Untitled Document

[00:00:07] [music] [00:00:08] The US's imperial ambitions know no [00:00:11] bounds. From overthrowing the government [00:00:13] of Venezuela to regime change in Russia [00:00:16] and China, Washington has cast its net [00:00:19] across the entire globe. And the US has [00:00:22] attempted to carry out a one-sided trade [00:00:24] war with China, which has backfired. And [00:00:27] now the nuclear arms race has thrusted [00:00:30] back on the international stage with [00:00:33] Washington testing hypersonic nuclear [00:00:35] missiles and ballistic missiles claiming [00:00:37] it's just part of testing its nuclear [00:00:39] arsenal on an equal basis with Russia [00:00:42] and China. And even as it tries to [00:00:44] achieve its goals, there are signs that [00:00:47] the US's power is beginning to fade [00:00:49] globally and is being challenged around [00:00:52] the world. Joining me to discuss the big [00:00:54] picture today is Rachel Blevens. Rachel [00:00:58] is an independent journalist from Texas [00:01:00] who covers war and geopolitics. Rachel, [00:01:03] welcome to the show. [00:01:04] >> Thank you so much for having me. [00:01:07] >> Well, we've been wanting to have you on [00:01:08] for a while, Rachel, and I'm always [00:01:10] impressed with your uh geopolitical [00:01:12] analysis. So let's start the topic with [00:01:15] uh nuclear testing, nuclear weapons [00:01:17] testing right now, which we're seeing [00:01:19] the US is supposedly modernizing its [00:01:22] nuclear arsenal, including developing [00:01:25] new warheads for its upcoming LGM 35A [00:01:29] Sentenno ICBM and Trident 2 D5 missile [00:01:33] and the new B61-13 [00:01:36] gravity bomb and other long range [00:01:38] hypersonic missiles. Yes, it's a [00:01:41] mouthful, but Moscow says it will [00:01:44] respond in kind to nuclear tests by any [00:01:46] country. So, what can you tell us about [00:01:49] this nuclear arms race considering [00:01:51] neither the US or Russia has detonated a [00:01:54] nuclear bomb since the early '9s? [00:01:58] >> Yeah, this uh nuclear arms race is [00:02:01] getting extremely concerning. I would [00:02:03] say that is the the biggest takeaway, [00:02:05] right, from all of the different weapons [00:02:07] that they're looking at. And we have to [00:02:09] remember that we are just a few months [00:02:11] away from the last remaining nuclear [00:02:13] treaty between the US and Russia [00:02:15] expiring. The New Start treaty is set to [00:02:17] expire on February 1st of 2026. And [00:02:21] Russia has made attempts to get the US [00:02:24] to extend it. They came forward in [00:02:27] recent weeks and offered one more year, [00:02:30] essentially one more year to really get [00:02:33] negotiations started so that we could [00:02:35] come up with a new version of this [00:02:36] treaty. They've even thrown it out there [00:02:38] that, hey, let's include China in this [00:02:40] treaty and the US has not agreed to it. [00:02:44] And so, it's very concerning when you [00:02:46] see some of the comments that President [00:02:48] Trump has made going, "Oh yeah, we're [00:02:50] going to go back to nuclear weapons [00:02:52] testing." As if he's announcing what [00:02:54] he's going to have for lunch today, [00:02:55] right? as if he does not fully grasp [00:02:59] what kind of a situation we could be in, [00:03:02] especially if we see the US and Russia [00:03:04] really going to a full-on nuclear arms [00:03:07] race. And I know that Trump is a bit [00:03:09] jealous, right? He's been keeping an eye [00:03:11] on Russia. He knows that they ann have [00:03:14] announced multiple nuclearpowered [00:03:16] weapons in recent months. Talking about [00:03:19] the Orreshnik of which we have only [00:03:22] started to really see Russia rule it [00:03:26] out. And then the Burvestnik which is [00:03:28] just this insane weapon that is the [00:03:31] first of its kind, right? Russia's [00:03:33] telling the world that, hey, we could [00:03:35] send this up into the sky and you would [00:03:37] not know it. You would have no idea. It [00:03:39] could be flying around for days before [00:03:41] it hits its target. Oh, and guess what? [00:03:43] There are no limits to it. So, I think [00:03:45] what we're seeing right now with the [00:03:47] Trump administration is they don't want [00:03:49] to be outdone by Russia. And so, that's [00:03:51] why they're trying to kind of make it [00:03:53] look like they are really the top dog. [00:03:56] They're going, "Okay, what can we roll [00:03:58] out on our end?" And as I'm kind of [00:04:00] watching this heat up, it just does not [00:04:03] feel like it can go anywhere good at the [00:04:06] end of the day. Right? We see as you [00:04:08] have Ukraine in this position where [00:04:11] you're watching Kiev's defensive lines [00:04:14] really start to fall apart. Russia has [00:04:17] engaged in a war of attrition. Their war [00:04:19] is not for just territory in Ukraine. [00:04:22] Their war is for the overall defeat of [00:04:25] the Ukrainian military which is [00:04:28] essentially the defeat of NATO when you [00:04:30] look at the fact that NATO is the one [00:04:32] backing Kiev's forces. And so when [00:04:35] you're in the situation that we're [00:04:36] currently in and that we're really kind [00:04:38] of getting into in the next few months, [00:04:41] as you start to see Kiev's forces [00:04:43] crumbling, then you start to see real [00:04:46] concerns about whether we could see a [00:04:50] false flag attack that would draw NATO [00:04:52] further into this war in Ukraine. And so [00:04:54] that's when I start to get concerned [00:04:56] going, okay, yes, we have seen talks [00:04:59] happening here and there, but could we [00:05:01] see the potential for a false flag? And [00:05:03] could that then lead to the potential [00:05:05] for even more nuclear weapons testing, [00:05:08] especially as this treaty is set to [00:05:11] expire? And where does that leave us? [00:05:13] Because we all know that when it comes [00:05:14] to nuclear war, there is no winner, [00:05:17] right? We're talking about the end of [00:05:19] civilization as we know it. And it is a [00:05:23] very dangerous game that we're watching [00:05:25] the Trump administration engage in. And [00:05:27] they don't seem to be taking the [00:05:29] warnings that Russia is throwing out [00:05:30] there, right? Russia's trying to warn [00:05:32] them, you do not want to mess with us. [00:05:34] And it doesn't seem like there's anyone [00:05:37] in the US government who is really [00:05:39] taking