29
Speaker 2: the China's top intelligence of Intelligence Agency MSS that basically
4:37
Speaker 2: says the worst is over. You know, it's remarkable for
4:42
Speaker 2: the change of ton because traditionally they having output stuff
4:46
Speaker 2: like Okay, we must hunker down, we must survive America.
4:49
Speaker 2: We must survive in a world where it's increasingly chaotic,
4:54
Speaker 2: where United States no longer respect the international norms and
4:58
Speaker 2: is recklessly wrecked King the Pope for international order. But
5:03
Speaker 2: now the tone of the article is shifted. It's saying like,
5:06
Speaker 2: we got to manage the America's decline. So this is
5:10
Speaker 2: quite different from like we gotta hunker down and just
5:13
Speaker 2: survive this great American running a mark to Okay, now
5:17
Speaker 2: we just got to sit down like adults. We've gotta
5:19
Speaker 2: like just contain the damage United States can do to
5:23
Speaker 2: the world.
5:25
Speaker 1: Okay, I've got a few more questions on the meeting,
5:27
Speaker 1: But just before I do, I've got another question about
5:30
Speaker 1: the stock market, the Chinese stock market just because it's
5:34
Speaker 1: crushed apparently. But just before our do guys, if you're
5:36
Speaker 1: on the X space, there's a tweet in the nest.
5:40
Speaker 1: Everyone come across there. We'll continue the interview on the
5:44
Speaker 1: YouTube channel, so we will be ending the space. So
5:47
Speaker 1: everyone come across. We've got Carlza and then immediately after
5:51
Speaker 1: that we've got Anthony Agals. Come across to the tweet
5:53
Speaker 1: in the nest. Carl, the Chinese stock market has crushed.
5:58
Speaker 1: What's going on? Is it all for China?
6:01
Speaker 2: One thing China, one thing people should know is there's
6:05
Speaker 2: zero correlation between Chinese stock market and the real Chinese iconomy.
6:11
Speaker 2: If you look at the stock market chart for the
6:13
Speaker 2: Chinese stock market for the last twenty five years, a
6:17
Speaker 2: lot of the investors in the Chinese stock market didn't
6:20
Speaker 2: really make a lot of money compared to say, if
6:23
Speaker 2: they invested in US stock market. But if you look
6:26
Speaker 2: at the actual economy, Chinese economy of course have grown
6:31
Speaker 2: by the multiples. This is by design, by the way,
6:33
Speaker 2: because Chinese government, they they use a stock market as
6:38
Speaker 2: a way to funnel cap capital to you know, stay
6:43
Speaker 2: on your enterprises. And some strategic industries like they like
6:47
Speaker 2: to foster. It's not meant for outside investors to make money.
6:53
Speaker 2: So that's a big difference. People need to understand this.
6:56
Speaker 2: Like I actually had a debate with a mitrofessor of
7:01
Speaker 2: management from the Sloan School. He's he he is a
7:06
Speaker 2: big India booster, Professor Wungsen. I forgot his name, but anyway,
7:12
Speaker 2: he's a Chinese American professor, but he's a big booster
7:14
Speaker 2: of India. He often compared that India with China and
7:18
Speaker 2: his thesis is that India will overtake China. Well that
7:21
Speaker 2: was his thesis for the last twenty years. So I
7:24
Speaker 2: challenged him on that and his reply is, you should
7:27
Speaker 2: look at the Indian stock market versus the performance of
7:30
Speaker 2: Chinese stock market over the last twenty years. So I admit,
7:34
Speaker 2: you know, you would have made a lot more money
7:36
Speaker 2: if you invested in the Indian stock market. But again
7:40
Speaker 2: that does not correlate to you know, the quality of
7:45
Speaker 2: life experienced by people actually living in China versus living
7:48
Speaker 2: in India, because the market and the real economy they
7:56
Speaker 2: are two different, separate things that'not connected.
8:01
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, and obviously I wouldn't trust the Indian stock
8:04
Speaker 1: market as well, without the separate point. So in terms
8:09
Speaker 1: of but what was the reason for the actual I
8:11
Speaker 1: know you're trying to make the disconnect, but what's the
8:13
Speaker 1: reason for the crash?
8:15
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, stock market goes up and down. It's
8:18
Speaker 2: like sometimes the sometimes just profit taking. Sometimes it's it's
8:24
Speaker 2: maybe the capital got spooked. I mean, there could be
8:27
Speaker 2: many reasons for stock stock market crash. Sometimes it just uh,
8:33
Speaker 2: he has gone up long enough and and it just
8:36
Speaker 2: it must come down. It's like I said, there's no
8:39
Speaker 2: rhyme and the whatever rite and reason of the stock
8:43
Speaker 2: market doesn't really affect the Chinese real economy. So I'm
8:47
Speaker 2: not too particularly concerned about that because I personally not
8:51
Speaker 2: investing in the Chinese stock markets. I don't care either way.
8:56
Speaker 1: Fair enough, fair enough. Now, you mentioned during the Pooh
9:00
Speaker 1: in g meeting there was a lot of Russian businessmen
9:06
Speaker 1: went Well, that was that not the same case when
9:08
Speaker 1: Trump when he had a lot of billionaires, a lot
9:10
Speaker 1: of tech industry guys, technocrats, various others. So how do
9:15
Speaker 1: you differentiate these two meetings in terms of the pastonela
9:18
Speaker 1: that were taken.
9:20
Speaker 2: Well, he actually shows who is running the country in
9:23
Speaker 2: Russia versus United States. I mean Trump actually brought the
9:27
Speaker 2: people who actually ruled the United States. We're talking about
9:31
Speaker 2: the oligarchs from Goldman Sachs to Blackstone to Massacre, Visa,
9:37
Speaker 2: all the financial capital and the tech capital like Elon
9:41
Speaker 2: Musk and CEO Nvidia, Jens and Huang. So these are
9:46
Speaker 2: the people who really rule America. Whereas you know, in
9:51
Speaker 2: Russia's case, you can see the Russian government is still
9:53
Speaker 2: very much in control. He brought a lot of Russian
9:57
Speaker 2: bureaucrats who came to ink deal with the Chinese counterparts.
