John Helmer: Trump’s 3 Stages of War, on Venezuela, Russia, Iran, etc.

John Helmer: Trump’s 3 Stages of War, on Venezuela, Russia, Iran, etc.

28 October 2025, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

I boldface below his explanation of it against Venezuela (beginning at 38:50), but start with Helmer’s discussion of the sanctions warfare-stage which is being used to bring down Russia right now, which is the sanctions-stage.

https://www.youtube.com/live/TrYzszXZXVQ?t=1025s

“John Helmer: Burevestnik MOMENT”

Dialogue Works, 28 October 2025

17:05

INTERVIEWER: Donald Trump came out and said

17:06

that there were lines in gas stations in Russia. People are in line and to which

17:12

wasn’t as we I’ve learned from Larry Johnson. Larry Johnson was in Russia and

17:17

he was filming some areas that he was in

17:22

those areas and he said there is nothing that sore as he perceived it in Russia

17:28

in Moscow. But when it comes to the larger understanding of NATO, of Trump

17:34

administration, Europeans, do they really understand what is the conditions? What are the conditions in

17:40

Russia today? HELMER: Um,

17:48

I’m pausing because you’re asking, do they really understand? Is there an intelligence

17:55

assessment? Do the principles of the NATO leadership understand? Um, does

18:02

Trump himself understand that when they speak of the vulnerability of the

18:07

Russian economy, do they actually believe the Russian economy is as

18:12

vulnerable um as they say? Um, I believe they can’t make a mistake

18:21

about the the Russian economic situation. Uh I’ve explained myself that there have

18:29

been gasoline shortages especially in the southwest.

18:34

Um Larry Johnson did not leave Moscow and what he saw in Moscow is not um

18:43

an effective description of the nature of the petrol shortages. These were real

18:51

and they caused an increase in um petroleum product pricing and they’ve

18:58

been thoroughly admitted and thoroughly analyzed by the Russian press. INTERVIEWER: Sorry for interrupting you, John. Was it

19:05

because of those attacks, Ukrainian and NATO attacks on the infrastructure in Russia or the outcome [of] something else?

19:14

HELMER: Certainly there’s been some impact on refinery output but is in the dancers

19:20

with bears report I produced it’s clear that it was logistic problems, the

19:27

problem of getting the fuel from the refineries, about 30% of refinery output

19:34

was briefly let’s say from 7 to 14 days um suspended. In that period of time

19:42

there was a logistic problem of moving the fuel from the refineries producing

19:48

it in surplus areas to deficit areas. So there was a gasoline shortage

19:55

particularly concentrated among independent gas stations or petrol

20:00

stations not on the mainstream large oil company gas stations and not in Moscow

20:07

but there’s been um also a people taking advantage inside

20:14

the industry and consumers people when you face that and all of us are the same

20:20

you hoard you stock up and hoarding on the part on the commercial side meant um

20:28

individuals middlemen exploiting short uh spot shortages, regional shortages,

20:34

southwest shortage shortages in order to make bigger margins for selling petrol

20:40

and gas and other fuels elsewhere. So all of those problems were real.

20:48

One has to understand that Russia has the capacity to resolve its problems quickly and it has but is resolving the

20:56

gasoline shortage. It has to defend its refineries. So uh we can get on to it.

21:03

The new sanction hits refineries. It hits approximately a third of the

21:09

Russian refineries, the Rosneft refineries and the Lukoil refineries in their export capability. and it hits

21:16

petroleum products, exports especially not to Russia not to China and India

21:22

though they’re big buyers of petroleum products, but to Turkey. We can come back to that in a minute. The, your your

21:29

question, was is the Russian economy vulnerable to war

21:36

and the answer is no, and the answer I’ve tried to explain in print

21:43

is: what the Russians say the biggest damage and comes from Mikhail Delyagin,

21:50

a major voice on economic policy in the state Duma, a former Yelen economist, one

21:56

of the best and most critical of the opposition economists Mikhail Delyagin is

22:02

saying the biggest damage to the Russian economy is not coming from the war,

22:08

that’s the drones the drone attacks, or from the sanctions, it’s come from um

22:14

Governor Nabulina and the Russian central bank. Why? Because, and I don’t believe Larry

22:21

Johnson spoke of this, the Russian central bank has been running

22:26

extraordinarily high interest rates and Nabi has refused to reduce them. the

22:34

most recent central bank uh rate cut and it’s come down from 22 to 20 and it was

22:42

lowered to 16.5% on October the 24th. The current central

22:49

bank policy is to reduce Russian economic growth to zero. Let me explain.

22:56

And this is the damage to the Russian economy and it’s endorsed by the president [Putin] and

23:03

Kremlin. Let me read you what um Nabulina describes as the policy. I’m

23:12

just reading you the Bank of Russia key rate cut statement of 24 of October.

