Former MI6 Chief On the Ukraine & Russia Conflict | Oxford Union 

The former chief of MI6 is now on the board of BP. The revolving door is as well oiled in the UK as it is the US.

Fascinating interview. But the career path going from working with the 'militant arm' of the UK's foreign policy (aka MI6), to working for one of the world's largest oil companies is probably of even greater public interest.

I listen to this gentleman and understand that he doesn't understand a damn thing about the domestic political situation in Russia

The parallel drawn between sanctions against South Africa and present sanctions of Russia is that the substantial trade between the UK and SA never diminished because Thatcher’s Gvt UK refused to sanction SA.

I'm unfamiliar with this gentleman but was he part of MI6 when Blair assured the world that Iraq had WMDs?

Wasn't this guy deeply implicated in the 2003 Iraq war? He seems to excuse the establishment and the status quo at every turn.

I loved the closing statement" Britain security should not be at the cliffs of Dover but 1000 miles away" This is exactly what Putin is saying. He wants Russian security 1000 miles away. Why on earth did you promise Ucrane to enter NATO knowing that Russia would feel threatened.?

As a German born in 1946 serving in the 1960/1970th at the demarcation line as we called it, I am convinced, that after the Berlin Wall fell because Moskau decided that, the key was there since WW2 endet, we or at least I was surprised, that the reunification was not in the interest of some of "our allies", "we beat them twice, now they are back", "we like Germany so much that we are glad there are 2" etc. The mistakes that led to what we face today lies in the fact, that mainly the American policy staedily pushed Nato eastwards and in the end right to the door of the Russian Federation! James Baker promised in Febr.1990 talking with Schewatnaze, Gorbatschov that he favors WestGermany stays in Nato and if the GDR joins in unification no Nato Troups must be stationed there, except German soldiers, and not one inch further East of Nato! London even insisted shortly before the 2+4 talks in 1990 in Moskau to be allowed carrying out manouevers in the eastern part of Germany, which was turned down by J.Baker after the German Foreign Minister Genscher drove that night to the Hotel to speak with the US Foreign Minister. It is clear, historically, that the British policy has been anti-German for more than a century, only the French attitude match that. Today, better since decades, politicians and the media don't inform the public about the events which led to the war in Ukraine.Why they don't mention that on the Conference in Bukarest 2008 Merkel and Sarkozy vetoed that Ukraine and Georgia become member of Nato? 2014 the coup d'etat with the help of CIA and MI6, remember the phone talk between Victoria Newland and the US Ambassador in Kiew about who should be the new Praesident in Ukraine ( f.... the EU). The US and I guess the Brits started to undermine the Veto and in training and arming the Ukrainian Army, sent " Councellors" etc. In 2007, but already before, Russian Praesident Putin during the Conference of Security in Munich found fully right harsh words against Nato expansion, which is an existencial threat to Russia.After the coup d'etat in Febr.2014 the Ukrainian Army attacked and bombed the Donbass where most of the Russian speaking people live, which cost about 10-14000 lives. The red line for Russia was the continuing pumping of weapons into Ukraine and they acted in Febr.2022. It was clear to me after Febr.2014 that Moskau will take the Krim with Sevastopol not only to prevent Nato Navy there but the historical fact that it belonged to Russia since Katharina the Great, like Odessa, the foundation goes back to her, and more important the fight against the German Army twice in 1941 and 1944 where both sides had heavy losses and the Krim laid in ruins like most of the part of Russia westward and south of Moskau down to Stalingrad and Kaukasus. My conclusion considering the old aim of the British Empire and after the US took over after 1945 is to destroy Russia, get the ressources etc. Remember Berezinsky: Russia without Ukraine is no longer an Eurasien power. So, this is no war between Russia and Ukrain, it is a war of US led Nato and EU on the back of the Ukrainians and the people of the EU! I guess US-Senator Richard Black from Virginia is right in saying: the war was planned by the US, executed bby Russia. That German politicians participate in this "Great Game" is more than shameful, not in my name! They all underestimate what's gonna happen if "Mother Russia" is in danger! This is not Irak, Syria or Libya! Russia survived several attacks by Poland, Sweden, France and Germany from the West and Japan from the East. It backfires already to Europe and will bind China and Russia together, most probably India, the BRICS. I don't expect that someone from MI6 tells the truth, even if he was in charge before.Britain belongs to the 5 eyes. The Angloamericans like to play with fire, seems to me, Nato States have the status of Vasalls, nothing else, all this is not in their interest! Hans-Juergen Golieberzuch

When a former MI6 chief speaks, listen carefully to what he says, and even more carefully to what he doesn't say.

