Tap to unmute

Why Russia-Ukraine War May End In A Frozen Conflict & Why US Should Focus On China: John Mearsheimer

  • Published on May 30, 2023 veröffentlicht
  • Is a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine on the cards? No, says American political scientist John Mearsheimer. The renowned international relations analyst says that the best the world can hope for at this stage is a frozen conflict. He added that the differences between the two countries do not only involve territorial matters but also the status of Ukraine vis-à-vis the West. Watch this exclusive interview where Professor Mearsheimer also explains the implications of Putin’s decision to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, the Russia-China friendship and who could emerge as the big winners of the conflict.
    n18oc_world n18oc_crux
    CRUX is your daily video news guide to the big events that are shaping our world. We track news, geopolitics, diplomacy and defence strategies and explain how they shape national policies. Crux makes sense of global developments, and analyses their impact on daily lives.
    Follow CRUX on Telegram: bit.ly/3fnlLua
    Follow CRUX on Instagram (@crux.india): bit.ly/3qSFx1K
    Follow CRUX on Facebook: bit.ly/2Lte7iF
    #GetCloserToTheNews with latest headlines on politics, sports and entertainment on news18.com bit.ly/2Y4QccL
    Also watch:
    Crux Decode: bit.ly/3MjzIoG
    Crux+ : bit.ly/35mm97B
    Crux Most Watched: bit.ly/3KhJ8iX

Comments • 1 294

  • Terry Radford
    Terry Radford 2 months ago +181

    “When brothers fight to death a stranger inherit their father’s estate.”
    - Chinua Achebe

    • Chris Wong
      Chris Wong 2 months ago +23

      Henry Kissinger Quoted: “To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.”

    • Tony Mills
      Tony Mills 2 months ago +10

      Okay, when good men do nothing... Evil will prosper, let us not be devoid of the fact this is a conflict Good versus evil, the world should hope that the good will conquer the evil! God is good! (You may not believe in God, or his sovereignty) truth is the Earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof....

    • larry zigler
      larry zigler 2 months ago +3

      No brothers are fighting here, Ivan.

  • Thomas Truong
    Thomas Truong Month ago +36

    Zakka Jacob is an excellent host. Not only did he raise real good questions for his host to answer, but also the entire interview was very well paced. Thank you both, Zakka and the Professor!

    • Didmasela
      Didmasela Month ago +2

      Thomas Truong, I agree with you 100%. Zakka Jacob is one of my favourable tv hosts on geopolitical events and debates. He is an excellent host because he asks very good and interesting questions and allows his discussants to answer all the questions without interrupting them.

    • theselector
      theselector Month ago +4

      Not really. He doesn't know very much about the topic and only asked very generalised questions. The war didn't start last year like he said, it actually began in 2014.

  • Eric Turner
    Eric Turner Month ago +26

    Agree with everything he says except that I don't think the Ukraine war drove Russia and China together. They were moving toward each other way before the war (e.g. integrating payment systems in order to move away from SWIFT, formation of BRICS alliance which is now seeing many other countries want to join it). The war and the sanctions have just sped the process up.

    • Ariel Zajac
      Ariel Zajac Month ago +1

      2008 it was the year of the bucharest summit when nato announced that they welcomed georgia and ukraine. Long before the war started.

    • sergey beloklokov
      sergey beloklokov Month ago

      They just new long time ago that this time will come one day.

    • Emilio26
      Emilio26 Month ago

      @ericturner6662 I seems like Taiwan will be another Ukraine 2.0

    • Law
      Law Month ago +2

      @Emilio26 Garland Nixon’s twit pretty well confirmed your assertion. However, China is 10 times stronger than Russia, and that Taiwan is an island which China can easily block all assess from air and sea. Besides, China had made it very clear, it prefers a peaceful reunification with Taiwan, but if the Taiwan regime chooses to became another Ukraine, then China’s unification by force is not an invasion like the Russian’s attack on Ukraine, rather, it will be a resumption of the unfinished civil war.

  • Philip Pirrip
    Philip Pirrip Month ago +11

    Never underestimate Sleepy Joe’s ability to screw things up.

  • eric yeo
    eric yeo 2 months ago +34

    Correction on the statement of, "no one country is challenging the US hegemony after the second world war" is not appropriate to point a finger at China by them based on their understanding.
    China did not stand up on that position but only because they were threatened on their territorial as well as Taiwan's interference and defense.
    Any countries under China's situation and the US politicians behaviours and agendas will react without difference, to protect its sovereignty and not like the speakers both mentioned.

    • Lun Jiang
      Lun Jiang 2 months ago +4

      That’s what Mearsheimer always says: 1. in the great power struggles one side’s defense will always seems to be offensive to the other side. It works both ways. 2. China exceptionalism will just be the same as American exceptionalism: imagining that China is a special civilization that won’t go aggressive unless forced to do so.

    • comingviking
      comingviking Month ago +11

      @Lun Jiang Yes, that is probably the reason why the US has encircled both China and Russia with bases halfway around the world from their own fairly impregnable borders. No, I do not buy that for a second. In general terms, perhaps, for situations when you have two neighboring nations building up their defenses at borders. Not in the case of US vs the world. They wish to stay the worlds only superpower and to be able to dominate everybody else with preponderous power and full spectrum dominance. That is not defensive in any reasonable definition of the word.,

    • james gornall
      james gornall Month ago +2

      ​​@comingvikingreponderance of power only gets you so far, the USA cannot ramp up military spending ad infinitum and expect to get great returns from that expenditure. They might not be corrupt selling tank fuel etc but bloating staffs with functionaries, having 2 star generals playing golf in their offices with nothing to do, these are different forms and characteristic of bloated bureaucracy

  • marco borraz
    marco borraz 21 day ago +1

    Great interview, excellent work by Zakka Jacob. It´s always a pleasure and illuminating to hear Dr. John Mearsheimer´s wise and solid comments.

  • Banana Republic
    Banana Republic Month ago +11

    I've heard retired U.S military officers say that if any of the european NATO member countries had taken on Ukraine militarily, it probably would have fared far worse.

    • Pechudin
      Pechudin Month ago +7

      Well yeah European NATO members have small militaries. Russia has a massive (albeit poorly run) one.

    • A B
      A B Month ago +8

      @Pechudin Where do you get an idea on how it's run? Not to say you are wrong or right, but you are giving an "expert" opinion on something you have no clue about. For starters Russian standing military following their military reform in 2000's is not that massive. What is massive is their mobilization potential which is something different from active, standing army

    • Pechudin
      Pechudin Month ago +2

      @A B Yeah, I may have use wrong terminology.
      Perhaps I should have said that the force they use was not suited for the task of conquering Ukraine? At any rate, the original point that an European NATO member would fare worse still stands because they have very small armies for the most part.

    • A B
      A B Month ago +5

      @PechudinIt's not a stretch to suggest that Ukraine probably has the 2nd most capable army in Europe after Turkey. Even then that army was quite seriously beat up by " poorly run" Russian forces and the sole reason why they still exist is because of enormous Western support. I would venture to say that even US would not have fared much better. This isn't 1991 Gulf War where you could set up shop in neighboring Saudi Arabia with a million troops and have uncontested air superiority. Nobody in the world has any experience of fighting this type of war on that scale. Last time something like this happened was 1940's and the technologies were different. No drones, guided artillery, satellites, S-400's, tanks didn't have reactive armor. You literally have to learn on the fly.

    • Pechudin
      Pechudin Month ago +2

      @A B Hmm.. not sure about the US thing. I am by no means an expert, but from what I've gathered the main problem Russia had is that the leadership assumed Ukraine would not struggle as much as it is.
      And because of that the "West" would not have time to react. But it did not happen, and now it's a protracted grindfest.
      Would US fare better? They'd have a lot more airpower, and perhaps they'd not underestimate the Ukrainian army as much. At leas they would not assume "friendliness" of some populations. Also I am pretty sure US would have air superiority. Again, not an expert but is not supression of air defences one of key US priorities, seeing as that's what they were expecting from the USSR?
      Well, I'll say this. Maybe and maybe not Russian army is poorly run. But it does seem to be ... underwhelming? Like it should've not have had such an issue.

