Hosted by Christina Ruffini and Sir Richard Dearlove
Guest
Episode Summary
In this episode of One Decision In Brief, hosts Christina Ruffini and Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of Britain's MI6, unpack how the latest strike on Ukraine indicates Vladimir Putin's resistance to President Donald Trump's peace negotiations. They also examine how the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit - where Chinese President Xi Jinping convened global leaders, including India's Narendra Modi, North Korea's Kim Jong-Un, and Russia's Vladimir Putin - hints at a possible new global order that competes with the West. Plus, how the recent U.S. hit on an alleged Venezuelan drug cartel ship implies how Secretary of State Marco Rubio's influence is shaping foreign policy in the Oval Office.
Episode produced by Situation Room Studios. Original music composed and produced by Leo Sidran.
Listen & Subscribe
- Watch on YouTube
- Listen on Apple Podcasts
- Listen on Spotify
Transcript
INTRODUCTION
Raffini: Hi. Welcome to One Decision in Brief. I'm Christina Raffini joined, of course, by our co-host, Richard Dearlove. Today, we're gonna be talking about the latest strikes in Ukraine, what Putin's long term plan is for the war if there is one, what this big conference of leaders with Putin and Xi and Kim and Modi and everything means for Europe, the US, and the future of Ukraine, as well as what it means that the US is now going back and looking at taking direct action against what it says are drug runners and criminals coming out of places like Venezuela. Richard, you're in California today. You are bright and early there. It's early in the morning, but it's very beautiful here. I think we want to start with some other people waking up to something unexpected, that's these really significant strikes on Ukraine. It looks like they hit a government building where the cabinet meets, which is kind of inside that air defense zone. They haven't been able to penetrate that since the beginning of the war. There are reports they killed at least one young mother and an infant. And it just looks like Putin has no desire to yield to any of Trump's, whether he means it or not, any of Trump's warnings to scale back the operations. It looks like he doesn't have any desire to get to the table. And you're hearing you think that sanctions, at least in your part of the world, might be imminent. Does that include the US?
STRIKES ON UKRAINE AND THE PATH TO COERCION
Dearlove: Well, I think Trump is on the point of having to escalate pressure on Putin. He really doesn't have any option because Putin shows no signs whatsoever of compromising on his policy. It looks ridiculous and reminiscent of Churchill saying, the Americans will do the right thing in the end, but having tried every other option. It's now that all other options. And I mean, I've got a feeling that Trump is in that vector at the moment where he's doing all the options, but he hasn't quite done the right thing. And the right thing, of course, is coercion in relation to Putin. And I mean, I've been in that building that was attacked with a drone, and it's the sort of central government part. Because it's so heavily protected, what's interesting, a lot of young mothers walk their babies and children in the parks in that area because they feel it's safe. So this is a significant escalation. It's quite heavily defended, both aerially and in terms of sandbagging in the streets and that sort of stuff, so this is a shift. I think that Trump's options really boil down to how far is he going to go with secondary sanctions. I mean, he's already put them on India. The Indians are they're difficult to enforce, but it's making life difficult for Modi politically. And the question is, can he extend them in any way effectively to China, even if it's only symbolic? And of course, the other thing that's happening, and we're not really being able to see visibly the change, but a lot's going on behind the scenes. I think a lot of the military initiative is being passed to the Europeans. The Europeans have massively ramped up their defense production, particularly in areas like artillery shells, ammunition, and they do have the capacity to out supply the Russians, but on the other hand, they've got to coordinate and get their act together. So I think we're in an intermediate phase where you haven't really had an effective military handover completely. And of course, Trump's main initiative really would be to really ramp up sanctions.
Raffini: If Europe decided they wanted to take direct military action in Ukraine, and I'm not saying they do, and I'm not saying that will happen, if tomorrow something happens and the Europeans decide, okay, we can't wait for the US, we have to do this. Do they have the capacity right now to have any type of effective ground game sustained fight with Russia on Ukrainian soil? Could they pull that off without the US at the moment?