23:19

Quotes, “The upward deviation of the Russian economy from a balanced growth

23:26

path is narrowing.” That’s what is meant by zero growth.

23:33

Zero growth. And she’s announced that um there are one-off factors

23:41

causing this, the inflation against which she maintains these crushingly

23:47

high investments-stopping interest rates. One

23:52

is oneoff factors increase motor fuel prices. There’s no doubt the central

23:58

bank recognizes shortage inflationary expectations at the gas pump. She also

24:04

recognizes that inflation has been driven by the state by the increased uh

24:11

increase in the VAT from 20% to 22%.

24:16

These are war taxes if you like. But the the impact of crushing the economy to

24:23

zero is coming from the central bank. And in this I’m turning the page on this

24:29

statement. Um the uh what what um

24:36

Nabiulina’s statement says is essentially she’s against the

24:41

continuation of the war. One of the inflation drivers she says is

24:47

deterioration in the terms of external trade. That’s the central banker way of

24:53

saying um US and European sanctions are causing disruption of the terms of

25:00

external trade. In other words, the central bank is acting to reinforce the

25:06

external threats. And in this new statement, um I’m

25:12

reaching for various bits of paper in which she says it. She’s saying in 2026

25:19

we’ll have the same level of central bank interest rate. Now, every

25:24

significant business voice and consumers too object to this level of central bank

25:32

interest, but President Putin has continued to defend her. And she insists

25:38

that this uh 50 basis points cut of this past week

25:45

will be all she’ll do because next year she aims at maintaining this very high

25:51

interest rate. And that’s the principle as to go back to Diyagin’s

25:57

uh statement, the principal threat to the Russian economy. Does the do the

26:02

NATO powers does the United States understand these are self-inflicted wounds which can be changed which aren’t

26:10

responsive to their war making? Um they probably do, but they certain uh they

26:18

certainly don’t say so.

26:24

INTERVIEWER: John, you’ve mentioned the situation with Turkey. It’s not just about Turkey, you know, the pressure from the United

26:30

States on Hungary, Turkey, they’re talking about

26:35

Croatia, Croatia and you know it’s a

26:41

the way it’s not just about they were talking about China and India. It seems that these are two big you know giant

26:50

countries that is so much difficult for the United States to put lot of pressure

26:55

on them without having some sort of repercussions in their economy.

27:01

But when it comes to the countries like Turkey, Hungary, you know, Slovakia and

27:07

these countries, how can they, you know, put pressure on them? Here is before

27:12

going to that here is what Matt Whitaker the the US ambassador said about that.

27:20

What what he said on Fox is “Our expectation is that countries

27:25

like Hungary uh Turkey and Slovakia that continue to buy Russian oil and gas will

27:32

come up with a plan and execute a plan that weens them off of Russian oil and gas.

27:37

And you know, Hungary, uh, unlike many of their neighbors, has, uh, not made

27:42

any plans or made any active steps. And so, we’re going to continue to work with them, and we’re going to continue to work with their neighbors like Croatia

27:49

and other countries that can help them, uh, wean themselves off. And, you know, obviously that pipeline is most likely

27:54

to be shut off in the coming years as well. And so, there’s a lot of um, planning that our friends in Hungary

28:01

should do. and and we’re going to help them obviously as a good ally uh make those plans and execute them to get them

28:06

off of Russian oil and gas.” So, how far would the West or let’s put

28:12

it this way, the Trump administration would go in that direction to put pressure on them?

28:18

HELMER: As far as they think they can um as far as they are currently attempting to do.

28:25

Um it’s one issue um to uh talk up the threats. Um the Croatia problem is

28:35

serious for Serbia because Serbia has been sanctioned um through the secondary

28:40

sanctions with the US to block its um oil and gas companies, state companies

28:47

from buying from Gazprom. And uh so let’s go back. Um there was

28:56

to some extent um the reaction to the US oil sanction

29:03

of of um saying it’s an unserious one. And one of the podcasters I heard say

29:10

that it’s it’s unserious and ineffectual because it sanctions Rosneft and

29:16

Lukoil’s um assets in the United States since those companies don’t have significant assets in the United States.

29:23

The sanction is is uh tokenism not not real. Uh this is to misunderstand that

29:30

the sanctions the oil sanction against Rosneft and Lukoil is has its bite at the

29:39

secondary level and you mentioned it. Um, China and India are the principal

29:45

buyers of crude oil and they’re the targets of uh the US sanction to cut off

29:52

as uh Ambassador Whitaker just said, to cut off Russian oil and gas trade or in

29:59

this case oil trade with um its principal buyers of crude which are

30:06

China, India uh then a very small amounts by the the EU, Turkey

30:11

and finally a tiny amount from Myanmar. But the oil products uh trade is

30:18

different. Turkey’s the principal buyer of Russian oil products. That’s

30:24

jet fuel, gasoline, um diesel, um

30:30

boiler fuel, and so forth and bunkers for ships. Turkey’s the principal

30:36

importer of oil products followed by China Brazil and I’m reading from a

30:41

report of June July uh China Brazil India Singapore which re-exports

30:51

Russian oil products, Saudi Arabia the and the UAE, they’re all targets and as

30:57

Whitaker just said our aim is to destroy Russia’s capacity to trade

31:05

destroy it. That brings us to the level of warfare with Russia.

