However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine, with its 52 million people and major resources as well as its access to the Black Sea, Russia automatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state, spanning Europe and Asia. ― Zbigniew Brzeziński, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives
Yes, problem is Russia always had imperialism and expansion in mind. Some decisions are not easy to make really but Surely Russia expansion to Ukraine have nothing to do with helping people in Donbass. It's a power grab.
@@martindembek9833Lmao nice propaganda. Russia actually cares about it's people unlike the US. They invaded ukriane because they been shelling the donbas for 8 years. The only imperialists are the US
*Divide and rule.* Maybe "rule" is the incorrect word in regards to the USA, and *divide and "gain an advantage"* if others struggle, fight, and then lose, is closer to what happened. The word "rule" also constitutes a "trigger", or natural aversion, which would mean psychologically oposing a theory, simply based on the words used. At the turn of the previous century ("around 1900") Washington DC set out to "divide (Europe)" and "gain" (from collective European madness). Note how such a policy doesn't necessarily have to be co-ordinated politically. So no "your a conspiwacy theowist"-allegations please, lol. In regards to Europeans, the policy basically carried itself, and today *still* carries itself, because Europeans are already sufficiently divided on multiple levels. Any actions by a strong enough 3rd party wishing to gain simply needs to avoid any form of unity in Europe, or to "nip in the bud" any signs of formal/informal agreement between Europeans (the Cold War was of course an exception, when Western European unity was useful to stand up to Eastern European Communism/SU/Warsaw Pact). One of the key strategies in "divide and rule" is to fund and support both sides in a world full of rivals for dominance, influence and markets. *Once "divided", and kept divided, there is no "single voice" to stand up to a stronger entity.* From wiki, and regarding the theory: "Divide and rule policy (Latin: divide et impera), or divide and conquer, in politics and sociology is gaining and maintaining power by breaking up larger concentrations of power into pieces that individually have less power than the one implementing the strategy." Elements of this technique involve: - creating or encouraging divisions ... - to prevent alliances that could challenge ... - distributing forces that they overpower the other - aiding and promoting those who are willing to cooperate - fostering distrust and enmity Historically, this strategy was used in many different ways by empires seeking to expand their territories." [editted for clarity re. the states/empires level of things] *"Divide and gain" would work exactly the same way.* There is an entire palate of examples of "dividing Europe" on multiple levels, and gain an advantage (see below comments thread for a few). These multiple examples are not "anecdotal", or "cherry picked", but form a pattern in a political game (in geopolitics/grand strategy = avoid the unity of "others", because unity = strength). Regarding this policy, it needs a keen sense of observation by a nation's gatekeepers, so as not to inadvertently become a part of it. *"Defeat Them in Detail: The Divide and Conquer Strategy. Look at the parts and determine how to control the individual parts, create dissension and leverage it." - Robert Greene* And "observe the details" and "leverage" is what the American Internationalism fans (US corporatism) in Washington DC did, opposed by the ever-waning forces of US Isolationism, re-inspired by Donald Trump ("Trump Doctrine") and others... All of these terms can be googled for more context. Note that in order to play this game, the "divider" must have some form of advantage. In regards to Washington DC, this advantage which it could use to attract suitors was their own rapidly increasing power. Ever important markets acting like a lighthouse for capitalist ventures. But with a geographical advantage which made it virtually impossible to invade by the late-19th Century (grand strategy), the USA already had little to fear militarily. What was "in it" for Washington DC in her favoratism of mostly Paris and London? *London was Europe's only power that could effectively unite Europe, by acting as a unifying power as a matter of policy, rather than as an aloof divider herself.