Dearlove: No. Well, they need two things from the US. They need air cover to an extent. And intelligence, right? They need intelligence from the unit in Wiesbaden, particularly the overhead tactical stuff, the detailed stuff, and the continuous flow. There isn't any sign. Trump did shut that off way back for ten days, you'll remember, and it made a big difference. It switched back on, and it's working now. But I think we're some distance from the Europeans being able to act in an organized military fashion with American coordination and support, giving the Ukrainians what they need. But I mean, I don't see any scenario at the moment where actual troops are gonna be deployed, boots on the ground, into Ukraine. I mean, that's just too risky in terms of Article five and all the other issues that we understand.
Raffini: We talk a lot about Europe's overreliance on the US military, and I think most of us think of that in terms of air cover, hardware, artillery. Do you think Europe has become too reliant on the US for intelligence?
Dearlove: At the moment, I think the answer to that is probably yes. That's the strategic overhead, the satellite stuff, the intercept. I mean, the American capability is so significant, and the Europeans would need to rebuild their capability to replace that. They're a long way from doing that. I mean, what they are rebuilding is armaments production, and that's happening at significant speed. And they do have the aggregated strength eventually to replace American supplies. For example, there is a manufacturing initiative in Germany, which is now manufacturing Patriots faster than the Americans under license. So I mean, there are things happening, which in the medium to longer term are really important. But over the next six to eight weeks, that's not going to make any difference. We're talking about six months to a year. The important thing is holding the line for the Ukrainians whilst this sort of transfer of military capability takes place.
PUTIN, XI, MODI AND THE REWRITING OF HISTORY
Raffini: We have, you know, Trump saying on Sunday he may have to think about sanctions, and then we've got Russia saying they're gonna have no effect whatsoever and are, quote, absolutely useless. They seem not at all concerned. Meanwhile, Putin is doing this bromance tour meeting with Kim, the Iranian leader, President Xi, and the optics are not subtle there. I mean, really sending a signal that we can do this without you. And before that latter meeting, he also had a meeting with the leaders of India and China, you know, Modi and exclusively. And of course, those would be the two countries that would be targeted in secondary sanctions if the US and Europe were to go ahead of that because they're the two biggest purchasers of Russian oil and gas and LNG, etcetera. And in addition to these meetings themselves, they put on this big military parade in China reportedly to celebrate the end of World War II, which is odd for a couple reasons, but I know you have some strong feelings about the remake of history here. So walk us through this because this is not something China usually celebrates because it was not this Chinese government that fought World War II.
Dearlove: Well, it is a rewriting of history, but it's typical communist move where you have this massive military parade. They, you know, love those expressions of power. But at the same time, they have a version of their own history which they teach in schools. They've been doing it for so long now, a lot of the Chinese people probably don't even know what really happened. I mean, what really happened at the end of World War II is that General Chiang Kai-shek and the KMT, the Nationalist Army, fought the Japanese to a standstill and effectively drove them out of Manchuria and defeated them. And this is two years before the communist revolution, which is in '47. And the reason eventually why the nationalists retreated to Formosa, Taiwan, was because they were militarily exhausted, having borne the brunt of the fighting with the Japanese. So you've got the People's Liberation Army, which is the servant of the Communist Party, an anniversary and claiming it historically, with which they have pretty much nothing to do. So this is absolutely typical historical manipulation. I mean, it's what, for example, the Russians used to celebrate at the end of World War II in Eastern Europe. Eastern Europe was not necessarily liberated. Large chunks of it were liberated by Patton, not by the glorious Red Army. This is typical of communist regime. But the other thing fascinating about this meeting is as Xi and Putin walk through the Gate of Heavenly Peace in Tiananmen Square, the conversation was picked up by a journalist on a recording thing. What were they talking about? Medically living to 100, living forever. So you've got Kim Jong Un and Putin and Xi all worrying about their own immortality, not thinking about they're talking about the most. And I think this tells you an awful lot about what you're dealing with. Putin in particular. I mean, he's in a hole, and he's still digging, and the impact on the Russian economy, the Russian people of this war is in the long term, medium to long term, disastrous. They're not winning this war. And okay, the cost to Ukraine is massively high, but the only thing I think we could see eventually is a frozen conflict. And then the question is after that how it's policed, but it's so difficult to see what the outcome is going to be because the Russians are making their concessions.
