Russia-Ukraine War: What Can We Learn from History? | Intelligence Squared 

well, when you see Indian, Russian and Chinese media it's hard for these people not to be arrogant. The Indian mass media is pretty much owned by Indian politicians, Russian State Media is calling for nuclear strikes against London and The Chinese and their "wolf warrior" nonsense aren't terribly interesting.

We can and we do learn from history. We learn that england was the violent country in the 19th century, and that the USA is the most violent country sinse 1950 TO THIS DAY.

We have learned so much from history, what are you talking about? Whether it be technology, tactics, logistics etc. In the moral aspect we now have Int. law, numerous pro-humanity laws to limit the destruction of war. It's a very nihilistic view you have, and also just a wrong one

Yup. They ignore anything that does not support the U.S. and U.K. official government positions. I suppose, even amongst independent minded, tenured Academics, only superstars like Professor John Mearscheimer, or Professor Jeffrey Sachs, or Professor Noam Chomsky, are moral and courageous enough to speak independently, based on their years of scholarship, and/or political experience, or powerfful enough, like Henry Kissinger, who himself even broke ranks and spoke out against U.S. escalation of the conflict. (A good way to test the panelists' intellectual honesty would have been to ask all three, if they believe the U.S. and U.K. government proclamations that Russia blew up their own pipeline, or if it is more probable, that the U.S. blew it up. Most neutral experts will admit it is more likely that the U.S. did.)

@@stevelang6990 neutral experts say the U.S. did it, huh? Who are these "neutral" experts that you speak of? I'm sure they're anything but neutral but your bias won't let you believe otherwise...

you must be joking

Kanye West is not welcome 😂🤣🤣

@@tj2636 Are you sure? Why's that, because you have looked into it? What was Russia's motivation to blow up their own pipeline? The U.S. has claimed for years that Putin was using the pipeline as a weapon to extort Europe, why would he blow up his own weapon? He didn't have to blow it up, he could have just turned it off. Promising to turn it back on again if there was a Negotiated Peace, was his leverage. Why would he blow up his leverage. The U.S. has been against the pipeline for years and Biden warned back in February of this year: "WASHINGTON, Feb 7 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden on Monday warned that if Russia invades Ukraine, there would be no Nord Stream 2, but did not specify how he would go about ensuring the controversial pipeline would not be used. Speaking at a joint news conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Biden said, "If Russia invades... again, then there will be longer Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it." When asked how he would do that, he responded, "I promise you we will be able to do it."------------------------------------------------------------- But to answer your question, the most prominent neutral expert is Jeffrey Sachs. He is an internationally respected former faculty of Harvard and Columbia University, Advisor to the UN, Public policy analyst, and senior advisor to governments, specifically: "In 1989, Sachs advised Poland's anticommunist Solidarity movement and the government of Prime Minister Tadeusz Mazowiecki. He wrote a comprehensive plan for the transition from central planning to a market economy which became incorporated into Poland's reform program led by Finance Minister Leszek Balcerowicz. Sachs was the main architect of Poland's debt reduction operation. Sachs and IMF economist David Lipton advised the rapid conversion of all property and assets from public to private ownership. Closure of many uncompetitive factories ensued.[25]" "Sachs's ideas and methods of transition from central planning were adopted throughout the transition economies. He advised Slovenia in 1991 and Estonia in 1992 on the introduction of new stable and convertible currencies. Based on Poland's success, he was invited first by Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and then by Russian President Boris Yeltsin on the transition to a market economy." --------------Anti-globalist activists have called him a "cold hearted neo-liberal," which is why he was invited on corporate media news shows. "Professor Sachs told Bloomberg: "The destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline which I would bet was a US action perhaps US and Poland. But host Tom Keene interrupted: "Jeff, Jeff you've got to stop there, that's quite a statement as well. "Why do you feel that that was a US action? What evidence do you have of that?" Professor Sachs continued: "Well, first of all, there's direct radar evidence that US helicopters, military helicopters that are normally based in Gdansk were circling over this area." ""We also had the threats from the United States earlier in this year that one way or another, we are going to end Nord Stream. "We also have a remarkable statement by Secretary Blinken last Friday at a press conference, so he says this is also a tremendous opportunity. "It's a strange way to talk if you're worried about piracy on international infrastructure of vital significance." "So I know this runs counter to our narrative and you're not allowed to say these things in the West but the fact of the matter is all over the world when I talk to people, they think the US did it." --------------------------------------------------------And the U.S. is now the country that Europe will be dependent on for gas. "Until Russia's invasion of Ukraine in late February, the Nord Stream 1 pipeline beneath the Baltic Sea from Russia to Germany was one of western Europe's main sources of gas." (From website) "Business Insider": "Energy companies and traders are raking in huge profits selling US natural gas to Europe as prices on the continent skyrocket, with a single shipment netting around $200 million of profit, according to industry experts. Aug 13, 2022"