* Regarding any form of united Europe, by whomever or for whatever reasons, the "gatekeepers of Empire" sat in London. A "united Europe" either with or without GB/Empire could only go through London and with London's approval. Ask Napoleon I. He knows what it resulted in when "gatekeepers" stepped forward to avoid any form of single continental unity or hegemony. These "gatekeepers" followed policies which made any form of unity impossible (per treaty, political, or as a result of wars between continental powers). At the first signs of unity/friendship on the continent, London would step in and divide using a variety of age-old, trusted and well-honed political skills up to the point of declaring preventive wars. *A divided continent also suited London just fine: the newly united Germany, was wedged in between her two main historical rivals for territory and gain: France and Russia (geopolitics/grand strategy).* The above is also known as the "avoid a single hegemony on the continent"-narrative, and is not disputed by most historians. A disunited Europe at this point, also suited Washington DC just fine. *It should not have "suited" London, because the world was changing.* The USA's first really big attempt at expanding beyond the limits of the own Monroe Doctrine, and the "promises made" not to meddle in European affairs was Spain. With the Monroe Doctrine Washington DC stated: "Don't worry Europe, we are satiated..." A declaration which would not last long. LOL, no. They were *not* satiated. After a period of strategic consolidation, leaders here were looking for easy targets whose spheres of influence could be expanded into with the formula "little ventured/a lot gained", and excuses which could be made for expanding which could be sold as "acts of benevolence". The rapidly sinking Spanish Empire offered the territories as a "gateway to China" in the form of already annexed Hawaii, the Philippenes and Guam and protection for the seaways in between. The 1898 Spanish American War was then simply the torero sticking a sword into the neck of the dying bull...a fitting allegory. Obviously "triggered" by the Japanese annexation of Formosa in 1895. To achieve all of this Washington DC needed European indifference for the cause of "weak failing empires" (Darwinism/Spain), and divided Europe happily complied... *How to succeed here if Europe decided to unite and stand up to US expansion, by offering political support to Spain?* Answer: favoratism. "Favor" one "empire" (in this case France and GB) above others...temporarily. It would be a mistake to think that these "divide and rule/conquer"-strategies and tactics started with the Roman Empire, and ended when the British left India in 1947 (Two examples usually referred to when historians examine this as a political practice). It is alive and well. *It surrounds every aspect of power politics and has been ever-present on all levels of society and politics ever since the dawn of mankind.* Today the US military doctrine of "Flexible Response" is nothing else but "divide and rule" in the disguise of "divide and gain": Divide Europeans, to enable the continued US domination of world affairs. It is the same strategy London/British Empire used as it tried to hang on to Empire. A flexible response = "hopping" onto a crisis or war without having to have done much to avoid it. Some of the rare historical anomalies are Chamberlain (Munich 1938) or Boris Jonson (Finland/Sweden 2022) because try as one might, one cannot find any other strategic incentive for these missions, other than the noble cause and an effort keep the peace, in the face of previous total failure. Notice that one of the key strategies in "dividing" others is to take opposing positions in political issues, without these positions being based on moral standards or principles. Simply strengthen the position of one side in an issue at one time, then make a 180 degree about turn and support the other side another time. An example here is for the two Moroccan crises (1905 vs. 1911). In 1905, Washington DC actually tacidly supported the German position and insisted on Morrocan independence, protecting it from being carved up by France/Spain. In 1911, the USA chose the side of the colonial powers against Berlin's position, and signed Moroccan independence away to "the wolves" of colonialism. Divide and gain: Historically the funding of opposing European ideologies, leaders and states. For example, US private funding of European dictators in the 1920s and 1930s, *and* at the same time supporting Stalin's Five-Year Plans, was a strategy which carried through to today. *A geographical advantage meant that whatever happened in Europe would be a "win" for Washington DC power mongers.* Or, one could state that if one is far enough away, one can "sit on the fence and await the outcome" when the shtf somewhere else. Strategists can always count on a plethora of enablers who carry out such division, mostly for entirely independent causes: from "humanism" to "big business", one can become a tool of strategists. Politicians, business elites, journalists, historians, teachers...they can all contribute, without even being aware of the fact.