10:02
Speaker 2: And there's also a as I mentioned, there's a level
10:06
Speaker 2: of difference in terms of preparation. The Trump's visit really
10:11
Speaker 2: kind of last minute at HOC because this was a
10:14
Speaker 2: visit that Trump himself very much desired. So he will
10:18
Speaker 2: have a chance to be cast into spotlight without Epstein files,
10:23
Speaker 2: without you brought that the mess in the straight or
10:26
Speaker 2: home moves and we're as we're as. For Trump, this
10:30
Speaker 2: is just a routine business trip for him and uh
10:34
Speaker 2: she Pu shore up their their relationship and and especially
10:38
Speaker 2: in today's environment, firstly solidify their cooperation because right now
10:43
Speaker 2: Russia is doing very good business in the energy market
10:46
Speaker 2: right now they are with the with a stop or
10:50
Speaker 2: flow of oil and gas out of Persian gold. Russia,
10:53
Speaker 2: uh is is you know, they're they're they're making they're
10:57
Speaker 2: they're making bank and and they are one of the
11:00
Speaker 2: largest producer of energy and commodity, and China is one
11:05
Speaker 2: of the largest consumer of energy and commodity. So the
11:08
Speaker 2: two countries have a naturally complementary interest and naturally complementary economies.
11:14
Speaker 2: This is this is the part that a lot of
11:20
Speaker 2: the American geopolitical observers seem not to understand. They seem
11:23
Speaker 2: like they keep on talking about reverse kissingering, like splitting
11:27
Speaker 2: Russia and China. What they didn't understand is even Kissinger
11:31
Speaker 2: did not engineers the Sino Soviet split. Back then, the
11:34
Speaker 2: Sino Silviet split happened first. Nixon and Kissinger just were
11:39
Speaker 2: able to exploit this split to pio China away. But
11:43
Speaker 2: today there's no reason for a Sino Russian split because
11:48
Speaker 2: both sides had their own priorities. Russia's priority remains Ukraine,
11:52
Speaker 2: China's priority remains Taiwan, and the two share a very
11:57
Speaker 2: long international border. It's too the interest of both sides
12:01
Speaker 2: to see the border remain peaceful, unstable, and on top
12:06
Speaker 2: of that, they continue their energy cooperation. So there are
12:09
Speaker 2: many reasons that ties Russia and China together, not just
12:14
Speaker 2: opposition to the United States.
12:17
Speaker 1: Fair enough. I don't know if you've heard of an individual,
12:22
Speaker 1: a Chinese guy called Professor Jiang.
12:25
Speaker 2: Yes, I have.
12:26
Speaker 1: So he holds the theory that essentially what happened was
12:32
Speaker 1: Trump and China are working secretly together on this AI
12:37
Speaker 1: pallanteer surveillance date and to implement it onto the populace.
12:42
Speaker 1: And actually Russia has been segregated and separated from this alliance,
12:48
Speaker 1: and now Russia is going to have to align with Europe.
12:51
Speaker 1: What do you say about the views of your countrymen.
12:54
Speaker 2: Well, first of all, he's not my countryman. He is
12:58
Speaker 2: a Canadian citizen. He immigrated to Canada when he was
13:02
Speaker 2: eight years old. I mean I do have similar experience
13:05
Speaker 2: like him, because I immigrated to United States when I
13:08
Speaker 2: was thirteen. But you know, he's not my country mind,
13:11
Speaker 2: he's Canadian. I have a US passport, We do have
13:15
Speaker 2: both of the Chinese heritage. And his idea that somehow
13:21
Speaker 2: US and China is working together on a I don't
13:24
Speaker 2: find too much water in that because if you look
13:26
Speaker 2: at the US chip sanction which started under the first
13:30
Speaker 2: Trump administration, the whole reason for the US chip sanction
13:34
Speaker 2: is USAI industry was afraid that they're going to be
13:38
Speaker 2: surpassed by China, so they wanted to handicap the Chinese
13:41
Speaker 2: AI industry by restrict their access to advanced AI chips.
13:47
Speaker 2: That was the whole point. And if you look at
13:51
Speaker 2: especially people FUM volunteers, these are the most anti China guys.
13:55
Speaker 2: These are the guys who are sponsoring all these think
13:58
Speaker 2: tanks printing all these articles why there should be a
14:02
Speaker 2: semiconductor blockade against China. I don't think that has changed,
14:07
Speaker 2: you know, like video is a little bit different in
14:10
Speaker 2: video because they want to sell chips to China. They
14:13
Speaker 2: just lost the Chinese market thanks to Trump's chip sanction.
14:18
Speaker 2: They their their market share in China went from like
14:20
Speaker 2: ninety percent to basically zero. Uh So they're trying to
14:25
Speaker 2: call their way back into the Chinese market. But for
14:28
Speaker 2: for people like Eric Schmidt, the x Google CEO, or
14:35
Speaker 2: Peter Theo, uh, you know, the and all these Palatiner guys,
14:40
Speaker 2: they're they're still very much ideologically committed to the competition
14:46
Speaker 2: with China. You know, one of the reasons they you know,
14:50
Speaker 2: they they're so anti China is because this is how
14:54
Speaker 2: they justify the AI bubble. If you if you look
14:57
Speaker 2: at how they justify why United States might must spend
15:01
Speaker 2: hundreds of billions of dollars into this AI buondago is
15:05
Speaker 2: they say, we must win this race against China. You know,
15:10
Speaker 2: if we win, we can continue the American hegemony for
15:13
Speaker 2: like another thousand years. You know, we will have we
15:17
Speaker 2: will achieve AGI first, and you'll be over for the Chinese.
15:20
Speaker 2: So the idea that somehow they're going to agree to
15:22
Speaker 2: work together, I don't find that credible. What what they
15:26
Speaker 2: did agree though, is a protocol. And this again, this
15:31
Speaker 2: is just a very preliminary agreement on on AI development.
15:38
Speaker 2: So what I mean is there's a concern that the
15:42
Speaker 2: artificial intelligence development might get out of the hand, might
15:46
Speaker 2: get out of hand, you know when when the thinking
15:48
Speaker 2: machines UH turn seem to be controlling taking over the
15:54
Speaker 2: human society, you know, like terminate Nator type of world.
15:57
Speaker 2: So so this is actually a low hanging through for
16:01
Speaker 2: US China cooperation. But basically say they both agree there
16:07
Speaker 2: are limits, there should be limits to AI development. We
16:12
Speaker 2: shouldn't go beyond a certain point where the AI development
16:15
Speaker 2: will endanger humanity. So that's what they agree upon. But
16:19
Speaker 2: again this is very broad term. This is one of
16:24
Speaker 2: the top point that Trump and Chi Jinpin were raised
16:29
Speaker 2: during their meeting, and and the meeting there's really agree
16:33
Speaker 2: The real agreement is really the continual conversation, a dialogue
16:37
Speaker 2: between these two two to keep each other a breast
16:40
Speaker 2: of the AI development in each country and to the
16:45
Speaker 2: goal with the goal to prevent some kind of freakish
16:48
Speaker 2: AI takeover, unintended AI takeover of society, which I think
16:53
Speaker 2: is a very it's an easy win for both sides.