The fact that the MI6 Chief goes on to sit on the board of BP tells you everything you need to know about the British state (or the capitalist state in general).

Getting our news from many sources, and being widely read, is more important today than ever in navigating and counteracting the limited view pieces thrown at us via the internet and TV. At least in America, TV news isn't news any longer as much as it is supposition by arm-chair wanna-be experts in world affairs. The disservice they do to us all - for ratings and a paycheck - is something we need to push back on by educating ourselves better.

"I sit on the board of BP......the decision we took to exit Russia. Now, some might say 'why were you there in the first place?' Well, we were there in the first place because it was a very good investment to make and it produced excellent returns for shareholders over 25 years." In other words, we're happy to get into bed with Russia as long as it's profitable for us. Let's not look at the bigger picture - the bigger risks - let's just fill our pockets while we can.

And please Sir now that you are on the board of BP could you please initiate a clean-up of oil spills in the Niger delta where BP was involved. And also compensation for polluted land, crops and eco-systems destroyed, animals killed and peoples' lives wrecked. This will go along way in creating a more harmonious and just society.

I've seen a few people repeat that analysis - that Putin underestimated the Western and Ukrainian response, and has essentially rushed into this war under-prepared. I'm skeptical of that claim. That doesn't seem like the calculating and cautious Putin we've seen over the last few decades. Unless there has been a personnel shake-up around him and some of his more cautious advisers have gone, I assume Russian leadership would have planned for worst-case scenarios, and would have fairly accurate intelligence concerning Ukrainian resolve. I don't think we're yet in a position to know what Moscow's expectations and plans are.

“I used to know every damn village in Syria” why do I find that statement so very offensive. It must be because of this country’s shameful destruction of Syria. How flippant a comment given what’s happened and still happening

Here we are almost 90 days after this post and Kyiv, kharkiv are still in Ukrainian hands, hope it stays that way.

This guy is part of the world leadership that created all of the current problems.

"Wars are not fought to defeat enemies. Wars are fought to bring about conditions" - Lincoln's Secretary of War.

How could so many people smarter than me get this whole situation wrong?

"How pathetic the jester is, on the king's throne, How stupid the people who allowed it." This all you need to know about the Ukrainian government and current state of the people who live in this country.

Take what this guy says with many grains of salt. He's an insider. MI6 and now BP

I'm a Brit. And I am old. And I grew up around people like Sir Robert John Sawers. And I am very aware of his expertise and his deep knowledge and his commitment and tireless service to his country. And I can tell you, categorically, that you cannot trust one word that issues from his mouth.

Agreeing with his presentation or not, there is a measure of class here I wish our leaders had.

Interesting that he would mention that the UK don't want the security to be at the white cliffs of Dover but a thousand miles away. My question then is why would anyone think that Russia would see things differently regarding their security?

I agree with this guy, we need to leave Putin a way out or it gets catastrophic.

For anyone keen on hearing another view on this situation and how we've gotten here you should probably look up John Mearsheimer's 'Why is Ukraine the West's Fault?'. Obviously Putin still has to bear the majority of the blame for this war but terrible and miscalculated foreign policy by the 'West' has also brought us here and it's terribly unfortunate that the Ukrainian people at the end of the day will suffer the consequences of poor judgement across the board.

The border of what the former chief can say and cannot say is quite interesting to surmise.

His final thought: "keeping dangers at a distance from us, the essence, really, of our security, you don't want your security to be on the white cliffs of Dover. You want your security to be a thousand miles away so that you can operate freely and our people can go about their lives in freedom and one hopes with growing prosperity and that's what public service is about" (32:55). This to me is the tragic reason why we face conflicts like this - if you think that 'public service' amounts to holding influence thousands of miles from your own borders (i.e. all over the territory of other nations) how is this going to lead to peace? You can't have every nation of the world expanding their tentacles of power thousands of miles in every direction and also avoid antagonism with countries who don't want you doing this. This interpretation of 'public service' would (and does) lead to wars all over the place.

"We have now reached a point in human history where United Kingdom is condemning invasion and Taliban is talking about peace mediation"

Thankfully he let us know that he knows nothing about financial systems and how actually this is going to play out against central banks

Reading through the comments section here was considerably more informative than listening to this slick propagandist's spiel.