Everything very accurate, apart from one point: Boris Jonhson's pact with Finland/Sweden isn't an anomaly because it did nothing to keep the peace, as there was no threat whatsoever to them from Putin in 2022 - on the contrary, it facilitated them abandon their long-held neutrality and safety, in order to apply for NATO membership. (NATO membership means participation in wars on behalf of the USA interests)
Yes , you are right. Politics and politicians seem ignoring moral principles . In case of the two Moroccan crisis1905 and 1911 are well illustrated this fact
What a fool. He completely misread the situation in Crimea. Took zero consideration re: Crimeans wanting no part in taking orders from Kiev/allegiance to Russia-yes THE PEOPLE of Crimea by a massive majority wanted to be part of Russia. He also fails to understand the maritime access benefit of Crimea to Russia and what that means economically/militarily. It’s almost as if ZBig is expressing his hopes rather than make a cold analysis of the situation. His comments have aged terribly.
But Russians in Ukraine cannot have the same rights as Albanians in Kosovo or the Scots in UK etc. Those are RUSSIANS!! LOL Yeah, as a Slovenian I have full support for any part of Ukraine that wants to democratically split from Kyiv.
"Much … depends on the performance of the current Russian political elite-an elite that is strikingly different in composition and outlook from its post-communist counterparts in Central Europe. Russia’s current leadership includes no former political dissidents, not even one. … The current Russian political elite is largely an alliance of criminalized oligarchs and the KGB and military leadership. Their renunciation of the Soviet past has been perfunctory." - Zbigniew Brzezinski (The National Interest, Fall 2000)
@@nebojsakecman862 He looks just like Davros from Doctor Who! Am I the only person on the internet who thinks that Brzezinski looks like and talks exactly like "Davros", the creator of the Polish-Canadian Daleks from the British Doctor Who TV shows?
Do we have the moral right to condemn Russians? Who bombed Yugoslavia, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan... Why didn't you get outraged then??? Who turns a blind eye to the fascist units of ukriana "Azov", "Aidar"? Who hid from the world community the genocide in Donbass, where more than 14,000 people died in 8 years? Why were 150,000 Ukrainian soldiers concentrated on the border with Donbass? Why did we applaud the drug addict Zelensky, who declared that he intended to create an atomic bomb? Why are all Russian media blocked? Why do the media cover only one side of the conflict? The Western media are skillful factories of lies! Even presidents believe them… The world has long been a hostage of diabolical democracy!!! It has already been proven that Ukrainians themselves staged sinister provocations in Buchi, Crematorsk, thereby extorting lethal weapons… There is not a single proof that the Russians are killing civilians! The Russians are the only nation in the world that has fought evil all its history! Back in 2007, Putin warned NATO that if it approached Russia's borders, he would respond. Then they laughed at him.. We woke up the Russian bear in vain… He will turn the whole world upside down and become the winner! This is understood by the Chinese, Indians and Arabs. The world is going through an unprecedented economic crisis. It's only going to get worse every day... I'm against the war!!!! I am against fascists!!!!!! PS Pray for the Russians, they are saving the world from the fascists!!! If Putin wanted to, he would have captured Ukraine in 10 days. All he had to do was bomb the cities of Ukraine, like the United States in Syria, the city of Raqqa... The voice of real America - Lara Logan. She wasn't afraid to tell the TRUTH! Bravo!!! ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-rXkFpu7pH2g.html&ab_channel=SignsOfTheEndTimes%3F The opinion of an American military analyst. The UN Weapons Inspector in Iraq. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-seDi09dFurk.html
He looks like Davros from Doctor Who! Am I the only person on the internet who thinks that Brzezinski looks like and talks exactly like "Davros", the creator of the Polish-Canadian Daleks from the British Doctor Who TV shows?
At 2:27: For the first time since WWII 'force' was used within Europe (referring to when Russia 'invaded' Crimea, in 2014 after the illegal EU/US instigated coup). ~ Brzezinski Brzezinski did not remember too well in the end, did he? He seems to have forgotten America's/NATO's major illegal bombing of Serbia in 1999 under Clinton, when the Chinese embassy was hit and Chinese citizens were killed along with Serbs. And what about the terrorists and the upheaval they caused in Chechnya, a republic inside Russia, in the 1990s? And also other incidents INSIDE other NATO countries?