31:12

Uh that’s comparable to uh Franklin Delanor Roosevelt’s July and August 1941

31:19

sanctions on Japan. The first sanction July 26, 1941

31:26

froze all Japanese assets in the United States. Let’s call that comparable to the freeze

31:34

of uh Russian state assets, the 300 billion euro worth or dollar worth

31:40

freeze of 2022 immediately after the SVO started. Now we have an attempt to cut

31:48

off in its entirety all Russian exports of oil and petroleum products. Now um

31:57

that’s serious. It’s not unserious. It’s as serious as FDR’s attack on

32:05

Japanese oil. Um different circumstance. The Japanese

32:11

were oil dependent on oil import but uh Russia is e oil export um

32:20

dependent. Let me say that um the market first of

32:26

all the market doesn’t think this is going to work and that’s the important

32:32

thing. Um so I’ve I’ve put on uh the dancers with bears for for the audience

32:38

to watch the charts since it’s serious. The question is how

32:44

does the market for oil futures react and do they expect a shortage of supply

32:52

which would drive up price. Now, when President Putin was asked to respond to

32:57

Trump’s oil sanction, he made this point. If you like, we can

33:04

quote him, but essentially saying, I’ve explained, to Trump, I’ve explained to

33:09

Trump um that if you do this sort of thing, what you will do is curb the

33:16

supply of oil and oil products into the market when there’s no alternative

33:22

source of supply. If you shorten supply while demand remains constant or even

33:29

increasing or even decreases a little, either way, you disjoin

33:35

the relationship between supply and demand and you will trigger price rises.

33:40

Putin clearly said, “I warn Trump, if you disrupt the market this way, you will

33:46

get your car drivers will get sharply increased gasoline prices. And aren’t

33:52

you going into election next year? You want gasoline price inflation in the

33:59

United States as you run for election. That will have serious consequences for you.” So Putin has clearly explained

34:06

that. The market on the other hand, and I’ve provided the charts, I won’t

34:13

hold them up. Essentially is uh reacted the following way. There was a 3-day

34:20

price jump for oil futures for West Texas Intermediate, that’s the US oil

34:28

benchmark, and Brent crude. Both of them, the uh

34:35

WTI went up, and I’m looking at my uh charts. It initially went up about 10 to

34:42

12% in three days, but then it’s reversed and corrected. As of this

34:48

morning, WTI crude was um uh trading at

34:53

6.3% above its October 20, the pre-sanctions

34:59

level. So the market thinks um this uh that for WTI crude oil it’s a limited

35:08

supply disruption. Brent crude uh went up approximately 20 12% in the first

35:15

three days and is down to 6.5% now. Ural’s crude, which is the Russian

35:22

blend that’s exported, went up 11% in the first three days and

35:28

it hasn’t corrected yet. Now, what is the market saying? The market’s saying

35:34

you will fail to stop the trade. So, I asked uh my

35:41

sources to explain that and um I’ll I’ll just quote you what a Russian oil trade

35:49

source has told me from Dubai. Quotes. There’s no way to stop the oil. You You

35:56

only add more shipto- ship transfers and add some more percentage to the middlemen and off it goes. The point is

36:04

that while everyone, he means everyone in Russia is fixed on the Russian central bank interest rates, you in fact

36:11

have state and private oil companies and the whole system acting more secretively

36:17

than ever. The new sanction does not stop the oil moving into money. It just

36:23

makes it more difficult and that means more dollars per barrel for the middlemen. In Moscow, business, banking,

36:31

economic, and political circles, there’s confidence that the 10 percentage points everyone’s been making on oil deal

36:38

making off the books will continue. That’s the Trump effect. We Russians

36:44

aren’t ungrateful for it. In other words, what the oil sanction does is increase

36:52

black oil trading. And while you could discount

36:58

um this kind of trader excessive confidence, you might say,

37:05

there’s no discounting the market numbers. People who have to make a daily

37:11

living speculating on what the price of oil will be out 3 months, out six months

37:17

believe it will be very small. Why? because they agree the trade will become

37:24

blacker and uh ambassador uh Whitaker can say whatever he likes. He’s waving

37:31

his hands uh at the sea rolling in. The sea of oil will continue to roll. And

37:38

these uh Americans who think they can control that sea and force it to roll

37:44

back are false and faking and have an ambition they lack the power

37:51

to implement. INTERVIEWER: How do you connect the situation with

37:59

oil and with with what’s going on between the United States and Venezuela? Because the situation is getting

38:06

critical, John, and even let’s assume that the United States can do something

38:12

in Venezuela. Bringing Venezuela to the market, it’s going to take time. It’s

38:17

not going to be tomorrow and you know in two months and three months. It’s going to take time.

