Tucker's Lavrov Interview
Overall, I doubt that many, if any, readers here were surprised at how the interview went. Tucker stuck to broadly diplomatic matters for the most part, and Lavrov responded in kind—that was to be expected. Lavrov isn’t a head of state, so you wouldn’t expect the kind of wide open, free wheeling interview that we saw with Putin. What Lavrov did accomplish, I think—and perhaps this is what Tucker wanted to accomplish—was to show that Russians, including the Russians that our Zionist rulers refuse to talk to, are reasonable and intelligent people. Not monsters. Overall, I thought Lavrov came across as less defensive, perhaps, than Putin did in speaking with Tucker (contrast Putin’s Tucker interview to his conversations with Oliver Stone). Perhaps Tucker has built up a degree of trust with the Russians, perhaps the context—a time of war—had made Putin a bit more wary. Obviously Lavrov is in his element in these types of exchanges.
From my standpoint, the most interesting part was when Tucker asked whether ending sanctions is a precondition for negotiations. Perhaps I was imagining, but I thought I sensed that Lavrov showed a bit of caution in his response. He definitely paused to gather his thoughts, a clear sign that Tucker had hit on a sensitive point. Lavrov’s response was that “probably many in Russia” would like to make an end to sanctions a precondition, but that Russia has learned from the sanctions that it’s best to be self reliant. I call that a hedge. He didn’t commit one way or the other on what is sure to be a big issue going forward. Perhaps Lavrov’s refusal to commit—polite to the point of urbanity—was a matter of national pride. Or perhaps he didn’t want to show Russia’s hand on this important matter. Or maybe his view is that the sanctions issue is one of those things that should take care of itself—if the American side is genuinely interested in a new relationship with Russia. A litmus test, if you will.
Here’s hoping that this very civil exchange will lead Trump’s team to adopt a constructive approach and drop the tough guy routine. If there was any broad takeaway, it was that the Russians remain open to talking—to adults.
Russia’s longtime foreign minister describes the war with the United States and how to end it.
(0:00) Is the US at War With Russia?
(12:56) Russia’s Message to the West Through Hypersonic Weapons
(17:47) Is There Conversation Happening Between Russia and the US?
(23:18) How Many Have Died in the Ukraine/Russia War?
(28:21) What Would It Take To End the War?
(36:11) What Happened to Alexei Navalny?
(39:45) Boris Johnson Wants the War to Continue
(45:43) Sanctions on Russia
(56:31) The Chinese/Russian Alliance
(1:02:18) Who Is Making Foreign Policy Decisions in the US?
(1:05:05) Biden Pushes the US Toward Nuclear War Before Trump Takes Office
(1:08:52) What’s Happening in Syria?
(1:13:08) Lavrov’s Thoughts on Trump
The Sirius Report @thesiriusreport
Sanctions clown show continues:
Russia has increased platinum exports to the US in October, reaching a two year high and accounting for almost one-third of all US platinum imports.
It was a very easy listen, Lavrov explains things with great economy.
Approximately several times Tucker jumps in with "SO WOULD YOU ESCALATE?" to a nuclear exchange and Lavrov patiently redirects his attention to deeper issues than what Tucker wants to hear.
Near the end, Lavrov explains his last exchange with Blinken at the G20 in 2022 in which Blinken said there was a "need to de-escalate" in Ukraine. Lavrov pointed out "we don't want to escalate, you want to inflict strategic defeat upon Russia." Blinken said "no, no, it is not strategic defeat, globally, it is only in Ukraine."
You know, some low-rent, no-account backwater of little strategic interest to Russia.
Tucker never says "Hmm, I see your point."
A little later Tucker asks, because he just won't quit, "SO HOW SINCERELY WORRIED ARE YOU, ABOUT AN ESCALATION IN THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE UNITED STATES?" Lavrov patiently redirects.
A little later Lavrov points out that Kirby very recently said, about escalation and whether nuclear weapons could be employed, "we don't want escalation because if there is some nuclear element then our European allies would suffer."
Lavrov continues, "So mentally, he excludes that the United States could suffer. This makes the situation a bit risky, if this mentality prevails, some reckless steps [by the US would be taken] and this is bad."
Tucker says "So what I think you're saying is that American policy makers imagine there could be a nuclear exchange that doesn't directly affect the US and you're saying that's not true."
Lavrov pauses. "That's what I said, yes, but no... to speak of limited exchange of nuclear strikes is an invitation to disaster which we don't want to happen."
I dunno, maybe if Lavrov put their updated nuclear doctrine on a teleprompter Tucker could read it all the way through? Maybe he could have said "we have written down our doctrine; think of it as a flow-chart, but with Russian sovereignty not American hegemony."