Brzezinski is more measured in his analysis and not given to the hysteria of his compatriots. But the narrative by the interviewer is not correct. Russia did not invade Crimea, it already had a major military base and has never left Crimea for over 150 years. "Crimea was part of Russia from 1783, when the Tsarist Empire annexed it a decade after defeating Ottoman forces in the Battle of Kozludzha, until 1954, when the Soviet government transferred Crimea from the Russian Soviet Federation of Socialist Republics (RSFSR) to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (UkrSSR)." - The Wilson Center. Crimea which was handed over to Ukraine from Russia by the USSR as part of an alliance of economic and social integration between Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine's desire to become a part of NATO troubled the Russians and as a result - the people of Crimea decided to break away from Ukraine. It was a divorce and each side took back what they brought into the marriage. One question that I have that is never discussed is how is the referendum in Crimea any different from Scotland's when it voted with regards to separating from the United Kingdom? President Trump is at peace with Crimea being reintegrated with Russia. Brzezinski said that Western Europe should not have integrated 10 [Eastern European] countries into NATO. Ukraine was their next target and it imploded against their expectations. Russia's strategy towards Ukraine is clear, use the vast Russian speaking population in Eastern Ukraine to keep a perpetual state of tension so that NATO will not absorb Ukraine. The problem that I have with most of these geopolitical analysts is that they seem to start with the end-game - the geopolitical outcome they desire and then their analysis is fashioned to fulfill their goal. It is refreshing to see that Zbigniew Brzezinski is not part of that camp. Is Putin the CEO of Russia, quite likely, though not as wealthy as many of our western capitalists, but apparently the Russian people do not care. He has recovered their land (Crimea) which was handed over to Ukraine through their failed Communist experiment. Our biggest challenge in the United States is not Russia or even China - they are focused on the economic development of their nations, it is our Educational System and in particular STEM education. The Bible says that in a multitude of counselors there is safety and so people like Brzezinski with vast experience should enter into the discussions more often. A foreign policy that is focused on short-term gain is in no one's interest. It is not too late to re-engage with Russia, the longer we wait and the more aggressive we are towards them, the more likely it is that they will align more deeply militarily with China. Even if Russia is not a close partner, three separate global military powers are better than two against one and unfortunately, we are fast moving towards that path.
- Op-ed written as Crimea was shaken by clashes in the prelude to the peninsula’s annexation by Russia: The U.S. could and should convey clearly to Mr. Putin that it is prepared to use its influence to make certain a truly independent and territorially undivided Ukraine will pursue policies toward Russia similar to those so effectively practiced by Finland: mutually respectful neighbors with wide-ranging economic relations with Russia and the EU; no participation in any military alliance viewed by Moscow as directed at itself but expanding its European connectivity. In brief, the Finnish model is ideal for Ukraine, the EU, and Russia in any larger east-west strategic accommodation. But to be credible to the Kremlin, the U.S. needs also to spell out privately that attempts to destabilize the emerging democracy in Kiev or detach parts of Ukraine-not to mention even overt or covert Russian participation in its neighbor’s domestic conflicts-would compel Washington to use its influence internationally to prompt steps that would be economically costly to Moscow. - Zbigniew Brzezinski (Financial Times, 02.23.14)
@@tadasblindavicius8889 That was what Putin wanted too: a neutral model for Ukraine! But while he told Ukraine that they could be part of both the EAU and the EU, the EU told Ukraine it couldn't be part of both, and when the elected President asked for some more time, the USA backed the coup d'etat that dispose of him! In 2022, Kissinger said that Ukraine could abandon Crimea if it wanted peace, but the new generation attacked him. Bzrezinski and Kissinger were the architects who helped the USA win the Cold War, but their inheritors think of them as having fulfilled their role, they don't consider them relevant anymore.