Agree

oddly enough, mr putin is one of the few people who actually believes that moscow is under siege

@@hdevere8383 And Noam Chomsky, John Pilger, well... some people who like hearing different narratives, an not only the main stream ones.

No you merely search for the narratives you agree with

@@clydewmorgan Or maybe just complementary sources to have a broader picture in English. As for me, I watch many different news in 5 different languages since I am a polyglot linguist... it is extremely useful to have different views and mindset. as wekk as to make more nuances. In French, my favourite reference is our Perpetual Secretary of the Académie française, Mrs Hélène Carrère d'Encausse, who never speaks with such certainty regarding Russia, even if it is her area of expertise and even if she met Putin personnally and spoke with him in Russian, one of her mothertongue. (She is from the Russian nobility whose family used to live in Georgia before the Revolution)

Metaphorically? - ill-conceived analogy

Depends on what you knew at the time, but as it stands, of course.

It's not propaganda if it's the truth.

@@kkpenney444 this wasn’t that

Agree

@@kkpenney444 1/2 of it, unfortunately... the UK vision, obviously. I am French and I clearly do not share this point of view. I came because of Peter Frankopan, but I feel extremely disappointed... What was said about the French people clearly showed that they not only do not understand the Russians, but they don't even understand their neighbours! So... no need to go as far as Russia then! Understanding the European continent would be, in my view, a good start!

@@plumitive4105 What point of view?

False equivalence

Maybe a Russian who is pro war like English were pro war with Nazis when they threatened invasion … Why is the only good Russian you can conceive of a push-over servile Western-stooge type of Russian? Are the Russians not allowed to have a stance, different from Western imperialist worldview, that is valid!?!? Bigotry in this discussion and commentaries is phenomenal here :)

Three establishment clowns, repeating establishment talking points to secure their place in the establishment. Myopic.

"Interview With Three Western Historians" "Why no Russians?!" 🙄

MEABY SERBIAN TELLING YOU DO TRUTH,....WHEN YOU NAZI NATO ISIS TALMUD THERORIST ALLIENCE TRASH ARE IN RUBLLES PEACE WILL COME,...NOT A SECOND BEFORE

There is such a debate. And Mearsheimer lost by a landslide.

@@charlesfiddespayne7474 Not according to the public present. That was the point of the debate. You can pick a side in front of the computer, but that is not relevant, because you are just one person. Ofc, I'm not saying that one side is completely wrong and the other side is completely right. There are valid arguments, in my opinion, on both sides. Just that those present considered one side's arguments more compelling.

Any one of them would have seen this troika of twits off.

This is so unbalanced, you would find more depth in a puddle, I’m so disappointed.

A balance perspective would show that their arguments amount to ad hominem attacks and pure Russophobia with no actual self reflection about how this war actually started

You're too generous, there should be no reference to learning or history in the title. Truly an insult to historians.

name one non-factual comment that any of these Historians made! It goes against Putin's and the Kremlin's narrative but the truth often hurts.

😆

Unconstructive comment Harry

Spot on comments, Harry! Absolutely waste of time. Glad I only wasted 8 minutes of my time. The woman is so ridiculous and fake to call the war is between Russia and Ukraine. Is she blind? Hope her prayer will work.

Take your bs somewhere else.