16:56
Speaker 2: I mean, every bit buddy can say we don't want
16:59
Speaker 2: machine is to take over humans, right, but actually how
17:02
Speaker 2: to implement that the details so say, okay, we should
17:12
Speaker 2: put certain limitation around the AI development so we don't
17:16
Speaker 2: end up with a terminator type of society. But this
17:21
Speaker 2: is very early on, they're still talking. I don't think
17:25
Speaker 2: there's any concrete agreement following from that. So but from
17:31
Speaker 2: that go to like they are cooperating together with Volunteer,
17:35
Speaker 2: I just don't buy that because Volunteer and the Chinese
17:38
Speaker 2: AI companies they are competitors their rivals, and particularly the
17:45
Speaker 2: AI model in the United States, they are mostly close
17:49
Speaker 2: close model. The idea of the AI monopoly in the
17:55
Speaker 2: United States is they're gonna right now grab the market
17:58
Speaker 2: share and once every thing is AI base, they will
18:02
Speaker 2: click a toe by charging everybody a lot of money
18:05
Speaker 2: for using their AI product. But what the Chinese AI
18:09
Speaker 2: company did, especially like deep Seek, is they're going for
18:13
Speaker 2: the open source development and they're handing out things for free.
18:16
Speaker 2: And that is breaking the that's breaking the business model
18:21
Speaker 2: of US AI company, particularly company like sand Altman's Open
18:26
Speaker 2: Ai and and that you know that fundamentally threatened the
18:31
Speaker 2: AI bubble. People are going to ask questions, why do
18:34
Speaker 2: you need five hundred billion dollars for Stargate project if
18:37
Speaker 2: we can just go use the Chinese AI product for free?
18:41
Speaker 2: You know what, what is?
18:44
Speaker 1: What?
18:44
Speaker 2: What what do? What benefit do you bring to the table,
18:46
Speaker 2: And that's a that's a question they find very hard
18:49
Speaker 2: to answer. So their answer is we're gonna cripple the
18:52
Speaker 2: Chinese AI industry by restricting their access to the chips
18:57
Speaker 2: and so so this fundamental difference, I don't think it's
19:00
Speaker 2: easily resolvable. And this is why I don't see a
19:04
Speaker 2: cooperation possible in near terms.
19:08
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean the Chinese is open source. But the
19:11
Speaker 1: bit that I'm not too sure about in terms of
19:13
Speaker 1: what you mentioned, is this cooperation about restrictions or measures
19:19
Speaker 1: being put in place with AI. I doubt that's the
19:22
Speaker 1: case with the Americans and the and the Westerners. And
19:25
Speaker 1: the reason I say that is because part of the
19:28
Speaker 1: reason they're going to say that you shouldn't have these
19:30
Speaker 1: red tips, that you shouldn't have these stop gaps is
19:33
Speaker 1: because what's worse China having control over the world or
19:38
Speaker 1: we have in these stop gaps and measures. So I
19:40
Speaker 1: actually think the opposite. I think they're gonna fight for
19:43
Speaker 1: no regulations in AI in the US, and we're seeing
19:47
Speaker 1: that now there's a number of legislation that's been put
19:49
Speaker 1: in place. They're essentially ensure there's no regulation. And if
19:52
Speaker 1: you remember, Elon Musk was talking about AI regulation a
19:55
Speaker 1: few years ago and now he's not talking about it at all.
19:57
Speaker 1: So I don't so I don't think they want that.
19:59
Speaker 1: So if that discussion was happening, as per what you're saying,
20:02
Speaker 1: I don't see the reason for unless they're just trying
20:04
Speaker 1: to manipulate the Chinese.
20:07
Speaker 2: It could be. I mean, like I said, this is
20:08
Speaker 2: very preliminary, just agreement in principle. There's nothing. They haven't
20:14
Speaker 2: laid any ground for actual, like concrete steps on how
20:17
Speaker 2: they're going to implement their agreement. So I you know,
20:21
Speaker 2: listen to their words, watch their.
20:22
Speaker 1: Actions, no doubt. Guys, make sure you're liking this video.
20:27
Speaker 1: If everyone could like it, that would be awesome. Now
20:30
Speaker 1: coming back to the discussion in terms of China and Iran,
20:36
Speaker 1: what's the Chinese perspective on the Iran War? Now? Many
20:40
Speaker 1: view this as China taking a step back. Some view
20:43
Speaker 1: it as China possibly forcing Iran into negotiations that are
20:48
Speaker 1: not beneficial for Iran. Some view it as possibly the
20:52
Speaker 1: Chinese wanting this water to continue because it weakens America.
20:56
Speaker 1: What's your whole perspective on what's happening. Have the Chinese
20:59
Speaker 1: perspective on the wall changed?
21:01
Speaker 2: Well, Chinese perspective has always been there. Rather, there's no war.
21:06
Speaker 2: You know, the thing that China hate most is instability,
21:12
Speaker 2: and so it actually did not like the fact that
21:15
Speaker 2: US and Israel started this illegal war of aggression against
21:19
Speaker 2: Iran that disrupted the whole global economy. Now, China do
21:23
Speaker 2: like to see a political settlement of the issue. That's
21:27
Speaker 2: why China has been working together with Pakistan. But also
21:31
Speaker 2: is I wrong on getting the peace talk going? But
21:37
Speaker 2: whether that peace talk is gonna go, But China is
21:41
Speaker 2: not going to press you wrong to agree to terms
21:46
Speaker 2: advantageous to United States. They're two different things. China want
21:50
Speaker 2: peace talk, but China did not want a peace talk
21:53
Speaker 2: that result in a US victory in the Persian Gulf. Right,
21:57
Speaker 2: these are two fundamentally different things. China has stated over
22:01
Speaker 2: and over again. You know, it supports Uran's fight for
22:04
Speaker 2: its own sovereignty because China is one of the one
22:08
Speaker 2: of the major states right now that actually takes a
22:11
Speaker 2: whole Westphelian idea of sovereignty seriously, and and and and
22:18
Speaker 2: what China would like to do is to have a
22:22
Speaker 2: permanent peace settlement. Same way. This is not that's different
22:26
Speaker 2: from what Uran wants to do. Uron said they don't
22:29
Speaker 2: want to cease fire. They want a peace settlement that
22:32
Speaker 2: will prevent future attack against Iran ever happening again. And
22:38
Speaker 2: to that end, Uran's demand is US withdraw pay reparations,
22:42
Speaker 2: lift sanctions, and United States UH recognize Iran's control of
22:47
Speaker 2: straight or Homus and enshrine that in UN resolution. Now,
22:52
Speaker 2: those demands are going to be very hard to accept
22:55
Speaker 2: for United States because by accepting them, US is basically
22:59
Speaker 2: admitting complete defeat in West Asia. So this is why
23:03
Speaker 2: we're seeing the situation of the long drawn out cease fire,
23:09
Speaker 2: you know, on and off and the Blackade, because Trump
23:13
Speaker 2: is playing a game of chicken visa v Iran. He's
23:17
Speaker 2: hoping by him choking off Uran's own energy production and
23:22
Speaker 2: an energy export, that he will force you wrong to
23:25
Speaker 2: accept to agree to the terms that advantages to the
23:29
Speaker 2: United States, which is Huron give up on its nuclear
23:33
Speaker 2: uh enrichment, and which by the way, Yuran agreed to
23:39
Speaker 2: back in the days before Trump's first term, and he
23:43
Speaker 2: tore out that agreement himself. But I just don't see
23:52
Speaker 2: I just don't see you wan, will I indeed a
23:55
Speaker 2: guaranteed to their security for this for urund this is
23:58
Speaker 2: an existential fight and for that kind of security guarantee
24:04
Speaker 2: in these United States to get f out of West Asia,
24:09
Speaker 2: and that again that means dismantling of the US empire
24:14
Speaker 2: in the region. So we're likely going to see this
24:18
Speaker 2: drag out longer than anybody expected, because I feel United
24:24
Speaker 2: States hadn't really fell, hasn't truly felt the pain yet.