  • Richard Fellows
    Richard Fellows Month ago +1

    Excellent interview and analysis.

  • Themton Irani ReMax Broker

    Very Good Line of Questioning by the Host and Excellent response by one of My Favorite Mr John Mearsheimer, This Man is Brilliant!! , Many Thanks from Canada!!!

  • Faisal Husein
    Faisal Husein Month ago +9

    Nice analysis Mr John Mearsheimer

  • Amateur_Football
    Amateur_Football Month ago +13

    How incredibly rare is to hear an honest analysis

    • PruricGaming
      PruricGaming Month ago

      He is right in multiple levels.. But he is wrong in many others... F.eks., He says the Ukraine conflict benefits China, NO it does not, it is actually proving China that Taiwan (who has been preparing for over 40 years for an invasion, and Ukraine only for 8) Won't fall that easy and that if the west (as they have proven to be reckless, as they sanctioned Russian oil) would put those same sanctions on China as they did Russia, the Chinese would not only hurt but seriously collapse majorly. Their entire economy is based on export. So I don't agree on the statement that the Ukraine war is of benefit to China.

  • Ty N
    Ty N Month ago +6

    There's something disheartening about seeing the world as a Risk board.

    • Albert Grant
      Albert Grant Month ago +1

      Excellant question !

    • fresatx
      fresatx Month ago

      Yes... But it produces better outcomes than hope/ideology

    • WDLC1911
      WDLC1911 Month ago

      Read Zbigniew Brzezinski’s book **THE GRAND CHESSBOARD**

  • C Shannon
    C Shannon 2 months ago +29

    "There's something wrong here" (assessment of other countries) - you got that
    right Mr Mearsheimer- frighteningly incompetent people running things here
    (plus parts of administrative state I would say)

  • 19SaD82
    19SaD82 2 months ago +25

    I had a good laugh when seeing the thumbnail for this video.
    "The biggest winners of this conflict are...John Mearsheimer"
    I knew it! He's a winner type!

    • Bijoy Das
      Bijoy Das 2 months ago +2

      Mr. 19SaD82 ...
      Prof. John Mearsheimer has come to limelight in this Rus-Ukr mess for his truthful analysis of the situation. He is ofcourse famous long before the war by virtue of his knowledge. I found him the best political analyst of our age.

    • Chris Wong
      Chris Wong 2 months ago

      Funny how much has change and new players are on the board that John Mearsheimer does not see nor mentions.

    • Chris Wong
      Chris Wong 2 months ago

      @Bijoy Das and yet, he still see China the worldly war leader of the world and yet, China had not exported war since 1979. One question, one would ask him if by chance.... Prof. John Mearsheimer, did you see BRICS+

  • Beckley Smith
    Beckley Smith Month ago +307

    I'm really worried about the current bank crisis. If a bank as big as SVB could fail, I fear for a lot more. I know a friend who is running a high-growth startup, and was badly hit by the bank run. I have pulled out more than $340k from my bank. After all, the FDIC covers only up to$250,000, and the implosion could have bad effect. Looking to invest into the stock market now. Does anyone know how I could go about it?

    • Indah maindah
      Indah maindah Month ago

      We underestimate the fact that banks are corporate entities also governed by greed. Since 2020, the banks have been over-leveraging their assets, which was one of the reasons for SVB's implosion. I have never been okay with keeping much money in the bank. I simply invest through my financial advisor, collect my profits, which I then spend.

    • Znyovuddin lavrik
      Znyovuddin lavrik Month ago

      This sounds really interesting. I've been thinking of pulling out my money too. Could you recommend who your advisor is? I could really use some help.

    • O Perdigoto
      O Perdigoto Month ago +3

      Wtf these bots are everywhere

    • Lilian Berry
      Lilian Berry Month ago

      it's a good time to buy and basically I've just got cash sitting duck in the bank and I'd really love to put it to good use seeing how inflation is at an all time-high, who is this coach that guides you, mind I look them up

    • Margaret Hunt
      Margaret Hunt Month ago +1

      He appears to be well-educated and well-read. I ran a Google search on his name and came across his website; thank you for sharing..

  • Anar Abbasov
    Anar Abbasov 2 months ago +19

    But India and China both are in BRICS. This is possible when wisdom rules.

    • Anar Abbasov
      Anar Abbasov Month ago +7

      @Purvika because the West thinks so? Who cares😀

    • Calin
      Calin Month ago +2

      What good is brics lol

    • Anar Abbasov
      Anar Abbasov Month ago +2

      @Calin what is bad lol

    • Nicoljane
      Nicoljane Month ago +2

      I'm looking forward to hearing more about their new currency hopefully this will be mentioned at their next summit in August or maybe sooner.

  • Nader Khalighi
    Nader Khalighi 2 months ago +36

    As usual very realistic analysis.

    • Linda Kep
      Linda Kep 2 months ago +2

      Realistic 😂

    • MIO PHX
      MIO PHX 2 months ago +11

      ​@Linda Kepcareful! Your ignorance of the history and facts are showing.

    • Charlemagne Tancio
      Charlemagne Tancio 2 months ago +1

      Well its a reality to those who are blind and those are dreaming.

  • LibertyMatrix
    LibertyMatrix 2 months ago +25

    Jinping: 'Change is coming that hasn’t happened in 100 years. And we are driving this change together.'
    Putin: ‘I agree'!

    • Donald Kasper
      Donald Kasper 2 months ago +6

      Yeah in their own minds.

    • Clem Farley
      Clem Farley Month ago +1

      China Russia Saudi Arabia Iran and North Korea are great nations.

  • Mark
    Mark 2 months ago +10

    The Indian foreign minister had some harsh remarks about the "Western Democracy" on their terms ie if they don't like the result Regime change is the course of action. It shows the contempt the Indians have for USA Bullying

    • cavaradossi
      cavaradossi 2 months ago

      It shows the unease autocracies feel when they are being criticized by democracies

    • Nived S
      Nived S Month ago

      @cavaradossi the same way america supporting pakisthan help democarcy right?

    • cavaradossi
      cavaradossi Month ago

      @Nived S America does not support Pakistan. Where did you get that Idea? US - Pakistan relations are very poor.

  • Andrew Sirkis
    Andrew Sirkis Month ago +6

    Thoughtful interview with intelligent and probing questions. Prof Mearsheimer never disappoints with cogent comments. Not sure I understand why India and China must be in conflict. From a business and economic point of view, wouldn't they both benefit to be on decent terms?

  • 1antag0nist
    1antag0nist 2 months ago +14

    Would it be fair to say that this is biased from an Indian perspective as India would gain from the US focusing more on China? Seeing that Crux is an Indian channel.

    • PELEGON1
      PELEGON1 Month ago


    • Knight At Dawn Don By Night
      Knight At Dawn Don By Night Month ago +4

      It may be biased but any levelheaded neutral observer would notice that China with its population size and resulting market, deep spread out diversified industrial ouput capability, economy ten times the size of that of Russia, deep coffers to funds its military r&d and influence global policies in the long term poses much greater threat as a rising power to the US led statusquoist hegemon compared to Russia that is definitely a great power but strategically on the decline. Strategically speaking through western lens, China deserves far more focus than Russia.

    • Ayush gaur
      Ayush gaur Month ago

      Well one thing i have noticed due to war and India neutral stance is that US and NATO are now considering more weapons trade with India
      And that also of technology they were not offering before

    • Chicka boom boom 2
      Chicka boom boom 2 Month ago +1


  • Donald Kasper
    Donald Kasper Month ago +2

    As long as people fight and die, there is no stalemate as eventually one side or the other runs out of men.

  • Tesfaye Kenea
    Tesfaye Kenea 2 months ago +8

    Tks for bringing one of the distinguished authorities on the matter! I was yearning to hear from him!

    • larry zigler
      larry zigler 2 months ago

      Short bus ?

    • Tesfaye Kenea
      Tesfaye Kenea 2 months ago

      @larry zigler A nickname?