it seriously right now. And it's [00:05:42] so devastating just to see the history [00:05:44] of nuclear weapons testing in in places [00:05:46] like the Marshall Islands, for example, [00:05:48] where the US completely devastated an [00:05:50] entire uh people. And now until now they [00:05:54] are literally living with so many [00:05:56] cancers and diseases all rooted from [00:06:00] that nuclear testing by the United [00:06:02] States. And so I think a lot of people [00:06:04] forget what this really means for the [00:06:07] environment as well and for uh where the [00:06:10] US uh tests out these nuclear weapons. [00:06:13] Um and from my understanding they will [00:06:15] be testing these uh nuclear weapons near [00:06:17] the Marshall Islands again. I mean it's [00:06:19] it's pretty grotesque. But I want to [00:06:21] talk more about um Ukraine. You touched [00:06:24] on a lot of really interesting points [00:06:26] because I wanted to kind of segue into [00:06:28] Ukraine. Um Zalinski obviously in the [00:06:30] past month has been begging Washington [00:06:32] for these new ballistic missiles and so [00:06:35] how does this um nuclear arms race play [00:06:38] into what's happening in Ukraine? I know [00:06:40] you mentioned a little bit, but if you [00:06:41] can expand on that more. [snorts] [00:06:43] >> Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. You know, it's [00:06:45] it's been interesting to kind of watch [00:06:47] the way that the Trump administration [00:06:48] has handled the war in Ukraine because, [00:06:51] of course, Trump came in campaigning on [00:06:53] the promise that he was going to end [00:06:55] this war. And anyone paying attention to [00:06:57] his rhetoric on the campaign trail [00:06:59] wasn't exactly getting their hopes up. [00:07:01] They knew that that wasn't going to [00:07:02] happen because his version of solving [00:07:06] things seemed to be that we're going to [00:07:07] get, you know, Putin and Zalinsky in a [00:07:10] room together, they're going to hash it [00:07:12] out, and then we're going to solve this [00:07:13] war. Whether he was naive, whether he [00:07:16] knew what he was doing, that's up for [00:07:17] debate. But what we've seen is that even [00:07:20] though there have been direct talks [00:07:22] between the US and Russia, between [00:07:24] Russia and Ukraine, that hasn't led to [00:07:27] any meaningful agreements. And so, as we [00:07:30] knew would be the case all along, Russia [00:07:33] continues to focus on the battlefield. [00:07:35] And what we're seeing right now is [00:07:37] really fascinating because we have this [00:07:40] massively long front line. And Russia [00:07:42] came out a couple of weeks ago and they [00:07:44] told the world that look we have around [00:07:48] 10,500 [00:07:49] Ukrainian troops encircled in two key [00:07:52] points. One of them being in Picrosk [00:07:54] which is in the Detsk Republic which is [00:07:57] one of the regions that Russia sees as [00:07:59] part of the Russian Federation following [00:08:02] a referendum that was held back in 2022. [00:08:05] The other area is in Kupansk which is [00:08:08] actually in the Harkov region which [00:08:10] Russia actually sees as part of Ukraine. [00:08:12] So it's interesting to kind of see the [00:08:15] territory that they are taking the [00:08:17] advances that they are making that is [00:08:20] right now going beyond just the four [00:08:23] additional regions that they see as part [00:08:25] of Russia. But Russian officials come [00:08:27] out, they say, "Hey, just to let you [00:08:29] know, we've got all of these troops [00:08:31] encircled. Essentially, you I mean, we [00:08:34] can kill them all. They can surrender, [00:08:36] right? You're not really giving us any [00:08:38] good options here." And if you look at [00:08:41] what Zalinsky and the top Ukrainian [00:08:43] officials said, they all denied it, [00:08:44] right? They said, "Oh, that's not the [00:08:46] case. They're not fully encircled, [00:08:48] right? They just continue to be detached [00:08:50] from reality." And then we continue to [00:08:54] watch Russia make advances. We continue [00:08:56] to watch them telling the world that, [00:08:58] hey, the number of troops here are [00:09:00] dwindling, right? We are being forced to [00:09:03] essentially kill these guys that are [00:09:05] here in this area as they are trying to [00:09:07] take more territory. And so, going back [00:09:10] to your question, when we're looking at [00:09:11] what Zullinsky is asking for, he wants [00:09:14] long range Tomahawk cruise missiles. And [00:09:17] this has been one of those things that [00:09:19] has been on Zillinsk's wish list for, [00:09:21] you know, years now along with Abram's [00:09:24] main battle tanks, F-16s, right? It's [00:09:26] just kind of the what whatever the toy [00:09:28] of the moment coming from the US. But if [00:09:31] you look at the Tomahawks, the [00:09:33] possibility that the US could introduce [00:09:35] them into the conflict. One of the main [00:09:37] things we have to remember is that the [00:09:40] US military would be the ones carrying [00:09:42] out the attacks with the Tomahawks [00:09:44] because of the technology. This is not [00:09:46] something they can just hand off to the [00:09:48] Ukrainians and be like, "Oh, here you [00:09:50] guys have fun with this. Go destroy some [00:09:53] Russian targets." The other thing is [00:09:55] that if they were to introduce in [00:09:57] tomahawks, this would be about carrying [00:10:00] out attacks within Russia, right? We're [00:10:03] talking about attacks targeting Moscow [00:10:05] and targeting various other cities. This [00:10:08] wouldn't have anything to do with the [00:10:09] front lines. So, yeah, the US can [00:10:12] introduce in the tomahawks. they can [00:10:14] carry out these attacks, but that's not [00:10:16] going to change the balance of power on [00:10:18] the front lines. And that's one thing [00:10:20] that we've seen Putin mention multiple [00:10:22] times now, that, hey, you would just be [00:10:25] increasing tensions between the US and [00:10:27] Russia, you wouldn't actually be [00:10:29] addressing the manpower shortages or the [00:10:32] weapon shortages that Ukraine is [00:10:34] currently dealing with. So, the fact [00:10:36] that Zalinsky is lobbying so hard for [00:10:39] these tomahawks, you have to wonder, [00:10:41] right? You have to look at him and go, [00:10:43] "Wait a second. Your goal here, you [00:10:45] claim, is to take back all of this [00:10:47] territory to get Ukraine