No, because at that time the Soviet Union was a vastly, vastly inferior nuclear power to the United States. Krushchev knew it was a blunder and realized he had to get the problem resolved. He also had Castro being irrational, pushing for a nuclear launch from Cuba and pestering Kruschev for control if those missles and decision making on when to launch. Kruschev rightly refused to hand control over to Kennedy. Thus the deal on Turkey and keeping it quiet from Castro. It benefitted Kennedy and Catri both that the Turkey deal be kept quiet.

@@yam2050 "Take your bs somewhere else." He was right. Why do you angry?

America deployed nuclear missiles into the Soviet Union’s region because NATO did not have an adequate defense against the massive Red Army deployed on its border in the Warsaw Pact. The Red Army deployed immediately when the Nazis surrendered to grab as much land as possible and only American nuclear airpower (B-29s) made them withdraw from, for example, Iran. So only the west’s nuclear forces could deter regional invasions and coercion via the Red Army. That is why missiles were emplaced in Turkey, because the Red Army directly threatened Turkey. Everyone who has lived with Russia knows their game. If they can, they invade. If they can’t, they engage in subversion. It’s just what they do and all their neighbors know it intimately.

@@tommyrq180 Sounds like past UK and current US.

Thanks - good suggestion. We will be releasing a new video with Orlando Figes on the channel soon too.

this panel discussion is 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

Boring is a good thing idealistically, like having stability, & sanity in life, a boring blessing to say the least. Peace could be a very boring proposition of the way to live for some, But a good peaceful life that's null & void of drama, conflict & confusion compounded & driven by endless emotional debates & arguments concerning personal, philosophical, social , religious & political differences, can be quite boring and a peacefully predictable way to live & think about the same things.without the drama..etc etc.

True. The cost of going war with Russia - unless absolutely necessary - would be far greater than anything 1939-1945 was. I don't see how there could be parallels between the stakes then, and the stakes now.

@@irvin701 The problem is that nowadays there is far more at stake for both parties as there was in the past ..... the list is endless.

You are so right elenaalgazina5213 .... the conflict is pretty unfathomable and even if it is sorted out one day ? You can't take individual thoughts and the very essence of what makes a person think or believe out of the equation. It's a sad time we are living in and will end in disappointment and ruin. I believe we should take responsibility for our own brains and decisions but how do you get the horse to drink after you've taken him to the water ?

@@maryearll3359 Thank you,Mary Early for the comment. The religious question was not touched yet. It will make the conflict deeper.All the best.

not to worry, there are few in the west who have any memory. All attention is on the latest fashionable cause of the moment. that western nations have almost continuously been invading other countries is known by few.

Yup, that is why they are suffering because of the same stupid mistakes that they had gone through in the past like WW1 & WW2. This is another propaganda talk. The west deserved to be screwed and the pain that they are experiencing now is not painful enough to wake up.

Good job Russian comrade-bot! You ll have more vodka per post

I think you give them too much credit the you include the word 'academic' and 'historian' in any reference to these people. Even propagandists seem too generous a term.

@@stevel9200 I totally agree with you; I was just using the titles they give themselves so they'd know I was talking about them. These people are just oblivious, and they congratulate each other for it.

Perhaps you'd like to indicate the key elements they've missed? All three are quite well credentialed, yet you dismiss them as academic. The onus, therefore, is on you to show your credentials & argument. Will you please do so.

@@chrisfreebairn870 they will not because they cannot ;)

@@leenglishman1605 I suspected as much, just being polite .. see my comments beloe for a more assertive expression of my views ..

The surest way to start wars is to have lots of meaningful discussions.

The cold war has poisoned her intellect

not really

@@autemniaequinoctius2030 Care to back up your stance ? 2 words don't make a response ! The whole world has recognized this conflict as a ' Proxy war " between US ( Europe hardly counts ) and Russia .

@@narayanprasad4008 yes, the whole third world and even the fourth world, where people adore Putin as a "strong leader", like Stalin. Not a single normal civilized country in the world would agree to believe in such crap

Good point. America's using Ukraine like they use their grunts- let them put their body on the line while they sip 🍸

If NATO would be involved then it would have been long over.

Because it’s a marketing campaign, not a real discussion. This is for the pseudo intellectuals that are on the fence.

True

It's called brainwashing

Because they like to praise each other and reaffirm each other's idea and view.. it is a jokes

Maybe you do have an alternative point which I would hope would add another dimension ?