    • Mman
      Mman Month ago

      I agree with you. I’ve also been curious regarding Mearsheimer’s thoughts on the current state of the conflict. As usual, I was not disappointed.

  • Jha Navkant
    Jha Navkant 2 months ago +12

    Also bring Sri Chris Hedges and George Galloway on your forum.
    It was great to listen Prof. John Mearsheimer

    • Chris Wong
      Chris Wong 2 months ago

      Many thanks... George Galloway great debater..

  • JOE MOL1
    JOE MOL1 Month ago +17

    This Prof is always on point. I've been a realist for more than a decade now and this man and the situations around, are giving me reasons to dig more into this ideology. Thanks boss.

    • D Ro
      D Ro Month ago +5

      No he’s a fool because the facts on the ground have changed and he keeps his outdated and wrong views.
      That makes him a fool

    • cavaradossi
      cavaradossi Month ago

      the prof is a most unrealistic "realist"

    • JOE MOL1
      JOE MOL1 Month ago +3

      @cavaradossi why do you feel so?

    • JOE MOL1
      JOE MOL1 Month ago +5

      @D Ro so what are the facts on ground that were there before that have now changed?

  • D
    D Month ago +1

    Prof. Mearsheimer is honest intellectual! Very nice to see him invited!

  • Hugo Diaz Garcia
    Hugo Diaz Garcia Month ago +1

    Congratulations to Prof. John Mearsheimer for his insightful analysis about why Russia-Ukraine War may end in a frozen conflict and why US should focus on its relatinoship with China..

  • Nikoloz Gabedava
    Nikoloz Gabedava 2 months ago +2

    Very good questions by journalist.

  • Dhruba Maharjan
    Dhruba Maharjan Month ago +2

    India and China should understand what would potential conflicts between the Asian countries might end in. Answer lies in the Asian countries coming together which will bring peace in other continents as well.

  • Maurício Waldman
    Maurício Waldman Month ago

    Congratulations to Crux Channel about this episode!

  • barumbadum
    barumbadum 2 months ago +10

    The best IR scholar alive

    • Chris Wong
      Chris Wong 2 months ago

      Listen to George Galloway, if you want the truth...

  • ADM
    ADM 2 months ago +35

    I can say he is one of the best geo strategist/ analyst I’ve come across. Heard him predict a lot of what has happened more than 5 years ago.

    • Tesfaye Kenea
      Tesfaye Kenea 2 months ago +4


    • murderofcrows21
      murderofcrows21 Month ago +7

      He predicted what the US Govt, its intelligence assets, and military predicted, give him a prize.

      RESTITVTOR ORBIS Month ago +9

      He also predicted that putin was too smart to invade and that if the west really wanted to weaken Russia they would encourage him to invade. I was in his camp right up until the days right after the invasion where I expected him to go over where his predictions went wrong only for him to revise his points and pretend like he wasn't working off of now provably flawed information and act like he was still right the whole time. He keeps beating the exact same drum regardless of how much putin does to undermine him. I probably learned all his predictions and arguments 5 years ago and I know damn well that they are now detached from reality. I had to triple check when this interview was done to make sure it wasn't sometime in the first few months, but if it actually was done this week then i simply can't value his analysis at this point. He's a broken record, he keeps saying the same things regardless of what changes

  • Stefan Weber
    Stefan Weber Month ago +18

    Mearsheimer made the best predictions since 2014 on Ukraine.

    • D Ro
      D Ro Month ago +1

      lol why, the Ukrainians would have told you in 1991 that russia would try to invade them. You need to understand that russian doctrine and mindset sees Ukraine and Ukrainians as "little russians". They're imperialist, Meirsheimer didnt predict a damn thing.

  • NUMB
    NUMB Month ago +2

    Never think a patient man is a weak man.

  • Younus Ali Sardar
    Younus Ali Sardar 2 months ago +61

    Good one. As always Prof. John Mearsheimer speaks sincerely of what he believes judging from his vast knowledge and philosophical perspective. I've watched his futuristic speech delivered in 2015 in University of Chicago anticipating this current Russia-NATO conflict. He is a great philosopher. 🙏

    • Mica Mika
      Mica Mika 2 months ago +2

      Respect to Prof Mearsheimer, But philosophers never where right how a war ended!

    • Sir Francis
      Sir Francis 2 months ago +7

      Funniest thing I've read all day..... I certainly wouldn't buy shares from his tips, based on the accuracy of his political/military predictions

    • Aussie Patriot
      Aussie Patriot 2 months ago +4

      Russia hasn't won a war in 100years, what makes you think he's right. Mearsheimer is a legend in his own mind, and nobody else

    • Aussie Patriot
      Aussie Patriot 2 months ago +1

      Best philosophers to listen to in this war are Professor Mark Milley and Dr Lloyd Austin

  • Nadir Mahfoudh
    Nadir Mahfoudh Month ago +1

    Good analysis Prof John Meassheimer

  • Chok Woo
    Chok Woo 2 months ago +7

    Russia Ukraine War more than lightly will end like Korea War, basically cease fire and each consolidate the existing line of control. John Mearsheimer is another US centric hegemony advocator, cut lost now and aim for bigger prize -- China

  • Alex Abood
    Alex Abood Month ago

    “Here is the smartest guy on this topic. How do we solve this, sir?”
    “There is no solution”
    Understandable have a nice day

  • Me
    Me Month ago +34

    US will do anything to hinder India-Russia relations even if it gravely hurt India. In fact, the more any country is in trouble, the more beneficial it is for US - cheap labor, rich resources for a penny, brain drain, organ donation, etc, etc

  • Krishan 63
    Krishan 63 2 months ago +12

    Good interview

  • Paddy Nair
    Paddy Nair Month ago +2

    Totally realistic explanation of the situation😊

  • s c
    s c 2 months ago +3

    The host of this interview is rather good.

  • Alvin
    Alvin 2 months ago +2

    There is a peaceful long-term solution possible, one which is not good for the peoples of the west: the decline of USA's economic power. The end of the petrodollar has made this possible. It is a realistic path to any end under conditions of a statement, because a stalemate will continue to require large military budgets by the USA, already in unparalleled debt. As more countries part from the US dollar, that debt will become ever more burdensome. Inflationary pressues in the USA will eventually bring about political change. I don't see a similar decline occurring in Russia. In fact, Russia as part of a new multipolar Eurassia will continue to strengthen and to prosper.
    Meanwhile, Mother Nature has her way with the heating of the earth and the climate catastrophes that lie ahead. The threat to the world from them is an independent fact that will in time dwarf the insolubility of manking's self-imposed problems.