RLL and Secular Talk come together! Nice one! Always good to hear from the people on the ground, not just officials with investments

Sawers' wry smile when he mentioned Macron thinking himself saviour of Europe is exactly how I felt when he was jetting back and forth to Russia and got totally embarrassed when Putin attacked.

Was his Lorrdship part of the high nobility which got to see the irrefutable proof of Saddams nukes? The people who were convinced that invading Iraq was the right thing to do to keep humanity safe. As a commoner i am always in awe of these people, for all that they knew and we didn't at that time.

He concludes by saying that the essence of our security is not having threats on the cliffs of dover but keeping them a thousand miles away...why does that have a familiar ring?

He is smart but also seems forget sometimes that times change. Just because it worked before doesn't mean it will work now.

I'm constantly surprised what you may find on RU-vid . Thank you Oxford Union for letting us , the general public hear and watch this . His thinking is so clear and so well informed !

At last a competent interviewer (unlike BBC) who doesn't think it's all about her! Full marks girl! You let the 'guest' be the focus of attention.

Thanks Alistair. An interesting talk but I think it was recorded some time ago. Hope you're having a good time. Jenny leaves tomorrow. We've enjoyed her visit. Safe journey back for you. Love Joan

If (as he says) that Russia will win the war - then what is the point in "supporting the Ukrainian government" with sanctions, but not with military action? The West should either get involved or not at all

He sounds very much like Blair or Blair sounds very much like him. The problem is that Blair lost all credibility in the Iraq War.

One of the things I learned while working at diplomatic representations of the European Commission in various EU member-states was the people working behind the scenes, whether they're high level diplomats or civil servants, are generally considerably more skilled, more competent, possess vastly more knowledge, and are generally much better at planning for the medium to long term than most politicians. They also tend to be more self-aware (including being aware of their own limitations - Dunning-Kruger Effect, I guess?), and many of them are highly dedicated to their work. I found that realization to be quite comforting, and this talk reminded me of that. Very good indeed.

I would like to hear him again , after months of the war.

I would not trust this man one iota but it does give an insight to one perspective, so thanks.

Imagine what this guy could really share if we were able.

How can a man once(maybe still is) employed by mI6 and now an oil company give a balanced fair perpespective of the situation without it being biased towards the west.

English MI6 knew this was coming with large anticipation

Am bitterly shocked to find out that my remark begging you OU to rectify the misspelling on your title is now missing. In its place only my two addenda are now appearing as my contributions to the debate. Back then, I praise the guest speaker for his briefing and said that it was up to each viewer to draw their own conclusion after listening to both sides of the same coin. Indeed, what I objected to was that your full title should have read: Former M16 Chief on the Ukraine & Russia Conflict, not Former M16 Chief On the Ukraine & Russia Conflict. Patiently awaiting to be proven wrong, for Oxford is rightfully renowned for being.the centre of academic excellence. @ngand'osambalundula

Without a free and unbiased press ( which doesn't exist anymore ) it is impossible to know what the truth is about anything.

"The one thing about clandestine operations is they always become known at some point." Brilliant and useful for all relationships, I should think.

It's very normal to hear from both the antagonists and protagonists so each informed viewer can discern facts from opinions and then draw their own conclusions. Now we linguists are reported to be language detectives. As such wasn't this video title to read: 'From M1616 Chief on the Ukraine Russia Conflict' . In other words, grammar proscribes the capitalisation of form or closed words comprising fewer than five letters. Yet this preposition 'on' is one of the three closed words aka bond morphemes. Oxford is the shining star of academic and the focal point of academic reference the world over. May OU retain her prestigious reputation in whatever she writes in future!

This is how you learn about the details of the present conflict in Ukraine. Thank you moderator for asking the key questions and not interrupting the speaker with needless questions. I have learned a great deal .

As a westerner, I always find it extremely ignorant to paint Putin as irrational. Everything he is doing is extremely rational - if you don't think so, all that shows is that you either don't understand the geostrategic game or that you are engaging in disingenuous polemics. That doesn't mean he can't make miscalculations, but what he is doing makes a lot of sense.

I am surprised that someone who by his own admission, doesn't understand 'the enemy' anymore, is so sure that he still understands the situation. In the early part of the interview, talking about Putin he says, "I watched him closely for 20 years and met him close up" but I don't know what has happened to him during the 2 years of Covid. I think he lives in an information bubble." But he says "I am glued to the news watching what is happening. He has made a massive error of judgement." Certainly the West made a massive error of judgement. We thought that we could do and say what we want. We thought history had ended.