Exactly

Yes, a 100%!

Agree

Why? The East wants all of our money and all of our property leaving us with absolutely NOTHING... Putin desires to destroy the European Union and NATO... Why should we let him do so?

@@ronclark9724 the west has stolen our resources and enslaved our families and culture. Time for tables to turn.

renaissance was afforded with gunpowder.

I can't take him seriously as he is a historian with a fake name to claim Croatian nobility status. Although his family has nothing to with the Frankopan and they have changed their last name from a normal Croatian last name from Dujmić-Vukasinović to de Lupis, and then to Frankopan just to try and claim medival castles after the fall of communism. The last Frankopans were executed by the Austrians in 1617. Imagine now being a historian and carry a fake historic name. LOL

@@gregoryjames4474 And born on the back of the Islamic Golden Age.

The non violent answer could lie in collectively raising awareness in regard to any illegal tactics commonly used, including by Chinese or Russians, in all other jurisdictions. Educate all leaders and populations on ethics in these countries. Welcome Ukraine war survivors and Russian refugees who declare to resist the war, as refugee migrants by giving them dual citizenship, provided they assist to end the war. These three strategies could help drive to peace.

I agree, Maester. This discussion was so one sided it was an echo. No one is charting a path to peace, just arrogant justification for their ridged view. I see a very biased view of history without nuance. What is left out is the promotion of NATO and support of the military-industrial's profits and its impact on Russia. MacMillan's comment on Germany in WW11, implying jealousy of England trade competition was a cause of the war - what a joke. Oliver Stone's Untold History of the United States would be an excellent beginning for this group to learn some real history of the West.

❤ to Russia from UK stay safe ✌ Hasta La Victoria Siempre

Your comment resonates with me. Certainly none of the panelists have cognitive empathy taking Russia's perspective, not to mention saying that JFK withdrew putting a base in Turkey to show good faith leading to de-escalation of the Cuban crisis. Is there a parallel with this Ukraine war? America's military industrial complex is working, especially after Afghanistan withdrwal.

@@ele81946 someone said a few weeks back everything happening is a war against the working class, I'd not heard it put that so distinctly before.

@@0150Tricia there is no peace with Russia as it’s a terrorist state

U government is evil group..they go to war almost a very year,,Libya war, Afganistan war,Irak war for the sake of humanity they say..

And when we tire of our leaders we change them. Quite frequently if necesary. Can you change yours?

The differance is that Western political systems allow for the replacement of leaders who may not be doing a satisfactory job. If Russians look at their leaders "special military operation" and realise the long term consequences of it ...what can Russians do about this dreadful leadership?...their political system does not allow for replacement of a bad leader.That is the moral of this entire debacle.

Can you change yours ? CAN YOU CHANGE YOURS ???

Did you expect an illegal occupation of a Sovereign Country to be considered as acceptable ?.Do you understand the gravity of human suffering Russia have caused ?. Have you thought about the millions of civilians who are now left without their homes/jobs/villages.? Do you have a job and home?.I'll bet you do.

Gold . Exactly .

So true. "First time since the Cuban Missile Crisis, we have a direct threat of the (use of) a nuclear weapon if in fact things continue down the path they are going." Joe Biden "Above all, while defending our own vital interests, *nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war.* To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy, or of a collective death-wish for the world." John F Kennedy If not, history will simply repeat, and the entire Cold War "sh*tshow with death and destruction with return. "Sleepy Joe" is a bit late with his realisation.

You can definitely put McArthur in the same bunch as Taylor and Lemay

US nukes in Turkey, unknown to Russia were to be pulled out of Turkey, the fact that nukes were within easy range of Russia is interesting. Mind you, one can hate a leader, but to hate the country,, is to hate it's people. Curious is the NATOs evolving and expanding, through out the world, a once defensive force that of recent as become offensive.

Totally Democrats speaking

Left and socialistic neo-marxistic...

Пішов за кораблем. Там наші люди і не тобі вирішувати що нам треба а що не треба. Ні сантиметру священної української землі рашисти не отримають.

Їх треба розгромити і не дати перегрупуватись. І ті регіони не повністю проросійські, є люди які нас чекають.