The US cannot engage with Russia. Their whole international relations are built to keep Russia forever separate from the rest of Europe. That's why even though Russia is only about 20% worse than Ukraine in things like corruption etc etc, you will NEVER in your life time hear any proposal of Russia's integration with Europe after Putin is gone. Even if Russia turns very pro-European, they cannot be allowed to unite with Europe. If no one else, the fucking Polacks will make sure of it. One of the reasons why as a Slovenian I want out of the EU until Poland is thrown out.
Well you mention US foreign policies and you are correct ,have look "Wolfowitz Doctrine " which was declasified document after 30 years ...that document clearly explain the US role in geo politics after collaps of USSR ,first thing they did after collaps of USSR and East Block Warsaw Pact convinced senate to up millitary spending ? and gradualy increased NATO by all fromer " east block " countries ,creeping closer to Russian borders .That is not a sign of good will or copperation that is flexing the millitary power in Europe
Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski is a Polish American political scientist, geostrategist, and statesman who served as a counsellor to Lyndon B. Johnson from 1966–1968 and held the position of United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981. Zbigniew Brzezinski was born in Warsaw, Poland, in 1928. His family, members of the nobility (or "szlachta" in Polish), bore the Trąby coat of arms and hailed from Berzeżany in Galicia in the Tarnopol Voivodeship (administrative region) of then eastern Poland (now in Ukraine). The town of Brzeżany is thought to be the source of the family name. He was born on March 28, 1928. This photograph originates from the International Magazine Services photo archive. IMS was a editorial photo archive in Scandinavia founded in 1948 but evolved from older archives that have images in the collection also. The archive is in great condition and been in storage for a long time and the images in the collection are now being sold off one by one. The images in this archive where distributed in only 10-15 copies around the world at the time and many copies have been lost or damaged during time, each copy from the collection is therefore very rare and unique. This kind of rare images are not only a great thing to own but also a great investment. Own a piece of history with this great photography memorabilia. By purchasing a photo from IMXPIX Images, copyright does not transfer. We are selling these photos as collectibles only and no copyright is implied. Detected: OCR
"if Putin starts another wave of cold war unilateral actions..." This is the opposite of what Russia has done under Putin's leadership, but hatred of Russia is the absolute cornerstone of Zbig's world view.
I mean he was Polish who migrated to the US, and talking like he understands Russians more than the literal President of Russia. The Poles have a bad history against the Soviet Union. Its hard to take what he says without a grain of salt.
what are the kind of serious reforms , which Brzezinski told about Ukraine? I thing not only Ukraine which should attempt serious reforms, but every country in the world should do that way
This guy is delusional on purpose, a capitalist with colonial mentality. NATO is a threat not only to Russia, it participating in bombing Yugoslavia and destruction of the Middle East.
Crimea "....first time since WWII that force was used in Europe"... Really? Ask Belgrade people and Bill Clinton (ah, BIllC advised by ZB, of course.!).
just well spoken guy.... and retelling what was written in the script full of lies. so well spoken ... will drive you away from reality and and put you in the clouds where he also had been and he was in this video. nothing much to expect from the guy born in sovet time and driven by hate and revenge (rebel without cause). selling story about people based on information from .... no name stated or agency. just repeat the lie and will become true. sad old man
He’s an analyst who worked for presidents. He even suggests a neutral Crimea so both countries don’t lay a claim on it, avoided suggesting war even with this unreal solution.
I really don't know. I'm asking ... 4:37 min ... would, Crimea, be a stupid place to put the capital of the EU? ... if Ukraine became a member of the EU, and, EU agreed, and, Ukraine and Russia agreed, to Crimea becoming the EU Capital Territory (ECT) or EU Capital District (ECD) or EU Capital (EUC)... or EU Capital Region (EUCR) or e.t.c. ... ? ... with a new purpose built city, Europa or e.t.c. ... ? within that area, becoming the city that is the captial of the EU ... ? ... So that, for example, the capital of the EU would be Europa, in the EU Capital Territory/District/Region? .... (and, the EU Capital, would in addition, have it's own governance - not, Ukrainian or Russian or French or German or Belgium or Polish or Greek or e.t.c. .... ?, but the governance locally of Europa in the EU Capital Region: so that there would be two governments/parliaments: a local government for the actual running of the city/territory, made up of those who permanently live there, and, the government/parliament with all the seats, all the representatives, for all the members of the EU who travel from their own state/country to make decisions/debate/vote? ...)