24:30
Speaker 2: They haven't at least they hadn't felt enough pain to
24:32
Speaker 2: conclude that they need to wrap this up because because
24:36
Speaker 2: the time delay effect, you know, it takes twenty to
24:38
Speaker 2: third fifty days for oil to travel from Persian Golf
24:42
Speaker 2: to to like to United States are particularly to the
24:47
Speaker 2: West coast of the United States. So the last shipment
24:50
Speaker 2: of oil from Persian Golf that was that left the
24:55
Speaker 2: Persian Golf before the war just arrived in port of
24:57
Speaker 2: Los Angeles like a week ago. So the short hasn't
25:01
Speaker 2: really settled in yet. So I think it's when the
25:04
Speaker 2: two Panics that settle in that will force Trump's hand.
25:07
Speaker 2: But probably Trump is still trying to you know, trying
25:11
Speaker 2: to make it as last as long as possible.
25:14
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean I see a deal happening. I see
25:18
Speaker 1: the fact that there could be a deal very unlikely,
25:21
Speaker 1: and that's because of, as you said, the nuclear Richmond.
25:24
Speaker 1: But I think nuclear enrichment could get a deal if
25:26
Speaker 1: it wasn't for this Israel release. It's the strait of
25:28
Speaker 1: Remoose issue that makes it a lot more complicated, but
25:31
Speaker 1: a question to you. The Chinese obviously are the most
25:35
Speaker 1: impacted by the straight of Remoose closing.
25:37
Speaker 2: Now.
25:37
Speaker 1: I know that they had about thirty vessels come out
25:40
Speaker 1: last week, and there has been a number of vessels
25:43
Speaker 1: that have come out over even though the strait was closed.
25:46
Speaker 1: But that being said, it's nowhere near the number that
25:48
Speaker 1: it used to be. What's the Chinese situation. I know
25:51
Speaker 1: they have a reserve of sixty days, but it's gonna
25:54
Speaker 1: bit risky for the Chinese. What's your thoughts.
25:57
Speaker 2: Well, in the short term, China will be okay because
26:00
Speaker 2: there's still one hundred and fifty five million barrels of
26:03
Speaker 2: Uranian oil that's currently in South China Sea sitting in
26:07
Speaker 2: tankers in South China Sea that haven't even arrived in
26:10
Speaker 2: ports in China yet, So that that that that that
26:13
Speaker 2: will buffer China's energy needs for a while. And again,
26:18
Speaker 2: like I said, China have is an electrical state. It
26:23
Speaker 2: did a great job of electrification of its economy, so
26:27
Speaker 2: it's less reliant on hydrocarbons as before. But obviously the
26:35
Speaker 2: longer this drags on, the more problem you will be
26:39
Speaker 2: for the Chinese economy. So obviously China have interest to
26:43
Speaker 2: see this issue resolved as soon as possible, as do
26:46
Speaker 2: everybody around the world. Actually, because right now we are
26:51
Speaker 2: literally the last window of spring planting season right now,
26:56
Speaker 2: like it's almost summer, and farmer, like I say, farmers
27:00
Speaker 2: don't get their fertilizer and put their crops in the ground,
27:03
Speaker 2: we're going to have shortages end of the year, and
27:07
Speaker 2: which looks increasingly likely at this point. And and and
27:12
Speaker 2: when you have food shortages, that's that's uh, that that
27:16
Speaker 2: that's pretty big. That's that's gonna that's gonna have instability
27:19
Speaker 2: all around the world, not just the West Asia.
27:22
Speaker 1: I was speaking to Larry Johnson yesterday and one of
27:25
Speaker 1: the things we discussed was that when could the war restart?
27:30
Speaker 1: And the issue you have is, first of all, it's
27:34
Speaker 1: hatch in the South Arabia, and so the Saudis are
27:37
Speaker 1: very much averse to war happening because they have millions
27:40
Speaker 1: of pilgrim pilgrims who come to South Arabia. In addition
27:44
Speaker 1: to that, in the United States of America, from June
27:48
Speaker 1: the eleventh, that is the FIFA World Cup, which is
27:51
Speaker 1: probably the biggest sporting event in the world, and the
27:55
Speaker 1: final is watched by is the most watched sporting event
27:59
Speaker 1: in the world, and Trump has really pushed the World Cup,
28:02
Speaker 1: if you remember, they gave him the trophy and various
28:04
Speaker 1: other things. So looking at this, would Trump restart the
28:08
Speaker 1: war during any of that time and then be if
28:12
Speaker 1: he wouldn't, does that not mean that there's going to
28:13
Speaker 1: be even more DELAIUS?
28:15
Speaker 2: Well, I think the only incentive for US to restart
28:20
Speaker 2: the war at this point is if Trump thinks that's
28:24
Speaker 2: that gave him a realistic chance to end the war,
28:27
Speaker 2: to end the war resolving to US satisfaction. But I
28:31
Speaker 2: just don't see that happened. I mean, US does not
28:33
Speaker 2: have the capability to reopen this rat or hormones. If
28:38
Speaker 2: anyone that can reopen this raal hormones, it's Iran. If
28:46
Speaker 2: US could reopen this RAI hormone, it's because they can
28:50
Speaker 2: and and so they don't really have any good options
28:53
Speaker 2: in that regard, So I don't. I think it's more
28:58
Speaker 2: likely that Trump will continue to issue threats and then
29:02
Speaker 2: back off at the last moment, just like he has
29:04
Speaker 2: done in the past few weeks, because US really do
29:08
Speaker 2: not have any good options. But what he's trying to
29:11
Speaker 2: do is he's trying to delay the inevitable. He's trying
29:14
Speaker 2: to he's trying to delay the US admission to its
29:20
Speaker 2: own defeat in the Persian Gulf. But I it's yeah,
29:26
Speaker 2: I mean it's Uh. He's hoping that Iran Irani economy
29:30
Speaker 2: will collap first, uh, in the face of US block
29:34
Speaker 2: But I just don't think that will happen because you
29:37
Speaker 2: Irq has been under sanctioned for decades.