  • Philippos E
    Philippos E Month ago +12

    He is so true in his logic & estimations of what is to happen!😊

    • Righteousbyfaith
      Righteousbyfaith Month ago

      I disagree God's going to determine what's going to happen and when

  • Knight At Dawn Don By Night

    Except for the Donald Trump matter and India profiting from this war, I agree with everything else in this discussion.
    So how does India really profit from this war? Strategically, India's importance, relevance or the necessity to have India as a continuing partner has not reduced to both the US and Russia admittedly but that is a status quo and not a new benefit of sorts.
    Militarily, India does not benefit from this war as a) questions on sophitication, efficiency and quality of certain (and not all) Russian weapons that India also uses, has become more prominent b) the west's ability to quantitatively meet India's military demands has arisen c) with Russia and the west both using up their reserve stockpiles, both their ability to supply India in the scenario of an immediate short term contingency of a war between India and China d) With consequences of this war fortifying China-Russia military relations, Russia might be more weary of supplying or even providing for maintenance and uogrades of existing russian origin equipment in India's inventory e) With this war badly stressing Russia's inventory and their defense industries working overtime to meet their own wartime need, Russia has already defaulted on meeting some contractual obligations regarding supply of spares for military equipment to India e) The western sanctions enforced on Russia has made it difficult for India and Russia to get into new military contracts without avoiding the sanctions and sanctions have made certain electronics and materials off-limits to Russia which would hinder Russia's future supplies to India to a great extent f) apart from the questionable quantiative defense output ability of the west, India remains inhibitive about switching over to western weapons completely because of prohibitive cost of western weapons that would prevent India to acquire in large quantities needed against China, strings attached to it like whining EUMAs literally giving up the dictating terms to the west on a platter on when and whom to start a war with, coupled with observation of the US's push to countries like Germany to share their inventiry with Ukraine with India contemplating if a similar fate awaits India and above all looming threat of sanctions on military sales to India in a single vendor situation in absence of the Russian vendor from unpredictabke US if India continues to pursue independent foreign policy in exercise of its sovereignty.
    From business, trade and economy point of view, India does not benefit as a)India ensuring its food security through fertiliser import from Russia and India ensuring its energy security through oil import from Russia is not a new benefit, rather India's oil import from Russia is a desperate attempt by India at offsetting some of its loss especially after its economy took hit due to covid induced prolonged lockdowns b) If India continued to buy as much from other existing oil sources it traditionally has been buying from over the years and not from Russia, the west in the wake of its sanctions on Russian oil, other heavy oil consuming economies and India all crowding on common oil import sources would create disproportionate demand-supply issues, drive up global oil prices, make the oil prices for expensive for the west and illaffordable for developing countries including India causing further loss to indian economy. So India buying oil from Russia is a favor towards all economies in such trying times. c) Large portions of Russian oil bought by India is being rerouted at similar cheap rates to not just developing countries but to many of the western developed countries that have formally sanctioned russian oil yet have been knowingly buying Russian oil from India- India has done a favor to all these countries instead of benefitting from the war. d) War induced recession and depression in western economies is not beneficial for India either as Indian industries depend on export to the west e) sanctions and isolation of Russia makes Russia turn to china even more and binds it into monopsony kind of trade relation with China which is not at all beneficial for India, be it in teade, strategically (as India depends on Russian veto and China having greater say on Russian foreign policy due to its domination of Russia as single largest buyer is detrimental to India's strategic interest) as well as mikitarily. f) Even though China also stands to lose due to slump in western market while the war rages on as China exports plentiful to the west, China also stands to gain by becoming monopsonic client of cheap and opulent mineral reserves of Russia that will help it to undercut its prices and rig competition in gloibal markets and with both strategic wane of western and russian power projection amid their resorces and concentration remaining struck and regionakised in europe, China gets to spread its tentackes around the globe and gets an opportunity to bridge gap of its economic might and ability of power projection with the west- India sinply is not up there, has not arrived to challenge the hegemony of the west to benefit in any sorts from the war.
    So how come India profits from this war?

    • SongYou Guo
      SongYou Guo Month ago

      If all of what you said were correct, maybe, India should settle border dispute with China. After that, India can enjoy all the benefit from Ukraine War. Russian, Vietnam, Mayanmar, Nepal, Tajikistan have all settled disputes of land border with China, why couldn't India?

    • Knight At Dawn Don By Night
      Knight At Dawn Don By Night Month ago

      @SongYou Guo Vietnam and Nepal have not reallly settled. China is simply not willing to regard the Mcmahon line for dispute resolution unlike the way it has accepted Macmahon line hypocritically in dispute resolution with Myanmar as China stands from geopolitically benefit through gain of strategic vantage points in its recognition of Mcmahon line with Myanmar. Some other landlocked countries did not settle, rather accepted teeny tiny favors (they did not have much of an option left) masked as usual "win win situation" oftrepeated in forktongued chinese dilpolmatic parance on Chinese maximalist positions shoved onto them by China's wolf warriors from their China's position of strength while Russia did let go of its claims in its disputes with China in the wake of a greater common danger of US hegemonic dominance that has brought them closer in the recent decade. China remains in occupation of not just international waters in the SCS, but EEZs and even mmaritime boundaries of litttoral states in the south east asia and China has not resolved those disputes unilaterallly crrated and aggravated by it. India does not have taste for any short term profiteering at the expense of it foregoing its core national interest of its own territorial integrity in the name of dispute resolution with China, or at the expense of suffering of other people (the ukrainian people) in the war or at the expense of strategic insecurity its timetasted partner Rudsia has been subjected to. India will continue to do trade with both Russia and the west with the understanding that if India's import from Russia helps Russia to fund its war with Ukraine, India's import from the west also helps the west to fund its military supplies to Ukraine and so India is not responsible for how any country utilises their export revenues earned from their trade with India and hence India will press on doing trade without being pressurised by any of the bloc to choose one over the other, without being guilt tripped with false narrative of India profiteering of the war and without being ensnared into lure of greater gains if its joins the ranks of China and Russia in a military slliance with the west.

  • Tina Tang
    Tina Tang 2 months ago +19

    India will get closer to the Eurasian bloc of Russia and China because India's strategic interests are greater with Asia than with the West. India is also with BRICS and SCO!
    Whatever border issues India has with China is India's choice to upkeep or not because China has already reached out twice to India (during the reign of Gandhi's National Congress rule) to settle them peacefully. India then was (and may be even now) too dominated by her past colonial master & mindset, to agree to negotiate with China. The strategy of the colonial masters was and still is, to DIVIDE & CONQUER
    Even Mearsheimer's arguments have a hidden agenda to apply this strategy - DIVIDE and CONQUER. Calling Russia the weakest of the 3 great powers is an attempt to stoke the so-called EGO of Putin and the Russian people, to make them resentful of China; and laughing at the idea of India being able to broker a peace deal between the US and Russia, like China, is also an attempt to make India too jealous of China to stop rebuffing China's outreach to India to establish a better relationship between these 2 most populous nations in the world.
    The problem is, deep in his heart, the Prof believes and wishes to preserve US dominance and hegemony. He doesn't understand Russia and China's goal and desire to have a multipolar world without any state being a hegemon of any region. What these two powers want is a peaceful world based on the UN Charter, NOT the so-called "Rules based International Order" which the US tries to impose on the world to preserve her dominance and hegemony.
    RUSSIA & China believe in the philosophy of mutual benefits for all nations and a commuity with a shared future for all humanity. They don't subscribe to the US ego-centric philosophy of dominance, hegemony and divide and conquer.
    I wish, Prof Mearsheimer, who prides himself of being a realist, will stop trying to divide Russia and China and open his eyes to reality - these 2 countries refuse to play the West's game of hegemony and dominance because they have seen and experienced how destructive such a strategy is for world peace and harmony and how destructive wars are for the environment and global warming!

    • Knight At Dawn Don By Night
      Knight At Dawn Don By Night Month ago +1

      Your opinion of the prof is your personal that you are entitled to and I need not counter that although I may mot necessarily agree with each of your cynicism of the professor. I also understand that you are either Chinese or a russian or one from their bloc and that you evidently have a stake in the newfounded bonhomie between Russia and China that has not been this cordial in a while (remember 1960s) and the US this time around has defintely made a foolhardy strategic miscalculation to push isolated Russia into the fold of China. But I am not here to talk about all that. I am precisely here to tell you that you or whichsoever country you represent have or has no authority or agency to instruct or dictate terms to India on what should constitute India's foreign policy and that India does not seek or care for your validation as to whether India's foreign policies are independent or decided by its erstwhile colonial rulers or the collective west. India is not simply willing to cede ground, be it up the Himalayas or safe passage and and unhindered navigation as well as multinational nature of under sea mineral and other kinds of resources and reserves in high seas of the Indian ocean, the pacific ocean and adjoining international waters (India simply does not recognise South China sea as sovereign chinese territory) and India does not accept Chinese proposals of resolution of border disputes made from maximalist position by harnessing their position of strength with microscopic discount offers to India made to like "win win situation" magnanimous favor to India on the part of China. India is not here to get duped and be malleable to forktongued, duplicitous, treacherous pedagogy that often comes India's way. Peace is what India chooses between peace and war but peace on China's terms will not be accepted so there always will be this grey area of no peace but no war either kind of space for strategic ambiguity. India is in numerous multilateral organisations, be it BRICS, SCO or Quad and being in BRICS or SCO does not in any way mean that India is in friendly terms with China at all, it just means that India is open to multilateral cooperation so long as such groupings do not turn themselves to be anti this or anti that clubs, that India is not intent on shutting its doors and windows on China and is open to continuing with diplomatic engagement of China, that is it and there is nothing much to read into this. India has seen the west and China from close quarters and needs no lecture on which one is worse and more treacherous- India ideally would like to keep both at arms length distance but since China poses immediate threat to India, India cooperates with the west where their strategic interests align, that is containment of China along India's borders, in its neighborhood and in India's sphere of influence and trade interests, in exponence of true multipolarity where poles sometimes cooperate to balance. After ganging up against India by emboldening rogue states like Pakistan, proliferating nuclear weaoons and long range ballistic missiles to them in order to contain India and keep it straddled in regional conflicts wherein Pakistan keeps blackmailing and pinpricking india with terrorist activities against India under the cover of nuclear umbrella, knowingly despite the fact that Pakistan sided with the wes since is inception and still remains a nonNato ally of the US, China should never raise the bogey of the west with India and never expect any nicety in return from India by invoking India's Russia ties or by screaming their lungs out on how bad the west is. India has been already nice beyond reaaons to China in that India is yet to provide nuclear arms and ballistic missiles technology to littoral states in the indo pacific like vietnam or Taiwan following suit of China's shenanigans.
      India-Russia relation on the contrary is time tasted, deep, based on profoundly thought through ideas, does not suffer from any strategic insecurity so far as core interests like territorial integrity are concerned and India intends to pursue the mutually benefitting ties of strategic nature with Russia and there is no threat to Russia from whatsover bond India forges with the west as that will not be Russia specific on India's part and this war in Ukraine is living example that the west can not just wag fingers at India or armtwist India to make it acquiesce to their demands against Russia.