If your neighbor decides to take your back yard you’ll be ok? Let it take. It is easy to have an opinion that doesn’t touch you directly. Right?

@@katherinemunoz4138 I'm not trying to say what Ukraine should do; I'm just saying Ukraine is fine without Crimea (economically, politically, and militarily). Russia won't be in a position to restart the attack in the future. After all, it's easy to say Ukraine should "take the land back". That will come with a huge price. If the West stands behind Ukraine as long as it takes, the time is on the Ukrainian side. Russia can't play this game in isolation forever. But of course, it's on Ukraine to decide what to do, and my comment doesn't imply in any way what Ukraine should do.

It wasn’t who live there so to speak. The Vikings came there and they were invited to be the rulers they became the ruling class the polities stayed the same until they were overrun by the Mongols

As if the British and Germans haven't.... Duh!

Absolutely correct. Agree.

Poles understand us perfectly. Moscovia must be defeated, demilitarised including nuclear weapons, divided into free national states. Westerners completely underestimate danger of mongolian Rus' which successor is Moscow. They'll don't stop, they must be stopped.

Absolutely agree.

Exactly this

It would be good if someone here wasn't a biased believer in yet another crumbling western narrative.

I cannot agree more.

In 2014 the USA and the UK organized a coup in Ukraine to Instal a Nazi government in Ukraine and the western media and these fat intellectuals are propagating for their governments which are just evil.

Trump/Brexit dérangement syndrome.

Who would want to share a stage with a ruzzian?

@@canadiangemstones7636 certainly none of these guys. When Russians commentators with good English were allowed to appear on UK debates and TV in 2014 they often gave highly nuanced points of view and insights which were largely hidden from Western audiences. They were more than able to handle themselves and often left neoliberals Western media anchors and commentators.

These are vetted British slaves to the official western narrative. Russia bad, West good.

Why do people like you spam the comment section with complaints, such as these, rather than calling attention to something said in the video that is objectively incorrect. Instead you complain when anti-western voices aren’t included… why should they… they’re anti-western regardless of the topic.

​@@nicholasjohnson778 it's not spam or a complaint, it's an objective observation that there is little to no disagreement expressed between the panelists. If that is not self-evident to you, then that is your own problem. I personally agree with the majority of the viewpoints expressed in this video. Unlike you perhaps, I prefer a little more intellectual stimulation via a conflict of ideas. The world is not geopolitically dichotomous as you imply, and there is certainly room for a greater variety of opinion on this subject than your "Western v. Antiwestern" trope of a worldview.

@@nicholasjohnson778 I happen to support Ukraine, but I do not consider it "anti-Western" to question Western involvement in the war. That is the way of censorship.

@@stephanoskaravas5405 This was a panel interview not a debate, objectively. There are plenty of debates most feature John Mearsheimer but there are others. I also find it strange, the Kremlin’s causus belli has shifted from one month to another, Russian soldiers are not at all enthusiastic fighting this war, and hundreds of thousands of military age males have fled Russia. But you would like to have more academics, that side with Putin’s perspective, explain why the situation is far more complex than it appears. I’ve listened to these arguments, they don’t link up well with the facts. But if you have an interesting point, I’m interested in studying it. What if this war is straight forward? What if Russians are generally politically apathetic? What if Putin gambled and has lost? And what if these historians summarized the situation accurately? The problem I have with these “oh it’s one-sided” spammed comments is that they bring nothing to the table… AT ALL.

@@TedATL1 Well it is anti-western to complain that a panel interview (which wasn’t a debate) should have included a contradictory perspective. I’m all for debates, but this was not a debate. Also, censorship is the blocking of ideas from being expressed. Intelligence squared has provided plenty of debate forums for an anti-western or realist viewpoint. You demanding that every discussion on the topic include a Kremlin friendly perspective is anti-western and is in fact illiberal. We are in an information war with Russia and Russia is trying to crush liberalism in Ukraine… maybe you should put your money where your mouth is and ACTUALLY combat censorship. Censorship in Russia, Iran, China, etc.