back to the [00:10:50] borders of the 1990s, but you're not [00:10:53] actually pursuing that. You're just [00:10:55] pursuing a weapon that would further [00:10:58] increase tensions. Oh, and actually, [00:11:00] when you look at the Tomahawks, they're [00:11:02] also capable of holding nuclear [00:11:05] warheads." So, if you're in Russia, if [00:11:07] you're sitting in Moscow and you look up [00:11:10] at the radar system and you've got a [00:11:11] tomahawk flying towards your capital, [00:11:14] how do you know that it has a nuclear [00:11:16] warhead or that it doesn't? That could [00:11:18] put Russia in a very [clears throat] [00:11:20] dangerous situation of trying to figure [00:11:22] out how to respond and what do they do? [00:11:25] And that could further launch us into [00:11:27] the possibility of nuclear warfare. And [00:11:29] so going back to the ways in which [00:11:32] Russia has really tried to warn the US, [00:11:35] you don't want to do this. It reminds me [00:11:38] of the warnings that we've been getting [00:11:40] from Russia for years now when it comes [00:11:42] to the situation in the Dawnbass when it [00:11:44] came to the, you know, pre2022 [00:11:48] era when you had Kiev's forces targeting [00:11:51] all of these ethnic Russians in the [00:11:53] Dawnbass who simply said, "Look, we do [00:11:56] not want to live under Kiev's rule now [00:11:59] that you have overthrown the government [00:12:01] there." and they fought for their [00:12:03] territory for many years before Russia [00:12:06] got directly involved. And Russia tried [00:12:09] so hard, right? They issued all of these [00:12:11] warnings to the US. And it's interesting [00:12:13] cuz I know on social media there's [00:12:15] always a lot of talk and I'll get people [00:12:16] that'll say, "Oh, well that's just [00:12:18] Russian propaganda." And I'm like, "No, [00:12:19] if you look at the statements that [00:12:22] you're getting from these Russian [00:12:23] officials, they are practically begging [00:12:26] the US to work with them, begging them [00:12:28] not to take it a step further." And yet [00:12:31] we continue to see the US take it take [00:12:34] take it further. And so that's [00:12:36] definitely something that I'm going to [00:12:38] be keeping an eye on as we start to [00:12:40] watch Russia not only gain more ground [00:12:43] in terms of territory in some of these [00:12:46] key locations, but also completely wipe [00:12:49] out what is left of Kiev's military of [00:12:52] their defensive lines because they are [00:12:54] not in a good position right now. And [00:12:57] there doesn't seem to be anything that [00:12:59] NATO, that the US in particular, are [00:13:01] doing, any solutions that they're coming [00:13:03] up with to help Kiev out. Instead, their [00:13:07] quote unquote solutions are, let's, you [00:13:10] know, funnel more money into this [00:13:12] endless militaryindustrial complex, [00:13:15] acting like we're solving things, or [00:13:16] let's, you know, send more dangerous [00:13:18] weapons into Russia and possibly spark [00:13:21] even more conflict. Well, you know, it's [00:13:24] so interesting that you said, you know, [00:13:25] when when we talk about these things [00:13:27] that the statements that have come out [00:13:29] of uh Russian uh politicians and [00:13:32] spokespeople, they have been warning the [00:13:35] United States. And it's really simple. [00:13:37] You just have to go on the um NATO [00:13:40] funded think tanks websites like the [00:13:42] Atlantic Council who are cheering on [00:13:45] this cold war against Russia. They want [00:13:47] a nuclear arms race with Russia. They [00:13:49] want this confrontation. Um, we're [00:13:52] seeing that with what the United States [00:13:53] has done inside of Ukraine to ignite [00:13:57] this conflict. And then anytime you [00:13:59] provide with an alternative perspective, [00:14:01] they just kind of just label you as a [00:14:03] Russian agent or you're just spewing [00:14:05] Russian propaganda. But it just takes [00:14:07] like two seconds to compare and contrast [00:14:09] what's coming out of the think tanks [00:14:11] that are funded by NATO, like the [00:14:12] Atlantic Council, which if you go on [00:14:14] there right now, one of their top [00:14:16] articles from the last year is a push to [00:14:19] arm uh Kiev with more weapons. They're [00:14:22] pushing that. And we have to remember [00:14:25] that this is the war that the [00:14:26] neoliberals want and the neocons want as [00:14:29] well. And so I want to um just call on [00:14:33] everybody now. We're just going to [00:14:34] switch gears to uh the US uh trade war [00:14:37] with China. But before we get into the [00:14:39] next question, I want to remind [00:14:40] everybody that Mintress News is an [00:14:42] independent investigative media outlet [00:14:45] and we're all almost about to hit [00:14:47] 100,000 uh YouTube subscribers. So, if [00:14:50] you haven't already, make sure to [00:14:52] subscribe to our channel and hit like to [00:14:54] increase the engagement and leave a [00:14:55] comment on this video. And so, uh, [00:14:58] Rachel, both you and I were Americans, [00:15:01] and we are watching our government, our [00:15:04] country carrying out a one-sided trade [00:15:07] war against China right now, but with [00:15:10] little success. It's actually backfired. [00:15:12] The tariffs have jacked up prices here [00:15:14] in the US. Washington failed to crush [00:15:18] Chinese tech giants. China is uh [00:15:21] supposedly winning this AI race and [00:15:23] American farmers in general are feeling [00:15:25] the pinch as their biggest customers are [00:15:29] disappearing. When I go out shopping, I [00:15:31] will tell you right now that prices are [00:15:33] up. So what to what extent is this trade [00:15:36] war blowing up in Washington's face and [00:15:39] in the face of the average American? [00:15:42] Yeah, I feel like I'm spending more than [00:15:44] ever and yet not getting nearly as much [00:15:47] in return. And I know that that is the [00:15:49] the story that just about every American [00:15:51] is feeling right now, especially when [00:15:53] you're going to the grocery store. And [00:15:55] yeah, we knew kind of what to expect [00:15:57] from Trump, right? Like he campaigned [00:15:59] really hard on the promise of tariffs. [00:16:02] And then he comes into office and his [00:16:05] tariff policies have just given me a [00:16:07] headache, right? We'll have one day [00:16:09] where he's like, "It's liberation day. [00:16:11] We're