Raffini: We in our Western elitist way of thinking have thought for so long, these countries can't compete with the US, they can't compete with Europe. But if you're looking at Modi, Xi, and Putin, you've got three nuclear powers that collectively hold a third of the world's population. They've got a lot of natural resources. They've got the best manufacturing or at least the biggest manufacturing in the world. Could we be looking at the rise of a different global powerhouse, and could they start to really compete with Europe and the US in a way that we haven't really thought about for quite a while?
Dearlove: The answer to your question is yes. And in fact, if you read the documentation for the twentieth Party Congress of the Chinese Communist Party, global domination by 2049 is exactly what they say their aim is. And they don't necessarily mean militarily global domination. They mean creating a global system which is attuned to Chinese interests and Chinese values. Okay, Russia is subservient to China, that's not going to change. Russia is a declining imperium and shows all the anxieties of a declining imperium. I think India is a different case, and I do not see India strategically making such a huge step towards China. India plays both ends against the middle, and of course, strategically, it's very worried about China's rise. Modi's very clever at playing every option, and that's what he did by going to the Shanghai Security Conference. But he left before the military parade, which I think is also significant. He didn't want to be seen in the military part of it. And remember, India has a very, very difficult relationship with China, and there is huge strategic tension along the border that they share, and they regularly fight across it. So these relationships are complex and need to be seen in context. And if anything, what we should worry about is China building its own interest group in which Russia will be a vassal.
US STRIKES AND VENEZUELA
Raffini: I want to switch topics a little bit and talk about this US strike on this alleged cartel. It looks like Rubio is stepping up his influence because this was an attack against alleged Venezuelan individuals. It's a little squishy as to whether or not it was a legal attack because it seemed to be in international waters. But Rubio has long linked President Nicolas Maduro to drug trafficking. They say it's coming from Venezuela. In the first Trump administration, Venezuela was like the boogeyman for everything. I covered a million of those press conferences both at the Trump administration and then, you know, you had this Venezuelan government in exile with Juan Guaidó. That all kind of fizzled. The Biden administration just seemed to kind of give up the ghost and then negotiate with Maduro. They had some success getting some US hostages out of there, but it seems like they're refocusing now. I'm wondering what you take about this, this strike that killed 11 people, whether it was legal and whether you think we're gonna see more of this.
Dearlove: It's what's called an extrajudicial killing, and technically in the States it is legal if it's approved by the president. People have forgotten that the big exponent of extrajudicial killings, particularly in Afghanistan, was Obama of all people, the liberal. So I mean, there is a legal precedent, and I think Rubio is very militant on the drugs issue. I mean, the problem is, if you're striking with your military resources, drugs runners, and let's say production camps and things, you've got to be pretty confident you're hitting the right targets and the right people. But I think this is definitely going to escalate, and I think it's part of the war against drugs and all the stuff that's coming out. I mean, Maduro denies it, but I think there's pretty clear implication that he's been involved in drugs cartels and drugs money, or his regime has, maybe not him personally. And I think you're going to see Rubio as the national security adviser backed by Trump taking a tough line, and I think they're going to go on the offensive. You can see that Maduro is massively concerned and nervous about this because it will threaten the security of his regime over time. And I think the other interesting thing I just read is this new proposal on Haiti where they're talking about an anti-gang intervention force of 5,000 with UN approval going in, and the rationale behind it, it's an American initiative, is to stop Haiti becoming a narco state on America's borders. And that's what they're talking about. Because the current security exercise that they're running with Kenyan soldiers in Haiti just hasn't worked. It's under resourced. So I mean, I think expect sort of Caribbean, Latin American initiatives coming now. I think Rubio is probably the driving force, and they're going to be controversial. But if they've got presidential approval, in my understanding, it's in the US, not necessarily in other jurisdictions, this makes it illegal. I think he's going to be a successful and important player, and I think there's going to be this focus, particularly on sorting Venezuela.
Raffini: All right. So Richard, fun to have in California, and I'll talk to you later this week. Great talking to you. As always, for more exclusive content and key discussions with global leaders, be sure to check out our website, 1decision.com, and of course, our YouTube. I'm Christina Raffini. We'll catch you next time.