29:41
Speaker 1: Uh.
29:41
Speaker 2: You know, they know how to make do with less,
29:45
Speaker 2: whereas Americans, you know, the Americans that haven't really lived
29:49
Speaker 2: through real shortages and and it's going to be a
29:52
Speaker 2: lot harder for the Americans to adjust to the new reality.
29:57
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's the concern. But then we'll go. But feel
30:01
Speaker 1: like we're just basically at the same point because you're
30:03
Speaker 1: in basically a situation where there's negotiations. We both agree
30:07
Speaker 1: that a deal is very difficult. We both agree that
30:11
Speaker 1: getting connect Kinnectic won't benefit the situation. The only all
30:15
Speaker 1: the option is that Trump essentially bends the knee and
30:18
Speaker 1: agrees to Iran's demands. But then he won't do that
30:21
Speaker 1: as well. So in reality, what's going to happen The
30:24
Speaker 1: straighter Men's closed but the straighter men's closed, isn't the
30:27
Speaker 1: Chinese going to be most effective.
30:30
Speaker 2: Chinese? China will not be the most affected or China
30:34
Speaker 2: will act effect. China will be affected, China will be
30:38
Speaker 2: not as affected by everyone else around the world, you know,
30:44
Speaker 2: especially US allies like Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, even India,
30:52
Speaker 2: and so so every everybody will hurt. Everybody will hurt,
30:56
Speaker 2: but they will not be hurt equally. And and China
30:59
Speaker 2: will definitely not be the most affected. But of course
31:02
Speaker 2: China will be impacted as well, because you know, China
31:05
Speaker 2: do consume a lot of energy. They're gonna have to
31:08
Speaker 2: They're gonna have to accelerate, which they likely will do,
31:12
Speaker 2: accelerate their current program pushing for further electrification. And but
31:19
Speaker 2: but there are just certain products you can really replace
31:22
Speaker 2: oil right now, that's chemical fertilizers and jet fuel everything else.
31:29
Speaker 2: You know, they can carry on evs or electric trucks
31:34
Speaker 2: or or high speed trains. But yeah, there will be
31:40
Speaker 2: I think we're hitting into the world, Sulaman, We're hitting
31:43
Speaker 2: into a world that's gonna be reminiscence of the oil
31:48
Speaker 2: shock of nineteen seventies, and it was probably much bigger
31:52
Speaker 2: impact because you know, people forget the oil shock. Actually
31:57
Speaker 2: the Opec oil in Bargo actually didn't last that long,
32:03
Speaker 2: but you had a profound impact of realigning economies. We
32:08
Speaker 2: are we're just witnessing the beginning of that right now.
32:11
Speaker 2: This will be have a major push for adoption of
32:16
Speaker 2: solar and evs, and China can't benefit from that because
32:21
Speaker 2: you know, Chinese is the largest producer of evs and solar. Yeah.
32:26
Speaker 1: Yeah, and now another question I have for you is
32:30
Speaker 1: just moving the conversation slightly, is Russia. Russia you mentioned
32:34
Speaker 1: is benefiting quite a lot from energy, but Russia has
32:38
Speaker 1: a problem where it's still in law and is being
32:41
Speaker 1: hit quite deep, and a lot of the Russian refineries
32:43
Speaker 1: are being hit as well. How are the Russians able
32:46
Speaker 1: to deal with the situation.
32:47
Speaker 2: Well, I think, you know, apparently certain veal coordination attacking
32:55
Speaker 2: Russian refinery because somebody do not want Russia to benefit
32:59
Speaker 2: too much from this current crisis in the strat or
33:02
Speaker 2: homus uh, that's why they're specifically targeting Russian refinery. You know,
33:08
Speaker 2: like ostensiblelice is done by Ukrainians, but you know, Ukrainian
33:11
Speaker 2: receive a lot of help from NATO and the United States.
33:16
Speaker 2: And but I think overall Russia will be fine because
33:20
Speaker 2: they they still sit on top of abundant natural resources,
33:25
Speaker 2: and in a in a couple of months, in a
33:28
Speaker 2: couple of months, the Arctic route will open up, the
33:32
Speaker 2: ice cap will melt in the Arctic, and so the
33:35
Speaker 2: Russian then will be able to transport their oil via
33:39
Speaker 2: the Arctic route, which is less shorter than actually going
33:43
Speaker 2: through uh, you know, the reds going through the Swiss
33:46
Speaker 2: Canal and Red Sea and cross the Indian Ocean, et cetera. So, uh,
33:52
Speaker 2: in the long term, you know, Russia will be fine.
33:55
Speaker 2: It does need to deal with some problem in the
33:58
Speaker 2: short term, like you said, like the tax sabotage and
34:01
Speaker 2: tax on its refinery, but I think you know, it's
34:04
Speaker 2: not it's a it's a nuisance, but it's not existential
34:09
Speaker 2: for the Russian economy.
34:11
Speaker 1: What's your thoughts on this theory that actually what the
34:14
Speaker 1: United States of America are doing on the Straight her
34:16
Speaker 1: Moose is actually benefiting the US. And what they've done
34:19
Speaker 1: is they've basically taken out a number of energy supplies.
34:23
Speaker 1: They've taken off the Gulfs their supplies. It's basically Reggie
34:26
Speaker 1: Madhest kind of proposed this theory. He was on our
34:29
Speaker 1: show last week.
34:31
Speaker 2: It it it benefit Well, when when we say benefit
34:35
Speaker 2: United States, we're taught we need to ask it benefits
34:40
Speaker 2: who in the United States. It benefits a big oil
34:43
Speaker 2: majors in US, for sure.
34:45
Speaker 1: Uh.
34:45
Speaker 2: You know, Shell just reported their first quarterly earling. They
34:50
Speaker 2: double their profit from the last quarter and that's only
34:54
Speaker 2: from January to March, so their next quarterly early report
34:58
Speaker 2: is going to be more gambusters. But everybody, including Americans,
35:05
Speaker 2: are paying the price for their record profit because it's
35:10
Speaker 2: it's it's an average consumer that's paying paying the price.
35:14
Speaker 2: And this is why the American farmers they can't afford
35:17
Speaker 2: the increasing diesel price or the fertilizer price. Seventy percent
35:20
Speaker 2: of the American farmers in fact, that they can't afford
35:23
Speaker 2: the price increase, and the farm bankruptcy in the United
35:27
Speaker 2: States increase forty five percent. You know over the last month.