  • Erik Robillard
    Erik Robillard Month ago

    just imagine if they did'nt live under sanctions for so many years.

  • AK 47
    AK 47 Month ago

    Although I think that his assessment about the US foolishy pushing Russia and china closer is correct, I think he missed the part that there is still a 4th world power here, which is the western EU bloc, wherein it's in their very interest that Russia is subdued or weakened in a non direct conflict. Now, given that yes, China is currently in a position of power. Its gain perceived gain will actually also help the US as well, simply because China is also a major threat to the east Asian countries. Just look at the recent moves by the Philippines. A few years ago, they threatened to end their alliance with the US, now after seeing that China is still a bully and Russia being irrational with its Ukrainian invasion. The Philippines is welcoming back the Americans with open arms. While Japan, Taiwan, S. Korea AND NATO are all doubling down on their re-armament programs, which, by the way are also buying mostly US weapons. Yes, the Chinese gained in this conflict, but to say that the US lost something here is a stretch, in fact they may have won an advantage in the long run.

  • MrZombiekiller23
    MrZombiekiller23 Month ago

    the irony of needing a buffer state between ukr and Russia is funny because Ukraine was originally formed as a buffer between russia and the west,ukraine literally means border in their language

  • Convergence
    Convergence Month ago +1

    Nice video!

  • Childs Name
    Childs Name Month ago +1

    I have to differ (not defer) with Meirsheimer. At the end of one year, Russia has upset the West totally. Russia did not collapse under sanctions, in fact, the West is collapsing. It is gaining ground economically and militarily every day. China is onboard with Ru because it sees Ru is winning. China is making things and making money every day, so helping Ru gradually win against the West makes good sense. Russia is definitely not a weak power, and for now Ru&Chi are playing the better chess game.

  • Bon Summers
    Bon Summers 2 months ago +3

    Russia had that territory from the late 1700's to about 1920.

    • Serendipity42
      Serendipity42 2 months ago

      We (the british) had half the world in that period....perhaps we should go back to that too??
      Silly argument

    • Don Ricardo
      Don Ricardo Month ago

      Seren, The Ukraine is not half of the world. It is a bridge state between the EU and Russia.

    • Bon Summers
      Bon Summers Month ago

      @Serendipity42 Not a silly argument. The Donbas to Kherson, with Crimea, is wild fields borderlands. The British imperialism does not compare. You did silly posturing.

    • Serendipity42
      Serendipity42 Month ago

      @Bon Summers the muscovites state was pretty tiny to start with, and then had continuous expansion for half a millenia... I would call that imperialism.
      My point is that it's too easy to pick a point in history that aligns with a view on people and state.

  • Tayakorn Kupakanjana
    Tayakorn Kupakanjana Month ago +16

    I notice Indian media tends to really play up this China-India rivalry and it's very counterproductive in putting an end to American imperialism. Hence they bring in China hawks like John Mearsheimer hoping to have him side with India. This backfired on the show host who posed a question whether India can be a meaningful peacemaker and Mearsheimer said "no". He left out the reason being that India has nothing to offer the West nor Russia except this huge human resource population which needs to consume Chinese technology, Russian fuel. The Indian is lagging behind China in terms of industrial productivity and technology by decades That, and land sea corridors of India.
    The Indian media is playing up this nationalistic hubris which will not serve Indian interests. Play the double game with US too long and India will lose out on the benefits of Eurasian integration compared to smaller Nations.

    • Sailendra Pamidi
      Sailendra Pamidi Month ago +2

      China has always been a threat to India’s sovereignty and has grabbed vast tracts of land in the North with several attempts to claim territories such as Arunachal Pradesh as belonging to it. The previous Indian governments proved ineffective in defending India’s interests. There has been a long standing buildup of troops at several points along the border since 2020 when there was a violent altercation which is yet to be resolved. This apart China has been trying to curtail India’s interests on multiple fronts by trying to influence India’s neighbouring countries with money and debt trap projects and send military vessels with powerful radars to spy on Indian coastal assets. So yes - the CCP is indeed a bully with expansionist mindset and Indian media is prudent to cover it in detail.
      I also think you are reading more into the question asked by the host on whether India has a role to play as a potential peacemaker. This is a a common question that comes up due to India having good relations with both rivals US and Russia. I dont see what there is for India to gain by being seen as the peacemaker.
      On the question of industrial productivity and other points - India has her own strengths and its not solely dependent on playing any side - and no country whether its the US or European nations are providing charity - there is a give and take involved in any relationship.

    • jitendra tiwari
      jitendra tiwari Month ago +1

      Nothing is free.

    • Tayakorn Kupakanjana
      Tayakorn Kupakanjana Month ago +3

      @Sailendra Pamidi Thank you for your extensive response to my point I appreciate your thoughts. I am aware of China India relations and I still think India's fears of Chinese expansionism should be given more critical thought to discern which aspects are dangerous and rightly to be resisted/negotiated, but also which areas are becoming lost opportunities which should be taken by both. It is clear that the sourgrapes in the BRICS /belt road initiative / dedollarization / multipolar world movement is the China-India relationship. I don't see an Anti-Indian sentiment in the Chinese media although it is obvious that China has the economic/strategic/political upper hand which they operate from.
      The point I am getting at is we know India has a vast human resource similar to that of China since the past century but now that China has bridged the technology gap but India has not, - India must seize this diplomatic opportunity to improve China-India relations and improve the technology gap in India's interest.
      If India allows its China fears to overtake the political environment then it opens the doors for the west to leverage that and making India become the next Pakistan, out fo the fear of China - same as how Pakistan embraces US aid out of the fear of India.

  • Ryan Costa
    Ryan Costa Month ago

    I suppose you can make a plan to spend 10000 dollars going to the Super Bowl, getting a nice hotel, hitting the best bars, having a great meal, and buying a t-shirt. And then you can decide not to do that. You can change your mind.

  • HK Foo
    HK Foo Month ago +1

    While John is spot on , on many issues, one opinion about China would or should dominate Asia is wrong. China or rather Chinese do not have the gene to dominate over others as proven in the past and now.
    China extends collaborations to all big and small on win win collaborations without interfering in other countries' affairs unlike the west which would not hesitate to dominate the moment they have the power to do so.
    Domination over others only bring violence and war which is bad for business . China only wants business .
    If a China century takes hold, then rest assured it would be a peaceful and prosperous world.
    In this current world dominated by war mongers, wars will never end . People will die.
    It is happening now. See all the tensions created by war mongers.

