Speaker 1: A thirty on a Tuesday. Here fifty five KC the
Speaker 1: talk station. That means it is time for a Daniel
Speaker 1: Davis Deeve Die, Welcome back to lieutenant retired Lieutenant Colonel
Speaker 1: Daniel Davis to give us some warfare analysis. Welcome back, Daniel.
Speaker 1: Always a pleasure to see you and have you on
Speaker 1: the program. Jilotti to be here, Brian can't you can't wait? Well,
Speaker 1: let's hit the ground running. Another update on the latest
Speaker 1: with Russian and Ukraine. I did I read correctly that
Speaker 1: Zelunsky now wants to have a sit down with Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 1: I thought one of the contingencies for that was a
Speaker 1: declaration of a ceasefire or something, which I don't know
Speaker 1: that the Russians were necessarily interested in, considering the advances
Speaker 1: they're making on the ground in Ukraine. But is there
Speaker 1: is there progress in that direction?
Speaker 2: There is a lot of people talking past one another
Speaker 2: and listening to no one. This is a complete disaster
Speaker 2: right now that has almost no chance of anything happening
Speaker 2: on Thursday. First of all, this started when you had
Speaker 2: the leaders of France, uk Germany and Poland went to
Speaker 2: Kiev to meet with the Zelensky, and they came out
Speaker 2: there and they said, hey, we demand a thirty day
Speaker 2: unconditional ceasefire. We were telling Putin you it's an ultimatum.
Speaker 2: You will do it by Monday. This is on Saturday.
Speaker 2: You will do it by Monday, or we will hit
Speaker 2: you with a bunch of sanctions. In response, Putin didn't
Speaker 2: answer the question. Of course, he's not going to do
Speaker 2: it unconditional thirty d cas far. They've said so from
Speaker 2: the beginning. They've never said anything besides that. And why
Speaker 2: would this stronger power ever submit to a demand by
Speaker 2: this weaker power.
Speaker 3: That's the first point. So Putin didn't answer that.
Speaker 2: But then he did say, you know what to tell
Speaker 2: you what, We're willing to have direct negotiations between Russia
Speaker 2: and Ukraine, and we'll do it in Istanbul on Thursday.
Speaker 2: So you wanted to decease far on Friday, We'll offer
Speaker 2: direct talks on Thursday. No discussion about a ceasefire. We're
Speaker 2: not interested in that. So then it turns out that
Speaker 2: we say that Zelenski tried said, oh, okay, I will
Speaker 2: one up you again. I will go to Istanbul and
Speaker 2: I will meet you. Vladimir Putin personally, you better be there,
Speaker 2: you know, just this mocking kind of thing. And there's
Speaker 2: no way that Putin is gonna just meet with him
Speaker 2: in the natal country istaan bull to try and settle
Speaker 2: this stuff, because they are miles apart on the fundamentals
Speaker 2: of an end of war negotiation. If you can't even
Speaker 2: get to a thirty day ceasefire the two sides can
Speaker 2: agree on, why do you think on Thursday you're gonna
Speaker 2: solve the war?
Speaker 3: Makes no sense at all? Well it doesn't.
Speaker 1: But as we have been typically going back to this posturing,
Speaker 1: you've got to have something to back up your threats.
Speaker 1: You have to have something that is worthy of exchange
Speaker 1: at the negotiation table. And as you've been pointing out
Speaker 1: week after week after week, the Russians keep making gains
Speaker 1: and advances, and more Ukrainian soldiers die, and they become
Speaker 1: weaker and weaker and weaker in terms of their bargaining
Speaker 1: position every single day that passes. Meaning, I guess if
Speaker 1: Plutin would show up there and sit down across the
Speaker 1: table from Zelensky, what would Zelensky have to say? Well,
Speaker 1: And that's the point exactly.
Speaker 2: And I was scouring the headlines and stories before we
Speaker 2: came on the air here today, and there's all this talking,
Speaker 2: I mean, and it's all over the place, and all
Speaker 2: the Western media yea, and the pundits and stuff, and
Speaker 2: they're all saying, we'll see if Putin's actually serious about
Speaker 2: this or not, or if it's just a ploy.
Speaker 3: And I'm like, it's there's no ploy. They're very open.
Speaker 2: About here's our conditions, come and talk about them, and
Speaker 2: if you don't, we'll simply keep fighting. That's what we
Speaker 2: aren't listening to on our side. So there's no way
Speaker 2: that Putin is going to meet with him as a
Speaker 2: first step. I mean, this is what they have offered.