Whenever I see anything come out of the England, I think upon the fact that a total of 65 countries have claimed their independence from the UK. Very simple to see why.

Imho as a person coming from a former soviet union country this analysis was the most interesting and precise I have heard regarding current events

Classy guy who knows 100 * more than he'll admit. First Q to validate his ethics & committment to the UK Nation (& not to a few Aerospace Defence execs) : did he know about the lack of WMD in Irak? I doubt it. He is, like Kroes & Macron to Uber, a sell out, > 50% chances.

I train MI6 agents in mortal hand-to-face combat. The most underrated technique is to scream loudly and run fast away from danger. But if you’re trapped and pleading doesn’t work, try playing dead and then run away fast to safety and call for backup

He is totally correct don't force the "Tiger to Jump Over the wall" or in this case "The Bear to crash through the wall"...like he says it best interest for the West to leave a route for Russia to dial down the tone.

Astonishingly, He knows lesser than the public!

The focus of many people in the unlikely event of a nuclear war is the initial blast, which could cause mass casualties and unimaginable devastation. When the U.S. detonated nuclear weapons over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 77 years ago, it leveled the cities and killed more than 100,000 to 200,000 people from the blasts or radiation sickness. But according to scientists, the horrors of a nuclear war could affect the whole planet. Clearly, one or two nuclear impacts would not have global effects but the impact of 100 weapons the size of the one that fell on Hiroshima would lower temperatures around the world to below those of the little ice age that occurred from roughly 1,300 to 1,850. That would result in crop failures and famine on a large scale. Here are the large scale impacts 1. Five megatons of soot and ash would fill the sky, bringing about a nuclear winter. 2. After one year, the average temperature of Earth would fall by about 2 degrees. After five years, the earth would be three degrees cooler than before. Twenty years down the road, it would warm up to one degree below where it was before the nuclear event. 3. That might sound beneficial, given all the talk about global warming today, but lower temperatures means less rain. Five years after the detonation, rainfall would be at 91% of current levels. After 26 years, we would still see 4.5% less rain than we did before the war. And the reduced rainfall would bring about global drought conditions. 4. Depending on the region, growing seasons for crops would be 10 to 40 days shorter, resulting in widespread famine. 5. The ozone layer would diminish due to the radiation, ultimately becoming as much as 25% thinner for the first five years after the event. After 10 years, there would be some recovery, but it would still be 8% thinner. This would result in a rise in skin cancer and sunburns. And the increased ultraviolet rays would put plant and animal life that survived the initial blast at risk. It wouldn't necessarily take 100 missiles for those theories to be tested, either. The United States' modern B83 bombs are 80 times more powerful than the weapon it hit Hiroshima. Russia has tested weapons that are even more powerful. Scientists warn that ripple effects of a nuclear war could be devastating for everyone on Earth. The combined cooling and enhanced UV would put significant pressures on global food supplies and could trigger a global nuclear famine.

Excellent man, thanks so much

Neo-nazis only existed in Ukraine during WW2? In 2014 they were instrumental in effecting the Maidan coup and overthrowing Yanukovych. The Azov Battalion were recently integrated into the Ukrainian military.

Thank you for allowing us non Oxford grads to watch this. Very worrying but also nice to see a calm, balanced perspective.

To Former MIG at the Oxford. Palembang - Kaltim, Mamado. Football, volcano, tornado. 8.6, 8.7, 10.8, 10.2, 1.1, 8.13. UK, France, Australia, Java Sea, Bali, Borneo. Glasgow, G7, G20.

This Guy is was appointed independent non-executive director of BP Global. You can connect the dots.

"You want your security to be a thousand miles away." Great line! That is what Putin has been saying all along about the prospect of the Ukraine becoming a NATO member in his backyard.

I'm not trying to draw a comparison between the two states, but you have to admit "former senior foreign intelligence boss, now board member on leading oil company" is the exact CV of an awful lot of dodgy Russians.

Fantastically informative. Thank you to Sir Robert John Sawers for your past official service to all of humanity. Thanks also for generously continuing to share valuable insight honed through many years of experience. Thanks to the Oxford Union for arranging and sharing.