  • Jacob Benjamin
    Jacob Benjamin Month ago +1

    India and China would do well to mend its fences, and get on as brothers. Not to do so would be to the detriment of India, for sure, and China too. You don't want the US meddling in that region in any shape or form

  • hussin said
    hussin said Month ago

    It is not a question of how it will end but who will be gaining and losing?

  • Abraham Elias Gutierrez
    Abraham Elias Gutierrez 2 months ago +6

    India should really find ways to bridge the gap with China. The sooner they understand USA just uses and fucks its allies the better. They dont like China now because they develop themselves, they didnt care shit when they were poor and weak and could only be subject to them, only once they started challenging them they began the narrativw change. They would do the same to India, and its natural it will happen, India has (as China) a much bigger population, so naturally if it develops it would have a much stronger economy. As I mexican I dont really understand or know the little details of the bad historic relationship with China, but its on their best interest to start looking for a better future together instead of antagonizing themselves.
    Mr. John its mistaken on thinking that China sees the world as USA, they have stuck on their head the way USA works, the winner takes it all mentality of america, China doesnt want to be a hegemon, they are looking for coperation and win-win relationships

    • Super-Sister
      Super-Sister Month ago +1


    • Sailendra Pamidi
      Sailendra Pamidi Month ago +1

      It takes two hands to clap - it would be naive to think that China does not want to be a hegemony. The actions of the Chinese against India and her interests speaks volumes not to mention the long standing border stand off and violent altercation back in 2020. That apart the actual war in 1962 led to India losing vast tracts of territory in the North (Aksai Chin). The current Indian prime minister Mr. Modi has made more than a dozen visits to China after becoming PM and reached out to their leadership to try and fix the international border - however, the Chinese side was not willing to address the outstanding issue and kept escalating tensions which flared in 2020.
      As for the US ‘ally’ status - India is more than aware of the strategic nature of its relationship with the US. The flare up of terrorist activities in Kashmir happened as a result of direct funding that Pakistan received as ‘aid’ from US in return for training Taliban fighters in Afghanistan back in the day. That said, India is not an ‘ally’ of the US - that is not our definition - we are a Strategic partner - meaning we look for areas of mutual interest and cooperation. I would refer you to India’s External Affairs minister Mr. S. Jai Shankar’s speeches where he not only clarifies some of these types of questions but also clearly assert our stand - that India is not on any side - but India is on India’s side as it should be for any sovereign nation that puts the interest and welfare of its own people first.

    • Real.mir_
      Real.mir_ Month ago


  • Carlos António
    Carlos António 2 months ago +11

    Is anyone considering the delivery of the invaded ukrainian land to United Nations administration for a period of, let's say, 20 or 30 years, after which this land would be delivered according to the result of a fair and clean referendum? There are several countries that are not involved in this war (Switzerland, India, Austria, Brazil, Israel, Indonesia, Ireland, etc.) that could participate in keeping the peace and run those territories in the meantime. Otherwise, it's like the man says, this war is not really going to end - the conflict will remain somehow for generations, like in Korea or in Palestine.

    • Rkkhelen Singh
      Rkkhelen Singh 2 months ago

      S of now d war sud b stop immediately with no condition frm both end n after dat all possible condition frm both sud b discuss. n during that If russia denied to fall back frm ukrain then ukrain sud immediately join nato n let nato troops protect ukraine further on. But i dnt think russia will agree s putin will face heat frm its people that if russian doesnt get anything then no point going to war with ukraine at d cost of many russian army lives

  • Gabriel Pérez Murillo

    Good guest, interesting interview, nice discussions … finally this channel is delivering valuable content

  • computer 1
    computer 1 Month ago

    One thing to clarify is that most Russian people still agree with their govt and the leader Putin. They think US are hostile to them. But that's not the case in China, most of Chinese people just don't hate US at all and never think that US would eliminate Chinese people or their culture.
    In China, if people have choice, they won't support President Xi at all. Because most Chinese people acknowledge that even the China govt could manage to gain lion share control of the Asia region, the China govt just won't share the benefit to the Chinese ordinary people at all.

  • Hans Weenink
    Hans Weenink 2 months ago

    another winner is the military industrial complex of allot of nations. and what does "disfunctional rump-state" mean? is ukraine going to be like haiti? honduras? yemen? syria? lybia? etc etc. or is going to be "disfunctional" like south-korea (also a "rump-state'')? I think it's going to be something in the middle since they still control major cities and ports. time will tell if ukraine will have better institutions after this war. mearsheimer tends to have too much of these edgy contrarian takes but still interesting.

  • Redhammer
    Redhammer 2 months ago +3

    It's gonna be like the Donbass since 2014 stale mate it won't end that war has never stopped

    • Sir Francis
      Sir Francis 2 months ago +2

      Well Ukraine had no military to do much about it back then

  • Gordon Schedel
    Gordon Schedel Month ago +2

    I wonder what the professor’s opinion is on why the west was pushing Ukraine towards this war.

    • UniqueG24
      UniqueG24 23 days ago

      I think he does go into more detail on this in other interviews/talks. Basically, because of political naïvety and arrogance. They just thought they could get away with it, as they did with previous NATO expansions.
      As for the reasons why they would follow such a policy in the first place, I'm not exactly sure whether I heard him talk about that. My guess is that (1) many people in power were fighting Russians in the Soviet Union all their lives and just couldn't let go (it's very difficult to dissolve an organization like NATO), and (2) the US did not want Europe to pivot towards Russia and away from the US.
      And personally, this is what bugs me so much about the EU's position/role in this: How did they not see after 1990 that a lasting peace within Europe requires a security architecture that involves Russia? With Siberia, the Caucasus and the Bosporus, that would have been a very comfortable buffer for Europe. Now we got an endless war of attrition going on almost in the heart of Europe (at least from a geographic PoV) that is going to push Europe and Russia further away day by day and would require decades to repair. Meanwhile, Russia is pushed even more towards China. So instead of the potential of having a Eurasian superpower with huge natural barriers towards East and South Asia, Europe now is in a situation where they may have China (via Russia) at their doorstep.

  • giacomo legends
    giacomo legends Month ago

    I think you should get every guest to wear a Pep Dream Makers t-shirt and cap.

  • Lance B
    Lance B Month ago +1

    There is no such thing as a weak great power that can vaporize the planet in 30 minutes.

  • ffelegal
    ffelegal Month ago

    Mearsheimer predicted this war years ago after 2014 saying Russia would destroy Ulkraine to the ground if Otan/US kept advancing. That the US thought they could poke Russia in the face. He just said everything Russia said before invasion. I can't decide which side is correct. I keep changing my mind about this subject. Clearly no one should invade anyones territory like Russia did. And Ulkraine is not to blame of course. But is Russia really justified in doing their actions?

  • oskar andradev
    oskar andradev Month ago

    This gentleman is right!

  • tony tan
    tony tan Month ago +3

    China basically does not think the way like John Mearsheimer. Hegemonic is not its DNA, but India
    in fact thinks/dreams to be a Hegemon

    • CrescentPrince Kronos
      CrescentPrince Kronos Month ago

      Well they don't call it the Indo Pacific for nothing. Truthfully though, i don't know enough about them to say one way or the other.

  • Baüveih
    Baüveih Month ago

    I really wanna have just one photo with this Processor!

  • Eagle999
    Eagle999 2 months ago +6

    The big arms dealers and shareholders are always the big winners.Get the list of shareholders and make it public.All will become clear.

    • Mi Aya
      Mi Aya 2 months ago

      And then what? Public too dvmb

    • MichaelMW
      MichaelMW 2 months ago

      o stay quiet hyppie.

  • Mark Azamatov
    Mark Azamatov Month ago

    I'm surprised that a mouthpiece like Crux has invited professor Mearsheimer.

  • Sai Krishna
    Sai Krishna Month ago +2

    Very simple, logical, and to the point. The world is pretty divided now. US and West is one bloc, Russia-Iraq-China is one bloc, and India and Saudi play to both the blocs.