Sorry for putting it like this ... but ... What is more important: to make Putin pay and cripple Russia and therefore potentially providing an opening for Putin and Russia to, in effect, become ruled by China and be China - extending China into Euroasia and Europe, up to Ukraine's borders and increasing China's land based resources (like rare earth minerals, coal, oil, access to the arctic), production e.t.c.? ... Or ... for the EU (which essentially also includes the US, UK, e.t.c.) to stop squabbling and infighting, which is resource intensive, putting the whole world at risk, risking the start of WWIII, and which is literally destroying those purported to be in need of protection and being protected, to instead to form an alliance with Russia? ... wouldn't that open a gateway for diplomacy and trade with Euroasia and or the Middle East (Russia is part of Europe and Eurasia, as Turkey is part of Europe and the Middle East)? ... If Turkey and Georgia were part of the EU and EU had an alliance or special alliance with Russia ... how would the globe look then? .... proportionally, EU/UK/US compared with China/(Russia) or EU/UK/US/Russia compared with China? How many American bonds is China earning interest from, enough to fund their military? How much does America owe financially to China? ... rules are rules, aren't they? .... or .... How much is China funding America? ... is it, EU/UK compared with China/(US)/(Russia) or EU/UK/Russia compared with China/(US)? "Memorandum on security assurances in connection with Ukraine’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons" Was it not agreed to or signed by, Russian Federation, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America? The UK and USA, don't have permission to enter Ukraine, to protect the border? ... Not NATO, but the UK and USA? .... and, because it is in writing, it is something that Russia would object to? I really don't know. I'm asking ... ... would, Crimea, be a stupid place to put the capital of the EU? ... if Ukraine became a member of the EU, and, EU agreed, and, Ukraine and Russia agreed, to Crimea becoming the EU Capital Territory (ECT) or EU Capital District (ECD) or EU Capital (EUC)... or EU Capital Region (EUCR) or e.t.c. ... ? ... with a new purpose built city, Europa or e.t.c. ... ? within that area, becoming the city that is the captial of the EU ... ? ... So that, for example, the capital of the EU would be Europa, in the EU Capital Territory/District/Region? .... (and, the EU Capital, would in addition, have it's own governance - not, Ukrainian or Russian or French or German or Belgium or Polish or Greek or e.t.c. .... ?, but the governance locally of Europa in the EU Capital Region: so that there would be two governments/parliaments: a local government for the actual running of the city/territory, made up of those who permanently live there, and, the government/parliament with all the seats, all the representatives, for all the members of the EU who travel from their own state/country to make decisions/debate/vote? ...) Short version: ... where is the current fighting? ... what is it over ... exactly ...? ... it doesn't look like it might cease any time soon. ... Would it be impossible, in that area, to convert the type ... of war ... from war of might to war of words? i.e. Ukraine retain sovereignty, possibly join the EU, a section of Ukraine (with Ukraine's permission) become the de jure capital of the EU, a buffer area that is Ukraine and Russia ... NATO headquarters remain where they are ... ? and, ... which agreement already assures Ukraines borders? This wouldn't support military goals, with less negative impact on civilians than sanctions or lending/giving military equipment*, and or contribute to long term security, safety and lives of military personnel? *military equipment (that might get scavenged/reverse engineered/sent elsewhere/on sold and or seized? ... and an increased risk, that, doesn't seem like it would be impossible to forsee: friendly fire, and, fingers point, as if otherwise?). ... distance of Ukraine ... possible EU de jure capital, international embassies ... Iranian oil ... ? ... if a section of Ukraine (with Ukraine's permission) becomes the de jure capital of the EU ... the US would need an embassy there ... as would the UK and Russia and e.t.c. ... also, ... de jure capital of EU in Ukraine ... seems like there would be more cameras there then .... ... who can assist with knowledge and wisdom, to turn it into a historic moment? ... peaceful? ... Stay well. Peace. Eleonora Formato née Szczepanowski South Australia