putting tariffs on everybody." And [00:16:13] then the next day he's rolling back half [00:16:15] of those tariffs because he essentially [00:16:17] just wants all of the world leaders to [00:16:20] come to Washington and beg him to work [00:16:22] with them and then he'll go, "Oh, okay. [00:16:24] I'll make a deal with you." Like that [00:16:26] seems to be his main goal here. And when [00:16:29] it comes to China, we also knew that [00:16:33] they have been watching Trump for years [00:16:35] now. They dealt with him during his [00:16:37] first term. And so they weren't just [00:16:39] sitting around doing nothing hoping that [00:16:42] Trump would be nice to them. No, they [00:16:44] had things pretty queued up in the sense [00:16:46] that they know where their dominance [00:16:48] lies. And that is of course with rare [00:16:50] earth minerals because China controls [00:16:54] 90% [00:16:56] of the refining of rare earth minerals [00:16:58] in the entire world. So yeah, the US, [00:17:01] you can see these various reports where [00:17:04] they talk about places where they're [00:17:05] finding rare earth minerals, yet they're [00:17:07] still shipping those rare earths off to [00:17:09] China to get them refined to then fully [00:17:12] use them. And even the reports I've seen [00:17:14] in the commentary from the Trump [00:17:16] administration acting like they're going [00:17:18] to come up with some sort of a solution [00:17:20] to this. Well, that's all fine and good, [00:17:22] but that's still years down the road. [00:17:24] So, China knew kind of where their power [00:17:28] was. They also knew that all they had to [00:17:30] do was pull back on, you know, simple [00:17:32] things like soybean purchases from the [00:17:34] US and that that could be a bargaining [00:17:37] chip that they could use with Trump [00:17:38] later on to go, "Oh, yeah, yeah, we'll [00:17:40] buy some more soybeans. Don't worry." [00:17:42] But what Trump didn't seem to realize [00:17:45] was that China was all fine and good to [00:17:48] allow him to try to claim a win, right? [00:17:52] for Trump to put all of these tariffs on [00:17:54] China to get them to over 100%. And then [00:17:58] to go meet with Xi Jinping and to come [00:18:00] back and to say, "Oh, yeah, yeah, I [00:18:02] won." Because he got a portion of the [00:18:05] tariffs removed by the fact that she was [00:18:07] willing to quote unquote back down also [00:18:10] when, as you were noting, this is a [00:18:12] one-sided trade war. China didn't want [00:18:15] this to begin with. But when it comes to [00:18:17] the rare earth, that's particularly [00:18:19] interesting because the US military [00:18:22] relies heavily on the rare earth coming [00:18:25] from China, of course. And so I was [00:18:28] reading a report earlier and the [00:18:30] publication is not coming to mind. I [00:18:31] want to say it was the Wall Street [00:18:32] Journal, but they were talking about how [00:18:35] they were saying that, oh, China has [00:18:37] this new scheme where they are, you [00:18:40] know, really ramping up the export [00:18:43] licenses for average companies that want [00:18:45] to work with their rare earths, but [00:18:46] they're slowing it down and putting all [00:18:48] of these blocks on ones that are related [00:18:51] to the US military. Because obviously if [00:18:54] you're Beijing and you're looking at the [00:18:56] US trying to mount some sort of proxy [00:18:59] war against you, say in Taiwan, then you [00:19:02] are not going to be like, "Oh yeah, [00:19:04] let's send all of these rare earths to [00:19:05] the US military and help them out." No, [00:19:08] you're going to take whatever steps you [00:19:09] can to try to prevent that from [00:19:11] happening. And so I think the Trump [00:19:14] administration is kind of starting to [00:19:16] realize the power that China has over [00:19:19] them. I know they all have this dream of [00:19:23] the US decoupling from China. I do think [00:19:26] that they are going to take steps in the [00:19:28] future to work towards that. I think [00:19:30] that, you know, war against China is one [00:19:32] of their long-term goals. But I think [00:19:35] that this year has also served as a [00:19:37] reality check for the US that look, we [00:19:39] are not there yet. So all of those hawks [00:19:41] in Washington that dream of war against [00:19:44] China by 2027 are having to realize that [00:19:47] the US can pursue that, but we're not [00:19:50] going to have the weapons. We're not [00:19:52] going to have the technology. Oh, and [00:19:54] all of those prices here at home are [00:19:56] going to skyrocket because if we're [00:19:58] pursuing a war against China, the first [00:20:00] thing that they're going to do is cut us [00:20:02] off from all [laughter] of the cheap [00:20:05] imports we're relying on here in the US. [00:20:08] And so a little bit of a reality check [00:20:10] for now. Although I I can't say that I [00:20:12] trust the Hawks in Washington to focus [00:20:15] on any sort of logic long term. And I I [00:20:18] am worried about what they're going to [00:20:20] try to pursue after they get through all [00:20:23] of the other wars and conflicts that are [00:20:25] just a little bit higher up on their [00:20:27] their list. And we are now seeing um you [00:20:31] know this closer alliance between Russia [00:20:33] and China and Iran more than ever. they [00:20:36] just keep getting closer and closer, the [00:20:37] more they get isolated, the more the US [00:20:39] pushes confrontation with these uh three [00:20:42] nations. the closer they get. And um [00:20:45] could you speak a little bit more about [00:20:46] this new partnership that has really [00:20:48] developed in the last few years and how [00:20:51] do you see it moving forward considering [00:20:54] uh the United States is pushing for more [00:20:56] confrontations but also having a reality [00:20:59] check like you said that uh a war with [00:21:03] any of these three countries would be [00:21:05] catastrophic. [00:21:07] >> I think the US really went in a bit too [00:21:10] far when it came to Russia, right? They [00:21:12] seem to think that if they announced [00:21:16] this proxy war against Russia, right, if [00:21:19] they announced that they were going to [00:21:20] do everything in their power to make [00:21:22] Russia the most sanctioned nation in the [00:21:24] world, that every other country would [00:21:26] just kind of follow along. That seemed [00:21:28] to have been their goal, maybe that of [00:21:30] the Biden administration