Speaker 2: And what is normal is that you have delegations at
Speaker 2: the appropriate level. That's what Russia said at the beginning
Speaker 2: on Thursday, at the appropriate level, we'll meet directly. No
Speaker 2: one ever offered for Putin to meet with So now
Speaker 2: they're trying to mock Putin and make it look like
Speaker 2: he's hiding. Well, look that works in Western media because
Speaker 2: they're not paying attention anyway. It does nothing on the
Speaker 2: battlefield or a jove reality. That's the problem, Brian. It
Speaker 2: won't change reality. Even if we mock him all week long.
Speaker 1: Well, going back to France, UK, Poland and Germany making
Speaker 1: a stance on this and sort of making the same
Speaker 1: type of demand threatened by sanctions, which I guess is
Speaker 1: an arrow in their quiver, but doesn't Germany kind of
Speaker 1: rely on Russia for its natural gas or to keep
Speaker 1: their country somewhat in running order.
Speaker 2: Well, they have significantly reduced I'm not sure if they
Speaker 2: brought it to zero, but it's significantly reduced with what
Speaker 2: it used to be, and they've getten it from other
Speaker 2: sources now.
Speaker 3: But that's the problem for Germany. The other sources are.
Speaker 2: Substantially higher in per unit cost, so that makes all
Speaker 2: of their industrial output more expensive, and that's had a
Speaker 2: dampening effect on their economy.
Speaker 3: I mean, I think that they're probably in a recession
Speaker 3: right now.
Speaker 2: We'll wait till the numbers come out here in a
Speaker 2: little bit, but I think that probably it's been a
Speaker 2: real problem for them.
Speaker 3: But I mean that just puzzles me.
Speaker 2: You got these guys, these four guys there, and you
Speaker 2: know they're all luck in the arms basically and say
Speaker 2: we're going to sings, did you And I'm like, wait,
Speaker 2: that's what we said. Lead led by Joe Biden and
Speaker 2: right when this war started about here where you're going
Speaker 2: to cripple Russia and all this kind of stuff. Well,
Speaker 2: now then bricks has expanded, They're expanding economically in places
Speaker 2: beyond the West. So I'm like, look, if we didn't
Speaker 2: cripple them, then what possible logic can these four guys
Speaker 2: in the leading Western countries think you're going to do
Speaker 2: to them?
Speaker 3: Now? It makes no sense to me at all.
Speaker 1: No, And you know, from a global geopolitical standpoint, that
Speaker 1: did nothing but drive them into the arms of China
Speaker 1: and cozy up there and formalize and create a better
Speaker 1: working relationship with Russia and China, which you know together
Speaker 1: rather for me.
Speaker 3: I mean just together. That's good so far you want
Speaker 3: to double down on that, I don't get it, man, No,
Speaker 3: And you know, got to.
Speaker 1: Go back to the what do there's a combined military
Speaker 1: force of France, UK Poland and Germany amount to in
Speaker 1: the grand scheme of things. I mean, if you put
Speaker 1: all their soldiers on the battlefield together, could they match
Speaker 1: the military might of Russia? Should push come to shove
Speaker 1: hopefully not.
Speaker 3: Not even close.
Speaker 2: I think that cumulative total on paper would be somewhere
Speaker 2: around seven hundred and fifty thousand something like that. Russia
Speaker 2: has one point five million, but none of those guys
Speaker 2: are trained for modern warfare. Russia has three now into
Speaker 2: the fourth year, a very painful experience learned in all
Speaker 2: kinds of technological advances, none of which these guys have.
Speaker 2: Nobody on our side knows anything about what it's like
Speaker 2: to get shelled mercilessly, to be not even afraid to
Speaker 2: look up into the sky because the drones fall in,
Speaker 2: how to do counter drone operations, the electron we don't
Speaker 2: know any of that, Brian. So the disparity, forget the
Speaker 2: numbers on paper, which is about like this, The actual
Speaker 2: capacity is probably more like this.
Speaker 3: That's the reality.