    • Debasis Mohanty
      Debasis Mohanty Month ago

      And knowledgeable peoples knows Russia china Iraq never going to beat usa and west and democracy always Beats communalism and directorships

  • Suraj Sharma
    Suraj Sharma Month ago

    John , regards, you make sense in a dysfunctional world.....

  • Li Ning
    Li Ning 2 months ago +8

    Sharing below written by a Malaysian Clip-Sharer:
    I’m from Malaysia. China has traded with Malaysia for 2000 years. In those years, they had been the world’s biggest powers many times. Never once they sent troops to take our land. China's admiral Zhenghe came to Malacca five times, in gigantic fleets, and a flagship eight times the size of Christopher Columbus’ flagship, Santa Maria. He could have seized Malacca easily, but he did not. In 1511, the Portuguese came. In 1642, the Dutch came. In the 18th century the British came. We were colonised by each, one after another.
    When China wanted spices from India, they traded with the Indians. When they wanted gems, they traded with the Persian. They didn’t take lands. The only time China expanded beyond their current borders was in Yuan Dynasty, when Genghis and his descendants Ogedei Khan, Guyuk Khan & Kublai Khan concurred China, Mid Asia and Eastern Europe. But Yuan Dynasty, although being based in China, was a part of the Mongolian Empire.
    Then came year 1800, the Century of Humiliation. Britain smuggled opium into China to dope the population, a strategy to turn the trade deficit around, after the British could not find enough silver to pay the Qing Dynasty in their tea and porcelain trades and the doping went on for over 30 years. After the opium warehouses were burned down and ports were closed by the Chinese in ordered to curb opium, the British started the Opium War I, which China lost. Hong Kong was forced to be surrendered to the British in a peace talk (Nanjing Treaty). The British owned 90% of the opium market in China, during that time, Queen Victoria was the world’s biggest drug baron. The remaining 10% was owned by American merchants from Boston. Many of Boston’s institutions were built with profit from opium.
    After 12 years of Nanjing Treaty, the West started getting really really greedy. The British wanted the Qing government:
    1. To open the borders of China to allow goods coming in and out freely, and tax free.
    2. Make opium legal in China.
    Insane requests, Qing government said no. The British and French (with supports from the US), started Opium War II with China, which again, China lost. The Anglo-French military raided the Summer Palace, and threatened to burn down the Imperial Palace, the Qing government was forced to pay with ports, free business zones, 300,000 kilograms of silver and Kowloon was taken. Since then, China’s resources flew out freely through these business zones and ports. In the subsequent amendment to the treaties, Chinese people were sold overseas to serve as labor.
    In 1900, China suffered attacks by the 8-National Alliance. These 8-Robbers were: Empire of Japan, Russian Empire, British Empire (including India), France, USA, Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary. Innocent Chinese civilians in Peking (Beijing now) were murdered, buildings were destroyed & women were raped. The Imperial Palace was raided, and treasures ended up in museums like the British Museum in London and the Louvre in Paris.
    In late 1930s China was occupied by the Japanese in WWII. Millions of Chinese died during the occupancy. 300,000 Chinese died in Nanjing Massacre alone.
    Mao brought China together again from the shambles. There were peace and unity for some time. But Mao’s later reign saw sufferings and deaths from famine and power struggles.
    Then came Deng Xiao Ping and his infamous “black-cat and white-cat” story. His preference in pragmatism than ideologies transformed China. This thinking allowed China to evolve all the time to adapt to the actual needs in the country, instead of rigidly bounded to ideologies. It also signified the death of Communism in actually practice in China. The current Socialism+Meritocracy+Market Economy model fits the Chinese like gloves, and it propels the uprise of China. Singapore has a similar model, and has been arguably more successful than Hong Kong, because Hong Kong being gateway to China, was riding on the economic boom in China, while Singapore had no one to gain from.
    In just 30 years, the CPC have moved 800 millions of people out from poverty. The rate of growth is unprecedented in human history. They have built the biggest mobile network, by far the biggest high speed rail network in the world, and they have become a behemoth in infrastructure. They made a fishing village called Shenzhen into the world’s second largest technological centre after the Silicon Valley. They are growing into a technological power house. It has the most elaborate e-commerce and cashless payment system in the world. They have launched exploration to Mars. The Chinese are living a good life and China has become one of the safest countries in the world. The level of patriotism in the country has reached an unprecedented height.
    For all of the achievements, the West has nothing good to say about it. China suffers from intense anti-China propagandas from the West. Western Media used the keyword “Communist” to instil fear and hatred towards China.
    Everything China does is negatively reported.
    They claimed China used slave labor in making iPhones. The truth was, Apple was the most profitable company in the world, it took most of the profit, leave some to Foxconn (a Taiwanese company) and little to the labor.
    They claimed China was inhuman with one-child policy. At the same time, they accused China of polluting the earth with its huge population. The fact is the Chinese consume just 30% of energy per capita compared to the US.
    They claimed China underwent ethnic cleansing in Xinjiang. The fact is China has a policy which priorities ethnic minorities. For a long time, the ethnic minorities were allowed to have two children and the majority Han only allowed one. The minorities are allowed a lower score for university intakes. There are 39,000 mosque in China, and 2100 in the US. China has about 3 times more mosque per muslim than the US.
    When terrorist attacks happened in Xinjiang, China had two choices:
    1. Re-educate the Uighur extremists before they turned terrorists.
    2. Let them be, after they launch attacks and killed innocent people, bomb their homes.
    China chose option 1 to solve problem from the root and not to do killing. How the US solve terrorism? Fire missiles from battleships, drop bombs from the sky.
    During the pandemic, when China took extreme measures to lockdown the people, they were accused of being inhuman.
    When China recovered swiftly because of the extreme measures, they were accused of lying about the actual numbers.
    When China’s cases became so low that they could provide medical support to other countries, they were accused of politically motivated.
    Western Media always have reasons to bash China.
    Just like any country, there are irresponsible individuals from China which do bad and dirty things, but the China government overall has done very well. But I hear this comment over and over by people from the West: I like Chinese people, but the CPC is evil. What they really want is the Chinese to change the government, because the current one is too good.
    Fortunately China is not a multi-party democratic country, otherwise the opposition party in China will be supported by notorious NGOs (Non-Government Organization) of the USA, like the NED (National Endowment for Democracy), to topple the ruling party. The US and the British couldn’t crack Mainland China, so they work on Hong Kong. Of all the ex-British colonial countries, only the Hong Kongers were offered BNOs by the British. Because the UK would like the Hong Kongers to think they are British citizens, not Chinese. A divide-and-conquer strategy, which they often used in Color Revolutions around the world.
    They resort to low dirty tricks like detaining Huawei’s CFO & banning Huawei. They raised a silly trade war which benefits no one. Trade deficit always exist between a developing and a developed country. USA is like a luxury car seller who ask a farmer: why am I always buying your vegetables and you haven’t bought any of my cars?
    When the Chinese were making socks for the world 30 years ago, the world let it be. But when Chinese started to make high technology products, like Huawei and DJI, it caused red-alert. Because when Western and Japanese products are equal to Chinese in technologies, they could never match the Chinese in prices. First world countries want China to continue in making socks. Instead of stepping up themselves, they want to pull China down.
    The recent movement by the US against China has a very important background. When Libya, Iran, and China decided to ditch the US dollar in oil trades, Gaddafi’s was killed by the US, Iran was being sanctioned by the US, and now it’s China’s turn. The US has been printing money out of nothing. The only reason why the US Dollar is still widely accepted, is because it’s the only currency which oil is allowed to be traded with. The US has an agreement with Saudi that oil must be traded in US dollar ONLY. Without the petrol-dollar status, the US dollars will sink, and America will fall. Therefore anyone trying to disobey this order will be eliminated. China will soon use a gold-backed crypto-currency, the alarms in the White House go off like mad.
    China’s achievement has been by hard work. Not by looting the world.
    I have deep sympathy for China for all the suffering, but now I feel happy for them. China is not rising, they are going back to where they belong. Good luck China.

    • Umar Jongi
      Umar Jongi 2 months ago +2

      thanks my friend Malaysia&China

    • gary euscher
      gary euscher 2 months ago +1

      WUMAO has arrived!