back in 2022. [00:21:34] But instead, that has backfired. And as [00:21:37] you were noting there, right, Russia, [00:21:39] China, Iran, they have all gotten closer [00:21:42] than ever. And I think they've all [00:21:44] realized a very important lesson, which [00:21:47] is yes, the US is willing to do that. I [00:21:50] mean, we may have thought previously [00:21:52] that the US would just pick on smaller [00:21:54] countries, right? That it would pick on [00:21:55] Iraq and Afghanistan and even now [00:21:58] currently Venezuela, but that it [00:22:00] wouldn't go as far as to pick on, say, a [00:22:03] Russia or a China. and the US did that. [00:22:06] And so now the rest of the world is [00:22:09] having to learn the importance of truly [00:22:12] creating this multipolar world, building [00:22:14] it out and building their alliances with [00:22:16] one another. And I think that kind of [00:22:18] plays into the reality check that the US [00:22:21] is getting when it comes to China [00:22:22] because it's like, okay, if you want to [00:22:24] pursue a war against China, have at it. [00:22:27] Do you think you're going to get Russia [00:22:28] on board? Do you think that Russia is [00:22:31] going to turn their back on China? No. [00:22:33] Absolutely not. And to that end, when it [00:22:36] comes to Iran, when it comes to [00:22:38] Venezuela, and all of these different [00:22:41] conflicts that the US is trying to [00:22:43] actively pursue, what we're watching is [00:22:45] the multipolar world realize that they [00:22:48] have to start to work together, right? [00:22:51] They have to continue to strengthen [00:22:53] these alliances. And it is tough. And I [00:22:56] will admit, I am both optimistic and [00:22:59] cynical, right? I'm optimistic about the [00:23:02] growing multipolar world that we're [00:23:03] seeing, about all of these countries [00:23:05] kind of waking up, realizing that there [00:23:08] is strength in numbers, realizing that [00:23:10] if they don't stand up to the US, then [00:23:12] they could be the next one that is [00:23:14] targeted. At the same time, I will say [00:23:18] I'm a little bit cynical, right, when I [00:23:20] look at the current situations, when I I [00:23:22] mean, and obviously the genocide in [00:23:24] Palestine has been at the forefront of [00:23:27] this, right? this kind of realization [00:23:28] that yes, we have this growing [00:23:31] multipolar world, but we also have [00:23:34] issues when it comes to okay, what are [00:23:36] all of these countries going to do if [00:23:38] you have a genocide that is being live [00:23:40] streamed to the entire world, right? [00:23:42] What is their solution for it? Because I [00:23:45] know that Russia and China do love to [00:23:47] focus on, you know, the international [00:23:49] system. They international laws, that's [00:23:52] something that they take very seriously [00:23:53] and that's great and I respect that. But [00:23:56] if we have an ongoing genocide, [00:23:58] international law isn't working for [00:23:59] that. International law is not working [00:24:02] quickly enough to save the lives of the [00:24:05] thousands, if not hundreds of thousands [00:24:07] of Palestinians that have been massacred [00:24:10] by Israel and by the US and by all of [00:24:13] the other Western powers that have [00:24:15] played a role. And so watching kind of [00:24:18] this building US aggression towards [00:24:21] Venezuela and towards Iran, we know that [00:24:25] Russia and that China are going to [00:24:27] provide the support that they can in a [00:24:29] number of various ways. But we also know [00:24:32] that there's only so much that they can [00:24:34] do. There's only so far that they can go [00:24:37] when it comes to that support. And a lot [00:24:39] of it comes down to what Venezuela is [00:24:42] going to be able to endure and what Iran [00:24:44] is going to be able to endure. And I [00:24:47] think that, you know, we're coming up on [00:24:48] the one-year anniversary of the [00:24:51] overthrow of Bashar al-Assad in Syria. [00:24:53] And that is a case for caution when it [00:24:56] comes to the multipolar world. I will [00:24:58] say because for years Assad stood [00:25:01] strong. For years, Assad did not fall. [00:25:03] But then seemingly overnight, he did. [00:25:06] And the world kind of had to wake up to [00:25:08] the fact that, you know, when you look [00:25:10] at Russia, you realize the US had it [00:25:13] figured out. It knew that we get Russia [00:25:16] busy in Ukraine. We have them, you know, [00:25:19] so busy over in Ukraine that they can't [00:25:21] do as much for Syria. Oh, and then we [00:25:23] get together our uprising of jihadis in [00:25:27] Syria. And then we target the government [00:25:30] that has already been hollowed out by [00:25:32] years and years of US sanctions. And so [00:25:35] I am incredibly concerned about the fact [00:25:37] that the fall of Assad in Syria has [00:25:40] really kind of emboldened the US to [00:25:44] continue to carry out these quote [00:25:47] unquote regime change wars in a number [00:25:50] of different ways. And that that's why [00:25:51] we're now seeing this buildup in the [00:25:54] Caribbean targeting Venezuela, right? [00:25:55] That's why they've got various plans [00:25:58] that they're trying to get together for [00:25:59] Iran, just trying to figure out how [00:26:01] Israel is going to survive that, if [00:26:04] that's even possible. But yeah, so I if [00:26:07] that makes sense. I have kind of the [00:26:09] cautious optimism, but I'm also still a [00:26:12] little bit cynical thinking that we have [00:26:14] really a ways to go before the [00:26:17] multipolar world gets to truly where it [00:26:19] needs to be. [00:26:21] >> Absolutely. Absolutely. And I'm glad you [00:26:22] touched up on Syria because if we look [00:26:23] at Syria as a case study or even what [00:26:26] happened in Gaz or even what happened in [00:26:28] Libya or what we see happening today in [00:26:31] Sudan, these are catastrophic or [00:26:34] catastrophic human rights uh abuses that [00:26:37] are taking place at the hands of US [00:26:39] proxy wars. Okay? These are proxy wars [00:26:42] that are warnings to these countries and [00:26:45] to the global south that if you ditch [00:26:46] the US dollar, if you resist, if you [00:26:49] stand up to um US imperialism and [00:26:52] influence and if you stand with Russia [00:26:54] and China and Iran, your country will be [00:26:57] regime changed. It will be um you know, [00:27:00] weapons will be poured in there