Sanctions ... aren't creating, or contributing to, a sort of Iron curtain ... ? Sanctions, historically, stop military spending? Sanctions don't impact civilians? ... "lesson militarily" ... and "effect of sanctions" ... ? ... seems like actions ... specifically going after civilians for strategic military gain ... seems like actions external to ... what's the administrative law position? ... separate and in addition to that though, what makes it ok to deny, an oligarch use of their property, or a General access to their own money while on vacation? ... if it's state owned or state money, then, they wouldn't be denied? ... where is the line, for denial of property ownership and use? ... a General doesn't necessarily have the wealth of an oligarch - more like, upper middle class wealth, comparable with those of the Chinese upper middle class ... no? I don't know. I'm asking. If the financial/banking sector in other countries are run by some clever people who are competent, it seems like a shame, there is an attempt to strangle them with sanctions (sanctions: "three phases" ... "deter", "punish", "bankrupt" ... "coup"). I don't know, would asking them, instead, how they are organising things totally a stupid thing to ask? On a different scale, over a similar region, isn't Ukraine in Europe? Isn't the part of Russia that surrounds the Ukraine, part of Europe? ... So, isn't 'it' all happening, in Europe? Between European countries? Is Russia still a communist country? ... Russia isn't, at the very least, on it's way to being a a democratic country? ... it's not a capitalist type country now? ... Aren't sanctions being applied to businesses in Russia and those living in Russia who are wealthy? It seems like, in away, with the support of other countries, NATO, it is just about all of Europe excluding a part of Europe and with economic sanctions? ... Isn't that a sort of Fascism?
@2:25 Was it as transforming as when force was used, contrary to your opinion, when NATO decided to dismantle Yugoslavia using around 30,000 bombs and missiles? Isn't it a little strange that while your own published perspectives and analyses on international relations and conflicts, including those in the Balkans, were influencing policymakers, academics, and the public on the region and yet here you claim that 2014 represents the first time since WW2 that force was used in Europe. Did Russia use more than 30K bombs to rip Ukraine out of the hands of Ukrainians? Did Crimeans suffer from Putin's bombs and are they still suffering the trauma from this event today as are the people who once constituted Yugoslavia? Is this the position of your son in Poland, as well, and your daughter in the USA, both of whom seem to be continuing your legacy of Russophobia? Is it really sad for your family that fear no longer holds sway over Europe with respect to Russia? Not very inviting of a peaceful Europe and an open continent in my humble opinion.
Panie Psorze, chyba w najblizszych latach wynalazek aptekarza polskiego troche na wartosci straci, a jesli nie to sie chyba rynek skurczy. Chcialbym doczekac wypowiedzi Psora-Bricks i przemysl swiatowy, ale to juz chyba w Niemczech. PZDR.Grzesiek
Only a Pole could be so completely wrong. I know, my grandfather was from Poland, his son (my uncle) pissed away his estate without even trying. The Polish are the most self destructive group in Europe and that says a lot. Carter was a fool.
2:35 that's plain wrong, 1999 US and its western europe servant states attacked Jugoslavija killing thousands of civilians and totally destroying the infrastructure, under the invented excuse to save albanians from serbian oppression (which was as valid as germany's excuse to invade poland 1939). Being an american makes you completely ignorant of your own crimes...