Speaker 1: That's harsh reality, but it is what it is, which
Speaker 1: is suggests, as you've concluded before, and I've reached the conclusion,
Speaker 1: they're going to have to make some major land concessions
Speaker 1: in Ukraine to get this thing done with. And that's
Speaker 1: of course the predicate for Russia is sitting down at
Speaker 1: the table, we're keeping crime here, We're keeping these areas
Speaker 1: that are Russian dominant and Russian populated. That's where we're
Speaker 1: starting from. Or they're just going to keep fighting and
Speaker 1: they'll end up at least on the Danepa River. That's
Speaker 1: my calculation, because I just don't see how the battlefield
Speaker 1: math works any differently. If you keep with this fiction
Speaker 1: that we're going right now, instead of having an ugly
Speaker 1: deal where you could keep most of that stuff from
Speaker 1: where those four provinces are to the river, you're gonna
Speaker 1: end up losing it all and the men that goes
Speaker 1: along with it. It's the worst of all worlds from
Speaker 1: our perspective. I guess that minerals deal wouldn't be worth
Speaker 1: the paper it's written on to come that if that happens, right, Daniel,
Speaker 1: it would not Oh jeez, hey, real quick before we
Speaker 1: part coming today. And it's always interesting, maybe a little
Speaker 1: bit depressing for a lot of folks, but reality Israelate reality,
Speaker 1: and someone's got to point it out. India Pakistan a
Speaker 1: lot of people concerned about World War three breaking out,
Speaker 1: and I know they were swapping shots against each other.
Speaker 1: Kashmir has been an issue between the two countries for
Speaker 1: a long long time. Trump was given some credit for
Speaker 1: negotiating at least a ceasefire between those two countries. You
Speaker 1: see an ongoing concern between those two countries. You think
Speaker 1: they can hammer it out. Yeah, I think they can
Speaker 1: hammer it out. I mean this has been going on.
Speaker 2: The seeds go all the way back to nineteen forty two,
Speaker 2: and then they really start spreading in nineteen forty seven,
Speaker 2: and then it's just been kind of on again, off again.
Speaker 2: There was a clash in twenty sixteen, there was a
Speaker 2: clash in twenty nineteen, and then now this one too.
Speaker 2: And I had John Meersheimer, you know, an international theorist,
Speaker 2: relations theorist, on our show earlier this week, and he
Speaker 2: pointed out he said, there are multiple rungs on the
Speaker 2: escalation ladder before this gets into potential nuclear clash, because
Speaker 2: neither side wants that. And so he predicted, and it's
Speaker 2: turned out that way, that they'll sort this out because
Speaker 2: escalating and going up beyond small hits is bad for
Speaker 2: both sides. And he said he thinks you're going to
Speaker 2: work it out, and he looks like that's what's happened.
Speaker 1: Well, and you'd hate to see World War three breakout
Speaker 1: over a terrorist attack. I mean, you think about Archduke
Speaker 1: Ferdinand getting killed leading to the World War. Things like
Speaker 1: that can happen. But fortunately, I guess the leaders realize
Speaker 1: that cooler heads must prevail when both sides have significant
Speaker 1: numbers of nuclear weapons.
Speaker 2: Right yeah, And if they had one, I mean that's
Speaker 2: and you would use it. That's that's that's one too many. Uh,
Speaker 2: and they got both of them have a decent sized stockpile,
Speaker 2: even even Pakistan. And that's the problem because you and
Speaker 2: that's what India understands. Conventionally, India dwarfs Pakistan. Obviously you
Speaker 2: can look at the the size and understand that. But
Speaker 2: the nuclear threshold, I mean, they could just Pakistan could
Speaker 2: devastate India. India knows that. So India will press its
Speaker 2: advantage as far as it can. But they know that
Speaker 2: if they push Pakistan too far, if they go too
Speaker 2: many wrungs up that escalation ladder, then the only thing
Speaker 2: they would leave Pakistan with is to use their their equalizer,
Speaker 2: and they don't want to do that. So so far,
Speaker 2: it looks like that, even though there's a lot of
Speaker 2: answers between the two sides, there's still is the same thought.
Speaker 1: Well, that's somewhat uplifting news. War's bad news, but at
Speaker 1: least they're not launching nukes. At each other. Daniel Davis
Speaker 1: Deep dive search for it where you find your podcast,
Speaker 1: and then tune in next Tuesday for another edition of
Speaker 1: the program here in fifty five care see the talk
Speaker 1: Talk Station Daniel. Have a great weekend, my friend. Thanks
Speaker 1: for much pleasure.
Speaker 3: By Francis.
Speaker 1: Next Tuesday, look forward to It's eight forty right now
Speaker 1: I fifty five krs. The Talk Station. Foreign Exchange gets
Speaker 1: you caring to FORIGN exchange like I did just the
Speaker 1: other day. Very expensive