and [00:27:02] famine will be used as a weapon of war. [00:27:05] And so um you know looking at what's [00:27:07] happening in Syria today, we did see [00:27:09] that because of uh the US sanctions and [00:27:13] the regime change operation that took [00:27:15] place there with the United States [00:27:16] arming the proxies or yeah arming the [00:27:19] pro the jihadis through proxies, excuse [00:27:21] me. And we saw the fall of Bashar [00:27:23] al-Assad. And so in that moment that [00:27:26] took away a huge ally for Russia and for [00:27:30] Iran. And in the case of Sudan today, [00:27:34] you know, the the sabotage that the [00:27:35] United States has done inside of Sudan [00:27:38] through its proxies through the CIA, [00:27:40] through Israel's Mossad, through Saudi [00:27:42] Arabia, through Egypt, through the UAE, [00:27:45] um has been to push out any sort of [00:27:49] influence from uh Iran, Russia, and [00:27:53] China to have any stake inside of, you [00:27:57] know, Sudan, another African country. [00:27:59] And you talked about the rare earth [00:28:00] minerals. I mean, you know, Sudan has a [00:28:03] lot of minerals, wealth. It has a lot of [00:28:05] gold and has a lot of oil. And so, the [00:28:08] United States right now is plundering [00:28:09] that through its proxies and it's being, [00:28:12] you know, poured into the international [00:28:15] uh market and it's, you know, its roots [00:28:18] at that point disappear. But we know [00:28:21] that's coming from the US war in Sudan [00:28:24] by proxy. But I want to talk more about [00:28:26] Syria because just the most interesting [00:28:31] thing is happening right now. You know, [00:28:32] Donald Trump recently met with Syrian uh [00:28:35] interim president, by the way. He's an [00:28:37] interim president who was never even [00:28:39] elected. Um Ahmed Ashara, where the two [00:28:42] announced the lifting of sanctions on [00:28:44] Syria, as well as a host of measures to [00:28:47] bring Syria under close control of the [00:28:51] US. The United States wants to build a [00:28:53] military base near Damascus and pull [00:28:56] Syria into the Abraham Accords. Um, [00:28:59] pulling Syria basically out of the [00:29:02] resistance camp to the assistance camp. [00:29:06] Right. And so, uh, this is completely [00:29:09] symbolic. And before you answer this [00:29:12] question, I want to play this video of a [00:29:14] sh who once had a bounty on his head for [00:29:17] his role as a founding father of uh [00:29:21] Nusra, the alada branch inside of Syria [00:29:25] to now playing basketball with his [00:29:27] former enemies, top US military [00:29:30] commanders. Check it out. [00:29:42] >> [applause] [00:29:49] >> So, Rachel, tell me what you thought [00:29:50] about that. [00:29:52] >> Yeah, it really sums it up, right? [00:29:55] You've got this guy who just went from [00:29:57] having a $10 million bounty on his head [00:30:00] to, as you were noting there, he's [00:30:02] playing basketball with the guys who [00:30:04] previously were supposed to be trying to [00:30:06] kill him. And I love how the articles in [00:30:09] the Western media, you know, they point [00:30:11] out, oh, he he spent some time in US [00:30:14] custody, right? He spent some time with [00:30:15] General David Petraeus. and they don't [00:30:18] seem to want to ask any questions about [00:30:19] how that would then, you know, kind of [00:30:21] help mold him into becoming the perfect [00:30:24] US puppet, which is exactly what he is [00:30:27] today. I mean, he was paraded through [00:30:30] DC. They made sure to drop him off at [00:30:32] the IMF headquarters that way he could, [00:30:34] you know, get some information on some [00:30:36] predatory loans for Syria so that the US [00:30:39] could further get the country under its [00:30:41] grasp. And then he goes to the White [00:30:43] House and he sits down with Donald [00:30:45] Trump, shakes his hand, and then he of [00:30:47] course has to go to Fox News and have an [00:30:49] in-person interview. I feel like it's [00:30:51] not quite a complete US visit unless you [00:30:54] have that. But in that interview, I [00:30:57] thought it was so interesting when they [00:30:58] mention his past and they're like, "Oh [00:31:00] yeah, you know, you were the leader of [00:31:03] al-Qaeda in Syria." And he's like, [00:31:04] "Yeah, yeah, that's in the past. We [00:31:06] didn't I didn't discuss that with [00:31:07] Trump." Right? Acting as if, oh, you [00:31:09] know, that was just something that [00:31:10] happened. in my school days. Not like, [00:31:12] oh, I was the literal leader of al-Qaeda [00:31:15] and Syria. I was the literal prodigy of [00:31:18] Alb Paghdaddy and ISIS. No, no, no. He's [00:31:21] just, you know, that was just a phase [00:31:22] that he went through. Not to mention the [00:31:25] fact that his quote unquote head [00:31:27] chopping days are still continuing as [00:31:29] you were pointing out earlier. You know, [00:31:30] the current situation for the Syrian [00:31:33] people is just horrific. You have [00:31:35] minorities being targeted across Syria. [00:31:38] You have Alani. I I will say I refer to [00:31:41] him as Abu Muhammad Alani more than I do [00:31:44] the same thing [00:31:45] >> because that is I I feel like that's the [00:31:47] name that he would really want at the [00:31:49] end of the day. But yeah, you have all [00:31:51] of his foreign fighters, his death [00:31:53] squads that have come into Syria and it [00:31:57] is just horrific to watch it play out [00:32:00] and to watch the Trump administration [00:32:02] bring him in and they're just seeing the [00:32:04] dollar signs, right? They're seeing the, [00:32:06] "Oh, let's get you into" and isn't that [00:32:08] ironic? get this guy who part of the [00:32:11] Islamic State. I believe he still is at [00:32:13] heart. He's now joining the anti-Islamic [00:32:16] State Coalition. Of course, that seems [00:32:18] just just fitting for him. And it it's [00:32:22] just a reminder of what the US was about [00:32:24] in Syria the entire time. And they're [00:32:27] feeling a little bit threatened, right? [00:32:29] Because I know Russia is also looking at [00:32:31] Syria. They've also had Galani at the [00:32:35] Kremlin. They've kind of whined and [00:32:37] nighted him a little bit while I think [00:32:39] issuing some warnings to him that look, [00:32:41] you better keep an eye on the Russian [00:32:42] forces at their specific bases that they [00:32:45] have on the coast in Syria and make sure [00:32:47] that nothing happens to