There is only IMPERATIVE: IT IS IMPERATIVE that no Eurasian challenger emerges capable of dominating EurAsia and thus of also challenging America - Zbignew Brzezinski {Nicholas J Spykman} 😎
@@geoeconomics3067 -To isolate Ukraine internationally, Russian policymakers have also skillfully exploited the Clinton administration’s preoccupation with Ukraine's nuclear status. Playing on American fears (and the administration's evident preference for Russian control over Ukraine's nuclear weapons), Moscow was quite successful in portraying the new leaders in Kiev as a menace to international stability. Ukraine's ineptitude in conveying its concerns to the West also intensified its isolation and therefore its sense of vulnerability. - Zbigniew Brzezinski (Foreign Affairs, March/April 1994)
@@tadasblindavicius8889 There is only one IMPERATIVE: IT IS IMPERATIVE that no EurAsian challenger emerges capable of dominating EurAsia and thus of also challenging America - Zbignew Brzezinski (Spykman)
Dual status entity for Ukraine, will be better than an alliance of Ukraine with NATO. Unfortunately the political leaders in Ukraine are not well qualified to understand this aspect of the reality3. The war startedin 24 February 2022 has given right to zbegniew brezensky opinion stated here in 2017...the political leaders seems don't understand the lessons of history
Panie Zbyszku (przepraszam za smialosc) sytuacja byla inna ale ta sama robote dla wolnosci co zrobil Kopernik zrobif tez Frycek Chopin w XIX wieku nuty po amerykansku nazywajac. Wiem ze pojecie "swiat "jest zbyt obszerne zeby spokoj byl. Moj kanal na youtube Panie Psorze-"armonica diatonica player ". Zem se w Milano jest. Grzesiek
I don’t think your analysis accepted by anyone given your biased view on Russia 🇷🇺 our world is changing China Russia and India and Brazil are the new players.
Problem Rosji Panie Zbyszku jeszcze drugorzedny nie jest, chociaz jednoczyc sie z bidnymi to nawet kosciol katolicki nie chce. Ja chcialem Pana Zbigniewa spytac pytaniem Laskowika do zespolu Boney M czy jak im tam bylo-czy sie Pan dobrze czuje jako ambasador, no i czy wszystko jest? To czego Pan potrzebuje. Z Turynu-armonica diatonica player-Grzesiek
COULD SOMEBODY EXPLAIN FOR ME ... what is he saying at 5:25 - 5:29 - "quither things are headed" ?!?!? What is he trying to say ? I don t understand him, pls explain
Foundations of Geopolitics The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S." In the United States: "Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements - extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics." --Alexander Dugin, Russian Military Subversion specialist (Adviser for Kremlin)
@@newkodiaq "I would describe it as the heart and soul of Soviet intelligence - was a subversion. Not intelligence collection, but subversion: active measures to weaken the West, to drive wedges in the Western community alliances of all sorts, particularly NATO, to sow discord among allies, to weaken the United States in the eyes of the people of Europe, Asia, Africa, Latin America, and thus to prepare the ground in case the war really occurs. To make America more vulnerable to the anger and distrust of other peoples." Oleg Kalugin, Ex-KGB Major General (retired)
So, is this why the US needed for Russia to go into Ukraine? Europe was slipping away and they figured that if Putin will go East, then Europe will get scared again, get united, and come back to the US?
@@micah4242 Remember, when you see adjectives next to the noun, like "unprovoked bombing," that's a sign of brainwashing. They add "unprovoked" strategically and repeat on all news and then repeaters like you repeat their filthy lies.
@@masternmargarita What was the provocation in your opinion? And don’t insult me by saying “denazification.” There is actually nothing that could justify such indiscriminate killing of civilians. I know it’s not “fake news” because I look on sites like Airwars and Forensic Architecture that analyze metadata to collect time, date and location of video. They will identify fakes on both sides.
@@antonioribeiro2978 wrong There is only one IMPERATIVE: IT IS IMPERATIVE that no EurAsian challenger emerges capable of dominating EurAsia and thus of also challenging America - Zbignew Brzezinski (Spykman)
The only way to predict the future is to have the power to shape the future. His predictions were only possible because he was the one shaping the future. I dont miss him at all.
It's Davros from Doctor Who! Am I the only person on the internet who thinks that Brzezinski looks like and talks exactly like "Davros", the creator of the Polish-Canadian Daleks from the British Doctor Who TV shows?
It is simple: You believe in the power of the devil and attempt to leverage this power or you don´t. Brzezinski believes that (wo)men can and should be bought with cash´n debauchery.