It’s like listening to Neville Chamberlain on his return from Munich

"One of the things I do in my afterlife from public service is I sit on the board of BP" - says it all really. Spoken like a true Blairite. He goes on to talk about BP's lucrative business investments, so much so that when he talks about what "we" have to do, one must legitimately wonder who exacly he is refererring to as "we", which seems to me the essential problem in the ongoing conflict between the West/US and Russia. In whose interests were the sustained provocations that led to this military crisis actually made?

This guy sounds quite intelligent and quick to give many limited references to half measures in the past. He's a high quality yarn spinner to entertain up and coming students whose families are certainly British Petroleum shareholders. Please note how instead of being truthful about how ineffective "sanctions" are in stopping aggression, he so wisely emphasized that once a belligerent leader is caught in a corner militarily, the sanctions can be useful while the aggressor begins negotiations for his/her own end-game. Ex-UK government employee, ex(?)-MI6, currently on BP's board of directors---smooth as a Cobra in the night.

I have a lot of respect for MI6 but these former chiefs and MI operatives need to keep their mouths shut on world dealings that are currently going on now.

Listen, Google, I will never ever buy anything from your annoying ads!

Notice the last remarks: GB doesn't want security on the cliffs of Dover. Same thing for Russia - it doesn't want security in Donetsk, right at its border. Russia wants it just like any other country. You would do the same, I reckon.

Oxford Union you need to get Prof John Mearscheimer for an intelligent and balanced counterview. For those interested watch his RU-vid talks, very educational.

such a slick and reasonable sounding narrative. ive hear the same story every where. I could see three reasons not to belive a thing this man says before we got done with his credentials. mi6, bp, and tony blair.

This guy is so smooth in his mis-direction.

We should remember that Stalin was absolutely committed to the modernization of the state, and was quite unconcerned by the cost in lives...

"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master." - Commisioner Pravin Lal, Alpha Centauri (game from Firaxis)

The Russians use a lot of Cold War designed equipment, but so do we. The F-15, F-16, and F-18s were designed in the 60s and 70s. The M-1 tank is a 1970s design. The B-52 are ancient and the Bradley is no spring chicken. We are partial to our antiques as well. Basically, new weapons systems are not affordable in large numbers, which is why the old stuff remains.

What do you expect from the organisation that creates, steers these situations. No surprises also that it is held at Oxford.

Everything he said can be read in big newspapers. I was hoping he could give additional insights.

Can see why BP hired the man. Natural Gas Reserve all by himself.

Can you get a speaker to update this topic?

excuse me. the former MI6 director just said he did not think it was in russia's interest to keep the russian speaking part of ukraine in the fold??

Those students ask great questions. Would love to hear Robert elaborate a bit more on the China dimension. Such a rare opportunity to hear someone like him talk this freely during this chaotic time.

So he's on the board of BP. The whole US goal was to stop Nordstream 2 or at least minimize its production and flow. The US calculated that Putin would take Donbass regions and eastern Ukraine and that would provide enough finger wagging ammunition to close down the pipeline. Then it all blew up.

Great professional and a public servant! Must be one of the most informed people on the planet!

That was very interesting. Thanks.

I started to watch this with an open mind looking for another perspective. When he discussed his close relationship with Blair I started to become wary. When he subtly pushed the narrative that Putin has gone mad I became more wary. When he described the annexation of Crimea as cold and calculated without giving context I pretty much gave up. Why did Russia annex Crimea? To protect their vital strategic interest in the port of Sevastopol, the home of the black sea fleet. If Faslane or Pearl Harbor were threatened the UK and US would act to prevent this too.

I managed to listen to 4 mins 55 seconds before being compelled to write “what a load of bollocks!”

Brilliant! Thankyou.

I'd love to see this updated a week later, a lot has changed.

Oxford and no one is smart enough to ask him how he feels about colluding with, and benefitting from the oil oligarchy. oil/gas is the sole reason that EU is dependent of Russia, and probably the only reason for the ukranian war

As a longtime toastmaster, it gauls me that established officers of the crown cannot speak without uh uh uh uh uh uh between each thought! It is so painful to listen to this man.

He will say anything for the right price

Professor Chomsky said the best path to peace is for Ukraine to declare neutrality towards NATO.

As board member of BP, his public analysis is colored by this fact. SO, he does not really reveal the background strategy of Western govt (influenced by the oil/gas sector)...to them Ukraine is only a pawn

Since his admission of being on the board of directors with an energy company, I would imagine he's laying low because we are paying for rocketing energy prices while he and his shareholders greatly benefit.