them. But it is [00:32:50] kind of interesting to watch him [00:32:52] balancing the Russian interests, the [00:32:55] American interest, the Turkish interest, [00:32:57] the Israeli interest. And it's just a [00:32:59] reminder that none of those interests [00:33:01] are for the Syrian people. None of those [00:33:03] interests are for the the people who are [00:33:06] being impacted by all of these policies [00:33:09] the most. And it's incredibly concerning [00:33:11] to me to watch the US really kind of [00:33:15] tighten their grip on Syria because I [00:33:17] know that they still have their eye on a [00:33:19] future war with Iran and they also want [00:33:22] to make sure that they are targeting the [00:33:24] resistance movement as much as they [00:33:27] possibly can. Right? They feel like they [00:33:29] have triumphed over the axis of [00:33:31] resistance in a number of ways. And as [00:33:34] we know, look, resistance cannot be [00:33:37] defeated at the end of the day, right? [00:33:39] It can be harmed, it can be hit, but it [00:33:41] is not going to be defeated ultimately [00:33:43] and it will return. But it is also [00:33:47] concerning to watch the ways in which [00:33:50] the US and Israel are continuing these [00:33:53] policies. And in some ways it feels like [00:33:57] no one is standing up against them, [00:33:58] right? It feels like we are watching the [00:34:01] US do what it wants. We're watching [00:34:03] Israel certainly do what they want, [00:34:05] right? As they have continued on with [00:34:06] this genocide. And even as you know, [00:34:09] there's supposed to be a ceasefire [00:34:10] agreement in Gaza. This quote that oh [00:34:13] yeah, yeah, the war is over, [00:34:15] everything's good. And then now we look [00:34:17] at Israel violating it on a daily basis, [00:34:20] continuing to target the Palestinian [00:34:22] people, continuing to carry out genocide [00:34:25] and to target their access to [00:34:27] humanitarian aid. And so it is [00:34:30] concerning to me to watch the US empire [00:34:33] and the direction that it is pursuing [00:34:37] because it's just a reminder that as [00:34:39] long as it's able to keep doing this, it [00:34:42] is going to do it. Right? We see kind of [00:34:44] little stops, right? We see China [00:34:46] saying, "Look, no, we're not. You can [00:34:49] have a trade war with us, but we're not [00:34:50] going to engage in this. Here is our [00:34:52] power." And then the US kind of backs [00:34:54] off. You see, you know, Trump going and [00:34:57] talking to Vladimir Putin and realizing [00:34:59] he's not going to get the full-on [00:35:01] ceasefire that he wanted in Ukraine. [00:35:04] Sure. But then you also see Trump and [00:35:07] the US kind of having their way in Syria [00:35:10] and getting what they want out of it and [00:35:12] destroying this country that the [00:35:16] American people I don't think they have [00:35:18] any idea of the historic importance of [00:35:22] Syria and the importance of the Syrian [00:35:25] people altogether. And it's just like [00:35:27] the US just looks at it as oh yet [00:35:30] another essentially another military [00:35:32] base that they can control in the Middle [00:35:34] East with their eyes on Iran hoping for [00:35:37] a future war there. And so it is [00:35:40] concerning to watch the ways in which [00:35:43] the US empire as a whole in some ways is [00:35:47] learning some lessons, but there are [00:35:49] still so many lessons that they need to [00:35:51] learn. And I think that kind of goes [00:35:52] back to what I was saying about the [00:35:54] multipolar world and the fact that there [00:35:56] are a lot of serious things that they [00:36:00] need to figure out before we can ever [00:36:03] achieve true multipolarity before [00:36:06] they're ever truly able to stand up to [00:36:09] the US empire. [00:36:11] Will they learn though, Rachel? I mean, [00:36:13] we have a Zionist uh uh what is it [00:36:17] called? chokeold on US politics here in [00:36:19] the United States and in Washington. And [00:36:21] so it seems like, you know, the United [00:36:23] States is not even making its own [00:36:24] decisions anymore when it comes to the [00:36:26] Middle East and in many places of the [00:36:28] world. It's Israeli influence that is um [00:36:31] you know, targeting countries and [00:36:34] creating the framework, I guess you [00:36:35] could say, the architecture for a lot of [00:36:37] these conflicts. I mean, that's just [00:36:39] where I see things going. Um, so unless [00:36:42] we get a hold of this Frankenstein that [00:36:45] we've created um out of Washington, [00:36:48] perhaps we can have some more [00:36:49] self-reflection inside of Washington. [00:36:52] And we can see um how US policies um [00:36:56] have been splintering uh Europe. We can [00:36:59] look at the case study of the Ukraine [00:37:01] war and the Nordstream pipeline bombing [00:37:05] for example. Um quite apart from the [00:37:08] from the huge economic toll it is [00:37:10] taking, Poland now is refusing to [00:37:13] extradite a suspect in the Nordstream 2 [00:37:16] bombings to Germany for prosecution, [00:37:18] effectively ending any hopes of justice. [00:37:22] And other European nations are [00:37:23] pressuring Germany to drop the case [00:37:25] entirely. So for my final question for [00:37:28] you, Rachel, what does that say about [00:37:30] the state of Europe considering this [00:37:32] investigation is splintering uh the [00:37:35] continent? Um, is the continent as [00:37:37] disunited as any other time in recent [00:37:40] memory? What do you think? [00:37:42] >> I think they're getting to that point. I [00:37:44] think they still have a ways to go. But [00:37:46] yeah, it's been interesting to watch [00:37:49] this Nordstream investigation because it [00:37:51] it comes up every well every several [00:37:54] months I would say, right? we get some [00:37:56] new update and then you don't hear about [00:37:57] it for a little bit and you kind of [00:37:59] forget about it and then it's like oh [00:38:00] yes in this latest report it's [00:38:02] interesting because Germany has decided [00:38:04] that they've got this group of Ukrainian [00:38:08] a group of Ukrainians essentially that [00:38:10] they say they are responsible right they [00:38:13] are the ones who are behind this very [00:38:16] sophisticated military bombing of the [00:38:19] Nordstream pipeline that n it's just [00:38:21] your average Joe's essentially and now [00:38:24] they're pointing the finger at Poland [00:38:26] saying, "Oh, well, Poland's