35:30
Speaker 2: This is not going to benefit average people in the
35:33
Speaker 2: United States. You won't benefit Twump's main founders, which is
35:38
Speaker 2: a big oil companies. Yes, does it benefit Americans American
35:42
Speaker 2: economy as a whole. No, And even you know, you
35:46
Speaker 2: know America. Even America is going to experience shortages because
35:52
Speaker 2: United States is a net oil importer. I have to
35:57
Speaker 2: emphasize that. I can't emphasize that enough. US export about
36:02
Speaker 2: three million barrels of oil per day. It imports six
36:06
Speaker 2: million barrels of oil. So it's a net oil importer.
36:12
Speaker 2: It imports three million barrels of oil per day net.
36:18
Speaker 2: So this does impact United States. It's just impact United
36:21
Speaker 2: States a little bit less than say, other countries. But
36:27
Speaker 2: US consumers will equally pay the bill.
36:31
Speaker 1: What's your thoughts on this idea? That actually less so oil?
36:34
Speaker 1: But basically the US wants to take over the entire
36:37
Speaker 1: basically wants to take over the LNG market, as in
36:41
Speaker 1: make sure all things run through them.
36:44
Speaker 2: Okay, So US do produce a lot of gas, so,
36:47
Speaker 2: unlike the oil, US is a net gas producer. And
36:52
Speaker 2: right now Europe basically was forced to buy expensive American LNG.
36:57
Speaker 2: So is India and Japan and and and pretty much
37:02
Speaker 2: anyone who still wants natural gas. And and this is uh,
37:07
Speaker 2: this does benefit greatly for again for American big oil
37:12
Speaker 2: and gas companies. UH, who are the ones who are
37:15
Speaker 2: funding Trump? So that in that regard, yes, it's working
37:20
Speaker 2: according to the plan. But over but overall, it still
37:27
Speaker 2: impacts United States because he even right now, the natural
37:31
Speaker 2: gas price is because the natural gas is a globally
37:35
Speaker 2: traded commodity. Right when United States export those l n
37:40
Speaker 2: g's to to the other parts of the world a
37:42
Speaker 2: higher price, you also also increase the price domestically, you know.
37:47
Speaker 2: So so like a lot of the for example, let's
37:51
Speaker 2: talk about AI, you know, because that's one of the
37:53
Speaker 2: biggest growth markets of the growth sector of the US economy.
37:57
Speaker 2: If you take away all the investment into AI they centers,
38:00
Speaker 2: the US economy is not growing, it's it's in fact
38:03
Speaker 2: in recession. So the AI to power those AI data centers,
38:08
Speaker 2: you need energy, and US electric grid simply is not
38:14
Speaker 2: enough to sufficient to support all these uh all these
38:18
Speaker 2: UH data center coming online. So what a lot of
38:22
Speaker 2: the company are trying to do. They're trying to build
38:24
Speaker 2: their own gas turbine generators, which is power again by
38:28
Speaker 2: natural gas. Well, guess what, the natural gas prices went
38:32
Speaker 2: straight up, and so those that's gonna eat into their
38:38
Speaker 2: bottom line again on their their whole planful AI expansion,
38:43
Speaker 2: because it's gonna raise it because ultimately AI is based
38:47
Speaker 2: on energy. It's a very energy intensive business. And what
38:52
Speaker 2: US action is just raised the price the price level
38:57
Speaker 2: energy sky high. And and it's just it actually makes
39:01
Speaker 2: the whole AI bubble even more unsustainable. So I you
39:05
Speaker 2: know this is this is not good for the long
39:07
Speaker 2: term development for the United States, but it is good
39:10
Speaker 2: for the big oil company in the short term. Yeah.
39:14
Speaker 1: Yeah, Now another question I've got for you rapping up
39:17
Speaker 1: soon is at the where do you think things go
39:21
Speaker 1: with the Iran Wall? Do you think it's just a
39:23
Speaker 1: stagnated conflict now of rosen conflict or do you think
39:26
Speaker 1: something happens Where do you think it goes?
39:29
Speaker 2: I think this will part likely drag out more than
39:31
Speaker 2: anyone expect, because I, like I said, it's very hard
39:38
Speaker 2: pill for US to swallow, to admit to its own
39:41
Speaker 2: defeat or to to accept the collapse of US imperial
39:45
Speaker 2: system in West Asia. And you will only happen when
39:50
Speaker 2: United States have suffered the consequences, when when the Americans
39:54
Speaker 2: have felt the real pain from from their action. That
39:57
Speaker 2: hasn't happened yet, but I expect maybe in the course
40:02
Speaker 2: of next few months that will happen. But that means
40:06
Speaker 2: we are going to have food shortages at the end
40:08
Speaker 2: of the year, and which is going to lead to
40:11
Speaker 2: a host of other problems. So I think I think
40:15
Speaker 2: that the crisis is already baked in at this point.
40:21
Speaker 2: Maybe maybe you run, crisis will be resolved then, but
40:25
Speaker 2: you will be too late for this war.
40:28
Speaker 1: That's the issue, right, because the longer the straight remains closed,
40:32
Speaker 1: the worse it's going to be for many of the
40:33
Speaker 1: countries that you mentioned, right, and more so American allies.
40:38
Speaker 1: How do they deal with the situation because the longer
40:41
Speaker 1: the straight remains closed, they're getting harmed. So like someone
40:44
Speaker 1: like Japan and fasiatically, I know Japan's always at an
40:47
Speaker 1: issue with China, but do you think they would maybe
40:50
Speaker 1: start rethinking or realigning the deals and commitments or do
40:53
Speaker 1: you think they're going to have to take it?
40:55
Speaker 2: Well, you know, there's two ways of thinking about it.
40:59
Speaker 2: One is the American client states have been hopelessly captured.
41:05
Speaker 2: You know, I look look at Europe, the European leaders
41:07
Speaker 2: that have been like stabbing themselves to police Washington. You know,
41:13
Speaker 2: like they their their economies has already been hollowed out
41:16
Speaker 2: by cutting off their access to cheap Russian energy. And
41:20
Speaker 2: this whole horror Mooz crisis obviously only made it much
41:24
Speaker 2: much worse. And so far you you're very little Europe
41:33
Speaker 2: from you, you you just hear nothing but just stand
41:38
Speaker 2: solidarity with Washington all the way. And that's that's Europe.