    • cavaradossi
      cavaradossi 2 months ago +1

      That's Chat GPT talking. Pure BS.

    • Quasi Motto
      Quasi Motto 2 months ago +1

      @cavaradossi I've heard of Chat GPT, of course, but I don't have any experience with it.
      So is this what we can expect..........eloquently, well-written lies? LOL

  • Blackbird
    Blackbird Month ago +3

    Correction .John Mearsheimer did not believe Russia would attack the Ukraine....he admitted he did not expect Russia to invade......pre February 2022

    • Долгова Наталья
      Долгова Наталья Month ago

      100% correct. I remember him saying Putin will not hit first. He doesn't know one of his famous sayings "if you see someone is going to hit you - hit him first".

  • William Bustos
    William Bustos Month ago

    All wars end with political resolutions.

  • Le Jaquerie
    Le Jaquerie Month ago

    Imagine Russia conquers the whole of Ukraine. Russia will still have NATO bulwarks directly on their new Russian occupied Ukrainian border. Therefore, by this logic, they will invade Poland for the very same reasons they invaded Ukraine.

  • J DU
    J DU Month ago

    A Korea like situation is not "the best solution we can hope for." It may take the elimination of most or all of Ukraine as we know it to solve this at the bargaining table. Russia, which is not a "weak great power,' will not use nuclear weapons to achieve this, as it is taking on and defeating all of NATO on its own terms, without need for military help from China. As for India, Mearsheimer is all wet, as India has nothing to gain by allying with the US, which has nothing to offer, and everything to gain, despite hyping of the non-existent "China threat," by joining the rapidly emerging BRICS monetary system. He seems in denial regarding the increasing isolation of the United States, vis-a vis the global majority.

  • Nader Khalighi
    Nader Khalighi 2 months ago +9

    I believe in the long run , India cannot continue its opportunistic game. Road and belt it is the reality and will go ahead and India has noenough energy sources and west is not going to give " How to" . Mostly US is playing India, which is now nothing more than a source of cheap labour.

    • 19SaD82
      19SaD82 2 months ago +5

      As India is a democracy and China isn't (Noticed that I didn't mention Russia? That's because Russia became a non-entity; totally unimportant for anything political related if it's not sanctioned by China), don't build your hopes on BRICS too much. It's not just those constant border disputes with China that ends with injured and killed indian people - it's the whole system. Democracies and authoritarian regimes don't get along for a long time. Sooner or later the authoritarian will show why he is authoritarian in the first place.
      (And no authoritarian regime lives forever.)

  • mats forsberg
    mats forsberg Month ago +1

    Russia do have the capability to take the hole of Ukraine. They will also throw out NATO of it´s bordering countries in the west (Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland and Finland. Would NATO stop it´s support to Ukraine now and stop throwing gasoline on the fire, Putin will stop his offensive some 150 km from it´s newly required borders of eastern Ukraine. Otherwise NATO and the US dollar and political/military hegemony will be a memory in history.

  • Ngand'osamba lundula
    Ngand'osamba lundula Month ago +1

    With all due respect to you, Prof Mearsheimer, may I suggest that you refer to any other power as being a weak power with restricted limitations. According to your own assertions, Russia is unable to conquer Ukraine and by extension Western Europe. Now was/were the States able to conquer North Korea, Vietnam, Lybian, Syria, ... and recently Afghanistan? Aren't these failed situations by the militarily mighty of this world an irrefutable admission that no single country or even a group of countries shall ever rule Planet Earth single-handedly?

  • jakim7720747
    jakim7720747 2 months ago

    Seeing n Hearing the Prof acknowledged tat INDIA 🇮🇳 is no super Power... more so INDIA should pursue Military Tech, All Sectors Tech. Instead of bickering policies n politics....monies politics😅

  • Jordan Thomson
    Jordan Thomson Month ago

    What China threat is John talking about

  • Lutherus P-XCs
    Lutherus P-XCs 2 months ago +5

    If Ukraine cant breakthrough Russian lines then yeah the map will stay the same. The best time to push Russia out has probably passed after mobilization. For Ukraine to push now would be extremely bloody, best chance is for Russia to collapse politically and then leaving the territory as a result

    • Wolfvale
      Wolfvale 2 months ago +2

      Lutherus has not bothered to look at what tactics NATO forces have employed to deal with entrenched troops in the past.
      In Iraq they used bulldozers to bury thousands of Iraqis in their trenches and just kept right on going. There is no question they will breakthrough.

    • Moon Dog
      Moon Dog 2 months ago +4

      Russia wont collapse politically little sign of that.

  • Alana Lam
    Alana Lam Month ago

    The host cannot speak without saying "if you will".

  • yoseph andika
    yoseph andika 2 months ago +22

    actually US should focus on itself first, there is mounting problem inside US and their peoples need attention from their government too

    • Tesfaye Kenea
      Tesfaye Kenea 2 months ago

      Where do u think is the balance? Or, just forget Russia-Ukraine?

    • Scott Davis
      Scott Davis Month ago

      You think the US can focus on only one thing at a time? 🙄

    • Amateur_Football
      Amateur_Football Month ago

      We can't just focus on ourselves, we live in a globalized world were events outside the country impact the country, there must be a balance and frankly I don't want the government to get even more involved in my life

  • TV Gerbil
    TV Gerbil 20 days ago +1

    Russia wants 20% of Ukraine, most of Ukraine's coastal access to the Black Sea, and a large portion of the Ukraine's natural resources. If Mearsheimer thinks Ukraine will ever settle with that, he is quite insane.

  • Demoj Rovtlinsky
    Demoj Rovtlinsky Month ago +1

    3:45 - Why then didn’t Russia accept Ukraines offer to never join NATO and remain neutral over security guarantees during peace talks in Istanbul, Turkey?
    This clearly shows that, even if NATO concerns were a reason to invade them, it certainly wasn’t the only one. Maybe not even the main reason.

  • Noel Burke
    Noel Burke Month ago

    He not telling us anything that people can't figure out fir themselves

  • Nick
    Nick Month ago +1

    The fact is Putin is surrounded by Nato now 😅

  • Anson Pui
    Anson Pui Month ago

    The one attacked at Nordstream says it all, everyone is skeptical about the USA

  • Vincent Croft
    Vincent Croft 2 months ago +20

    Russia is not weak, but it is about one against too many 😔😔🔥

    • Maria Adele Cagna
      Maria Adele Cagna 2 months ago +4

      Chapeau!!! Well said!!

    • cavaradossi
      cavaradossi 2 months ago +5

      Russia is weak. Very weak, not to mention militarily inept.

    • Raul Cardenas
      Raul Cardenas 2 months ago +8

      @cavaradossi :ignoramus...

    • cavaradossi
      cavaradossi 2 months ago +2

      @Raul Cardenas don't be so hard on yourself. You're (probably) smarter than you think..

  • Suraj Sharma
    Suraj Sharma Month ago

    John u are on point USA needs Russia not the other way around...!

  • LibertyMatrix
    LibertyMatrix 2 months ago +5

    "Today the people of these 4 regions became our citizens, forever." ~Russian President, Vladimir Putin

  • WDLC1911
    WDLC1911 Month ago

    Weak until the West pushes too far then 💥

  • B Ilic
    B Ilic Month ago

    Maybe if the Ukrainian army cracks completely I can see a division at the dnipro river.

  • jakim7720747
    jakim7720747 2 months ago +3

    INDIA 🇮🇳 if SMART should be expanding Military Hardwares....😅 Miltary Tech, All tech

    • Chris Wong
      Chris Wong 2 months ago

      Russia is India military supplier since 1950's, thanks to USA.

    • Sailendra Pamidi
      Sailendra Pamidi Month ago

      India is working on becoming self reliant in defence - which is currently underway. That does not necessarily exclude co-operation with another country - in this case Russia. The US and other western powers have historically not only denied weapons and technology but actively funded states like Pakistan in exporting terrorism to India. Russia and its predecessor - USSR have come to India’s help time and again which explains them being India’s major defence supplier.

  • Dong Hai Nguyen Thanh

    It is very to predict the past …