the reason [00:38:27] we can't continue with this cuz they've [00:38:29] got this one guy and he they refuse to [00:38:32] extradite him because they see him as a [00:38:34] national hero." But when you take a step [00:38:36] back, we also have to remember the [00:38:38] reporting. And I think that the [00:38:40] reporting by investigative journalist [00:38:41] Seymour Hirs is probably the most [00:38:44] spot-on that I've seen in this case, [00:38:46] pointing to the fact that look, this was [00:38:48] a fullon military operation [00:38:51] that it was, you know, m well really [00:38:54] years in the works before it was carried [00:38:57] out. And that this is not just a couple [00:38:58] of Ukrainian guys on a yacht getting [00:39:01] together carrying out this very advanced [00:39:04] bombing of the pipelines that were able [00:39:06] to do it. But of course when it [00:39:08] initially happened the focus was on [00:39:11] Russia and the West claimed over and [00:39:13] over again that Russia bombed their own [00:39:15] pipeline. You know the pipeline that [00:39:17] they just spent billions of dollars and [00:39:20] years building that they just got [00:39:22] together and bombed it instead of simply [00:39:24] turning off the gas like you would think [00:39:26] that they would do if they wanted to end [00:39:28] their work with Europe. But then they [00:39:31] had to go to the next quote unquote [00:39:33] logical option which in their mind was [00:39:35] Ukraine. They're like, "Obviously, yeah, [00:39:37] Ukraine, they had every reason to hate [00:39:39] the Nordstream pipelines, to hate the [00:39:42] fact that it was Russia sending cheap [00:39:44] gas to Germany. We've got to cut that [00:39:47] off." And so then that became their next [00:39:50] story, their next prime suspect while [00:39:52] keeping all eyes off of the US. And yet, [00:39:55] when you look at who has benefited from [00:39:57] the bombings of the Nordstream [00:39:59] pipelines, it's the US. because now [00:40:01] instead of buying cheap gas from Russia, [00:40:04] Europe has to turn and buy much more [00:40:06] expensive gas from the United States, [00:40:09] which is exactly what they've done. And [00:40:12] it's kind of crazy sometimes when you [00:40:14] look at the situation in Europe and you [00:40:15] go, they still don't get it. They still [00:40:18] think that the US is for them. They [00:40:20] still think that Washington is an ally [00:40:23] that they can trust and they are just [00:40:26] completely oblivious to all of the ways [00:40:28] in which the US has set them up to fail. [00:40:31] One of the most recent is of course the [00:40:34] fact that you have the Trump [00:40:36] administration with this new scheme that [00:40:38] oh we're not involved in the war in [00:40:40] Ukraine anymore. We are outsourcing it [00:40:43] to Europe. We are selling weapons to [00:40:45] Europe. Europe's going to pay for them [00:40:47] and then they're going to transfer them [00:40:49] over to Ukraine. Basically putting it [00:40:51] off on Europe that they are the ones [00:40:53] directly involved in this proxy war [00:40:55] against Russia while the US is still [00:40:57] providing the military intelligence [00:40:59] sharing with Ukraine. So I don't know [00:41:01] exactly how they expect that to work. [00:41:03] But you look at Europe and you do see [00:41:06] some splintering, right? You do see kind [00:41:10] of an awareness and I think we're [00:41:11] starting to see a version of that. We've [00:41:14] seen it in recent elections with the [00:41:17] parties that are more question or are [00:41:21] asking more questions about the war in [00:41:24] Ukraine, about funding for the war in [00:41:25] Ukraine, that they are starting to get [00:41:28] more and more support and that the [00:41:29] establishment politicians in Europe are [00:41:32] getting a bit of a wakeup call that [00:41:33] okay, we don't have public support fully [00:41:38] in the way that we did back in say 2022 [00:41:41] when they could just point the finger at [00:41:43] Russia. say Russia's the bad guy. They [00:41:45] invaded and then everyone would throw in [00:41:48] their votes to send as much money as [00:41:50] possible to Ukraine. So, I think we're [00:41:52] getting to that point. I also think the [00:41:54] US Empire, while it feels like it has to [00:41:57] be the top dog, I think that ultimately [00:41:58] they're making a mistake by continuing [00:42:01] to throw Europe under the bus. They [00:42:03] don't want Europe to get too powerful. [00:42:05] They certainly don't want an alliance [00:42:07] between the EU and the UK and Russia, [00:42:11] which is what they were so concerned [00:42:13] about at the start of all of this, that [00:42:15] they would see those quote unquote [00:42:17] allies align with Russia and then turn [00:42:19] against the US. But I think going back [00:42:23] to what we were talking about when it [00:42:24] comes to the growing multipolar world [00:42:27] when you have countries like Russia and [00:42:29] China and Iran and you know even India [00:42:32] to a certain extent was wanting to put [00:42:34] aside some differences to work with [00:42:36] China to work with to continue to work [00:42:38] with Russia. When you see those allies [00:42:41] standing together and then you look at [00:42:44] the US and its vassal states in Europe [00:42:46] that are falling apart, I think that the [00:42:49] US is going to live long enough to [00:42:51] regret putting Europe in that position [00:42:54] and to regret not having strong allies [00:42:58] by being so focused on overall primacy, [00:43:01] so focused on we have to be number one, [00:43:04] everyone has to be below us, that [00:43:06] they're not seeing the bigger picture. [00:43:08] and really the overall shifting on the [00:43:11] world stage of what happens when you get [00:43:14] multiple countries that are bigger [00:43:16] players that go, "Hey, we we think we [00:43:18] can work together and then they really [00:43:21] start to take on the US." [00:43:23] Rachel Blevens, thank you so much for [00:43:25] joining us today. It was a pleasure and [00:43:28] I've certainly learned a lot from you. [00:43:29] You have a skill where you can just, you [00:43:31] know, share this information so [00:43:33] eloquently and so [music] calmly and [00:43:35] collected. So, thank you so much. Yeah, [00:43:37] thank you so much for having me and [00:43:39] y'all be sure to give Mint Press News a [00:43:41] follow and get them to 100,000 [00:43:42] subscribers. [00:43:44] Thank you.