41:43
Speaker 2: But in case of East Asia is a little bit
41:47
Speaker 2: different because now all these countries like South Korea, Japan
41:52
Speaker 2: and even and the Philippines, they can't see what happened
41:56
Speaker 2: to the GCC countries in the in the Gulf. This
42:00
Speaker 2: GCC country are supposed to be protected on their American umbrella,
42:03
Speaker 2: yet they're getting devastated and with all the US bases destroyed,
42:08
Speaker 2: they realized if a war were to break out between
42:11
Speaker 2: US and China, they will not be protected, their basis
42:14
Speaker 2: will be destroyed. And that brings a big question to
42:19
Speaker 2: what is a value proposition then of being a US
42:26
Speaker 2: vasco states. You know, if you're not getting the protection,
42:29
Speaker 2: then what's the point. So I think I bet there
42:32
Speaker 2: is a lot of rethinking right now. I mean, Korea
42:36
Speaker 2: was all was its always kind of like on the CUSP.
42:40
Speaker 2: They the current leadership of Korea, they're a lot more
42:44
Speaker 2: amenable to make peace with both China and North Korea
42:48
Speaker 2: uh than the pre previous administration. Japan is kind of
42:52
Speaker 2: the odd one out because they really dug into their
42:55
Speaker 2: hill and they thought they saw this was an opportunity
42:58
Speaker 2: actually to remilitary arise. They thought, Okay, if America can't
43:03
Speaker 2: do this, maybe this will allow us to ditch our
43:06
Speaker 2: peacetime constitution which was imposed by the United States after
43:09
Speaker 2: the war, to allow us to grow the your Japanese
43:13
Speaker 2: military again. So, yeah, we live in interesting time, Sulerman.
43:21
Speaker 1: We do live in interesting times. And I guess the
43:23
Speaker 1: question mark becomes how bad this gets?
43:26
Speaker 2: Now?
43:26
Speaker 1: I know that it's the last question, but it's one
43:28
Speaker 1: more question to you. Is we spoke about the Gold States,
43:32
Speaker 1: you spoke about American allies. Where does this leave, for example,
43:38
Speaker 1: Chinese impacting the Gold States? And what I mean by
43:43
Speaker 1: that is this. So I spoke to CIA Larry Johnson,
43:47
Speaker 1: and he has an inside source in intelligence who basically
43:52
Speaker 1: told him that actually, the Golf States are moving away
43:56
Speaker 1: from the United States of America. They feel like the
43:58
Speaker 1: Golf the US can help them anymore. And there is
44:02
Speaker 1: some kind of secret, less secret, but some kind of
44:06
Speaker 1: pact going on between China, Pakistan, the Gulf States and
44:12
Speaker 1: Turkey where China there's this economic deals and we're Pakistan.
44:17
Speaker 1: It's the defense deal, and this is a way of
44:21
Speaker 1: squeezing the United States of America out. I'm always I
44:26
Speaker 1: told Larry this, like it makes sense logically, but I
44:29
Speaker 1: always have question marks about this because of the entrenched
44:33
Speaker 1: intelligence control over that region. For example, if NBS had
44:37
Speaker 1: the audacity, the temerity to move away from the United
44:41
Speaker 1: States of America, NBS knows there's a very good chance
44:45
Speaker 1: he would get the King Fessel treatment. And so what
44:48
Speaker 1: do you think about that kind of thesis or perspective.
44:51
Speaker 2: Actually, I think quite quite plausible. China would never militarily
44:56
Speaker 2: step in in that region. Just one is China lacks
45:02
Speaker 2: of power projection and to China is not willing to
45:06
Speaker 2: be a global policeman. But Pakistan played an interesting role
45:10
Speaker 2: because Pakistan has a very good relationship with the GCC
45:13
Speaker 2: countries and Saudi Arabian Pakistan actually do have a defense treaty.
45:18
Speaker 2: And Pakistan also happened to have a very solid relationship
45:24
Speaker 2: with China. You know, of all the countries, Pakistan publy
45:28
Speaker 2: has the closest relationship with China. You know, like the
45:31
Speaker 2: easiest way to tell out is look at what weapons
45:35
Speaker 2: they use. Pakistan military used like eighty percent of the
45:38
Speaker 2: Chinese weapon platform and like they they're they're likely to
45:42
Speaker 2: get the next generation Chinese stealth fighter when it's available.
45:51
Speaker 2: So so in that way, Pakistan can be a conduid
45:56
Speaker 2: for China to work with the GCC. And this is
46:01
Speaker 2: kind of the role. You also see the Pakistan play
46:03
Speaker 2: out doing the negotiations, you know, because Pakistan has good
46:10
Speaker 2: relationship with GCC, with United States and with China. That's
46:14
Speaker 2: why they're the ones who are approaching you wrong to
46:16
Speaker 2: proposing a having a peace talk in Pakistan. So so
46:21
Speaker 2: in this way, I think I think it's that's that's
46:23
Speaker 2: a very plausible. But again this everybody right now probably
46:29
Speaker 2: just testing water. It's nothing is like written in stone yet.
46:35
Speaker 2: But even the fact that testing the water speaks, uh,
46:40
Speaker 2: it speaks volumes because this would not be imaginable before
46:45
Speaker 2: the war started. Now I think now now they're especially
46:49
Speaker 2: GCC country right now, they're exploring options and for them,
46:53
Speaker 2: this is also their leverage when they deal with United States.
46:57
Speaker 2: Is this Saudi traditionally played that game, you know, when
47:00
Speaker 2: they repeatedly said that they are considering pricing uh, their
47:05
Speaker 2: oil in Chinese Yuan, for example. This is their way
47:09
Speaker 2: of telling United States, hey, we have alternatives. You know,
47:12
Speaker 2: if you don't give us what we want for in
47:16
Speaker 2: our relationship, there are people we can turn to. So
47:20
Speaker 2: so this is not just like a one way street.
47:23
Speaker 2: You know, everybody is playing a game of balance. So
47:27
Speaker 2: I think what Larry described is quite plausible, but I
47:31
Speaker 2: think it's at a very early stage of discussion. You know,
47:35
Speaker 2: we probably won't see any concrete without many many month
47:42
Speaker 2: of now.
47:44
Speaker 1: Let's see Caw. Thank you so much, so much for
47:46
Speaker 1: joining us. Always appreciate you coming on. You are the
47:50
Speaker 1: host of this Silk and Steel podcast. I believe people
47:52
Speaker 1: can find that podcast on YouTube and Patreon, right, that's correct,
47:58
Speaker 1: And in Patreon you give that like a detail history
48:00
Speaker 1: of Chinese history.
48:03
Speaker 2: I do a year by year breakdown, and currently I'm
48:06
Speaker 2: at the two ten BC, right around the death of
48:09
Speaker 2: the first Emperor, so I have another two thousand years
48:11
Speaker 2: to go.
48:12
Speaker 1: How much have you done?
48:13
Speaker 2: Really well, I already done like almost two thousand years.