And some Russians just to make it fair

Not necessarily. You don't necessarily invite an obese person to talk about the health problems of overweight, you invite an expert in the field, who may be stick thin. Unless a personal perspective or insider perspective is relevant and/or desirable, there is no need to invite someone who has a personal connection to the subject discussed. In a free society, anyone can talk about anything.

@@wh5254 OK, so bring Poles or Lithuanians, they exactly know what monster russia was and is. It's a genocide and to stop genocide you can only by defeating agressor. Problem is that Germany was occupied and hadn't nuclear weapons. russia is hard to occupy and they have weapons. Society is fascist, some adequates are in brutal pressure of police. Only victory of Ukraine can save the world.

Maybe it's better to hear from ethnic Russians who live in eastern Ukraine.

@@wh5254 Nothing about someone should be discussed without them

Dodgy History It’s what he leaves out that’s important which is he’s bias

It's nearly at the end for Russia.

Where is the space for freedom and not being kill on the street, in Your mind?

Good business is to buy bloody oil from dictatorships like Russia but still call your country 'biggest democracy'

your comment is not entirely fair. the first most difficult years, we had to fight the Nazis virtually one on one.

if it's not Russia, then US needed to fight Hitler themselves, not much to brag, really.

Are you insane? US has not joined WW2 until 1943, at that point USSR already broke Germany Army backbone and was pushing them back through Europe.

Dushen, US didn't wage war . it's Russia

@@77kromah Spot on! This is Putin's War....

History always repeats itself.

I think there is an implicit assumption in your line of reasoning, which is that every modern day country is made up of homogienous people (at least dominantly, mostly). But they are not. Take Ukraine, if 2/3 wants to live with EU, 1/3 wants to live Russia, should the 1/3 be IGNORED? (the debate about minority rights among academics), and what if the 2/3 tries to FORCE the 1/3? I think there is no black/white answer, its best for all sides to be considerate. The challenge is when one party acts belligerently, it causes a chain reaction and EVERYONE becomes belligerent.

@@Ajox191 not exactly but it often does rhyme.

You'd want to be where you're not wanted to gain money

History repeats itself yesterday, today and tomorrow. This’s the fact and that your opinion.

Indeed!

We can't, because softly softly let Russians hang their own monkey.

Yeah its complete propaganda, this is just the US using Ukraine to fight Russia. I dont know if you have realized that Russia and China have been labled as threat for more than 30 years. In that time Russia and China have not even threatened or said anything to the US. And at the same time the US have been invading other countries and taking out their leaders. This is just the US trying to stay as the main power in the world so its trying destroy their countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. Remember all these wars are to bring "peace and democracy" to these places but they just destroy it and leave it in ruins.

After the Soviet Union crumbled into Russia, the USA and the West chose to slice defense spending significantly and cash in a peace dividend. It isn't NATO's fault the former Warsaw Pack nations chose to join the EU and NATO... You reap what you sow...

@@ronclark9724The United States outspends the top 10 militaries in the world combined, the United States has toppled over 80 governments many of them duly elected, and the United States has literally hundreds of military bases around the world. What exactly did we slash, and what rock have you been living under.

Good advice for the meddling dictator Putler, but he doesn’t listen to advice.

@@canadiangemstones7636 Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine? Who?

He refused to go along with brain dead austerity measures that would have disadvantaged the least well off and was overthrown in a fascist backed coup

The US / UK duo has prepared Poles' most bleak future. Poles love to fight "for our freedom and yours!" They still do not understand that the T-shirt of the "leader" in this armed conflict with Russia, has a yellow colour on the front, but a shooting target sign is printed on the back!

Because Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, fought over 8 years of war against Ukraine, and invaded Ukraine again in 2022. Ukraine's security concern can only be satisfied with a demilitarized Russia.

@@TorianTammas What a twat! The medusas survived with no brain for thousands of years, there is your chance...hopefully they are not allowing you to vote! Another victim of the "mockingbird operation", LMFAO - by western standards you can be promoted to the position of an EXPERT & or a PROFESSOR!!!

@@TorianTammas Because the U.S. 'invaded ' (coup-ed') Ukraine in 2014, the Ukrainian army fought 8 yrs against its own ppl in the Donbas, and NATO provoked Russia's intervention in 2022. Russia's concerns can only be satisfied with a demilitarized Ukraine.