Untitled Document

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