48:17
Speaker 2: You know, I'm a two hundred and ten BC right now.
48:20
Speaker 2: So but but the history will get increasingly dense as
48:24
Speaker 2: we move closer and closer to the modern time because
48:28
Speaker 2: there will be more records, more documents. So right now
48:31
Speaker 2: I'm taking my time. I'm covering almost year by year,
48:35
Speaker 2: and because I intend this to be a long term project,
48:38
Speaker 2: you know, I have plenty of time.
48:40
Speaker 1: Nice. Nice, So everyone should be checking you out and
48:42
Speaker 1: watching you on that. Appreciate you taking your time out
48:44
Speaker 1: of John is always appreciate.
48:45
Speaker 2: You always my y.
48:49
Speaker 1: Thank you. That was kls on. Make sure you're following
48:51
Speaker 1: him on x. Make sure you're following his substack, and
48:56
Speaker 1: make sure you're following his YouTube and his Patreon. Great guy,
49:02
Speaker 1: great conversation. Make sure you like this video. We haven't
49:04
Speaker 1: got enough likes on get the likes up. Make sure
49:08
Speaker 1: you like this video. Make sure you comment in the
49:11
Speaker 1: main section, just to let you know what the plan
49:13
Speaker 1: is tomorrow. We have a number of great guests coming on.
49:16
Speaker 1: We've got the We did have Anthony Aguilaire coming on today,
49:20
Speaker 1: but we're gonna switch him to tomorrow because he did
49:22
Speaker 1: have some he did say to me or he's traveling
49:25
Speaker 1: and they could be fifty to fifty, so he's gonna
49:27
Speaker 1: be tomorrow instead. So tomorrow. Let me just give you
49:30
Speaker 1: the lineup for tomorrow. We've got a really good lineup tomorrow.
49:32
Speaker 1: We've got Laith Maroof, we have Professor Gibbs, and then
49:43
Speaker 1: also we have Ryan Dawson coming on tomorrow, so that's
49:48
Speaker 1: gonna be a great set of interviews. We're not Ryan
49:52
Speaker 1: on for about a week I think, or maybe six
49:54
Speaker 1: seven days, so it's gonna be great to have him on.
49:59
Speaker 1: So just so you're aware of that. So just to
50:01
Speaker 1: let you know, the Anthony Aguiallet interview has shifted to
50:05
Speaker 1: tomorrow instead. So let me just quickly post this to
50:09
Speaker 1: you guys. You see what the plan is. Here we go, yeah,
50:20
Speaker 1: here we go. Yeah, and look the it was surprising
50:25
Speaker 1: because just to give you guys a quick update of
50:28
Speaker 1: what happened, there was a deal that was this seemed
50:33
Speaker 1: like there was a parameters of a deal between Iran
50:37
Speaker 1: and the United States of America to the extent where
50:42
Speaker 1: we had a scenario what do you call it again,
50:48
Speaker 1: where Field Marshal Assimmnia was going to travel to Tehran
50:54
Speaker 1: for that deal. And what happened was in the last
50:58
Speaker 1: hours and the Iranians were expecting him to come. This
51:01
Speaker 1: was well known that he was going to come. It
51:03
Speaker 1: was for the negotiations. It was for the deal, and
51:06
Speaker 1: so despite the fact that they thought that he's gonna
51:09
Speaker 1: come and the feeling of the view was of people
51:12
Speaker 1: that they were going to announce the parameters of the
51:15
Speaker 1: pre stage deal. If you watch our interview with Dimitri Lascars,
51:19
Speaker 1: we talked about the deal, we talked about the specifics
51:22
Speaker 1: of the deal and what it contained. But then in
51:26
Speaker 1: the last minute, that flight was canceled and Assimonir did
51:33
Speaker 1: not turn up to Tehran, which means that either the
51:39
Speaker 1: negotiations failed or the negotiations were agreed and then they
51:44
Speaker 1: were pulled back on whatever it may be. That decision
51:48
Speaker 1: to cancel the flight demonstrate that the deal was no
51:53
Speaker 1: longer existing. Now the question mark becomes the fact that
51:58
Speaker 1: the deal failed. What does that mean? Does that mean
52:00
Speaker 1: that there's gonna be more negotiations? Does it mean do
52:12
Speaker 1: you think there's gonna be more negotiations. If there's be
52:14
Speaker 1: more deals, we'll speak about all of those things. I
52:17
Speaker 1: keep it distracted by the chat because this is why
52:19
Speaker 1: I have to check who the mods are, because they
52:21
Speaker 1: just repeat the same thing. So coming back to it,
52:25
Speaker 1: so the question mark becomes what are the negotiations going
52:28
Speaker 1: to be? What is the deal gonna be. We're gonna
52:31
Speaker 1: be and and that's really important because the point is this,
52:35
Speaker 1: we believe that the deal is so far apart, the
52:37
Speaker 1: negotiations are so far apart that and what the both
52:41
Speaker 1: sides want are so far apart that there won't be
52:43
Speaker 1: no deal. But the problem is, we had more reports
52:46
Speaker 1: today from the Wall Street Journal Washington Post that the
52:48
Speaker 1: US is completely out of uh. They've basically used a
52:52
Speaker 1: large amount of their defense interceptor missiles and they really
52:56
Speaker 1: are not and they've basically it's very difficult for them
52:59
Speaker 1: to replenish. And so for that reason, the question mark
53:04
Speaker 1: becomes Normally, ordinarily the US would become a kinnect but
53:07
Speaker 1: they can't do so. So this is kind of the
53:08
Speaker 1: complexity of what's going on. This is what we're trying
53:10
Speaker 1: to read out with a lot of these guests. Okay, guys,
53:14
Speaker 1: make sure you subscribe to this channel, make sure you
53:17
Speaker 1: like this video, make sure you share this video. Comment
53:22
Speaker 1: in the main section, like comment and subscribe. We'll see
53:26
Speaker 1: you tomorrow three pm Eastern. We have Leth Maroof on first.
53:32
Speaker 1: Appreciate you guys joining in, appreciate you guys listening, or
53:36
Speaker 1: just before go sorry, there's a tweet in the comments.
53:39
Speaker 1: Everyone come across there. We're watching that video that is
53:42
Speaker 1: of Peppe Escabar and he talks about how Bricks is
53:46
Speaker 1: in a coma. We're all gonna be there watching that,
53:49
Speaker 1: So everyone come across to that link bricks is in
53:52
Speaker 1: a coma. The tweet is pinned. Sorry they're not the tweet.
53:55
Speaker 1: The comment is pinned, So come across. I appreciate you
53:58
Speaker 1: guys joining in. I appreciate you guys listening. I'm for
54:02
Speaker 1: sure we'll see you next time.