38:24

How can we understand that? It seems that if they go in that direction, it seems to me that they have a longterm

38:31

strategy in fighting Russia. That would be the end game, you know, fighting and

38:37

the continuation of the conflict as Zelensky is talking about in the, you know, he’s planning for the next three

38:44

years to come to to fight Russia. Yes, your take on that?

38:50

HELMER: I agree with you, Nima. Um, they’re all of the same pattern, but at different

38:56

stages of war making. Now, let me make a general point. Then let’s come to the

39:02

Venezuelan issue. It’s very important we talk about Venezuela.

39:07

Um, for every one of Trump’s what is it 8, nine or 10 so-called peacemaking

39:13

moves as he counts them, um, there’s been a a a Trump wararm making move.

39:19

Okay. And um  these {TRUMP’S WARS] have basically

39:24

uh I think we can say three stages. First, Trump starts with a kill them

39:32

dead talk. And his statement that about so-called

39:38

Venezuelan drug smugglers, which we’ll come back to in a minute, is a complete lie, was we kill them dead. We kill them

39:46

dead. He said it. That’s the sort of talk which when combined with um

39:53

sanctions, attacks on economic sectors like the Venezuelan capability to export

39:59

oil um they’re called sanctions against an enemy. They’re called tariffs when

40:05

they’re applied to neutral or allied states. At that stage um Trump’s war is

40:11

essentially trying to trigger a domestic surrender. domestic surrender um led by a fifth

40:19

column of politicians or businesses or government and security agencies,

40:25

generals and policemen um which have been cultivated over the years by the Central Intelligence Agency or the State

40:32

Department, the Pentagon. And the fifth column has to be mobilized first. We saw

40:39

it as Israel and Mossad tried to do for regime change in Iran at the beginning

40:44

of the June war. What happened? We’ve seen in Venezuela, you have first um the

40:52

Guad candidacy opposed to the the elected government and now we have the

40:57

Nobel Prize winning uh woman Machado. uh these are the fifth columnists

41:04

established by the United States inside Iran or Venezuela or whatever the target

41:11

may be that Russia’s had uh its um Alexi Nalli and others.

41:18

The fifth column approach combined with kill them dead talk combined with

41:24

economic sanctions is Trump’s first war makingaking stage. Second war making stage happens when the

41:31

fifth column um candidates fail to mobilize effectively as was the case

41:37

with Gaido. Uh what uh what happens uh with

41:43

effective resistance is negotiations.

41:48

Trump then sounds sends out special emissaries. Uh it was Richard Grenell in

41:54

Venezuela. It was Steven Witkoff with Iran. It’s been Steven Witkoff with

41:59

Russia. It was Kushner and Witkoff uh with Israel and Gaza. These special

42:06

emissaries um then combine a combin bribes

42:12

uh threats threats of more violence uh and try to develop a term sheet on which

42:18

this so-called peace can be arranged. uh when that fails, when resistance to

42:25

the American negotiating terms proves solid,

42:31

as it has been everywhere, including Iran, Venezuela, Hamas, and Russia, of

42:37

course, China and India, of course, North Korea, of course, when that when

42:43

the resistance proves too strong, Trump has a problem. And he solves the

42:49

problem either by escalating to a massive violent strike as he used

42:56

against Iran or a buildup of preparation for violence

43:02

as he’s using against Venezuela right now as we speak. Or he retreats.

43:08

He retreats undercover of a smoke screen of one kind or another. ceasefire is one

43:14

of the smoke screens he’s used in in these various war making stages in the

43:20

past. So let’s go then back to we’re at stage three Trump wararm making with

43:26

Venezuela. What’s really happening? Well, we know that Admiral Horsley,

43:36

the command the commander of operations in Viet in Venezuela has resigned rather

43:42

than proceed to command what and he hasn’t said it, but you’ve had a

43:49

podcasters um explain it and it’s true. Horsely

43:54

believed, as do many uh US generals in command, that the commanderin-chief’s

44:02

orders are illegal and unconstitutional.

44:07

And Horsesley’s had the bravery to resign. You recall and we talked about

44:13

it last time uh President Trump ordered 800 of these general staff officers to

44:19

assemble in front of him and said to say if you don’t want to obey you can leave

44:24

the room and Horley didn’t leave the room but he did later. So, where are we?

44:31

To date, as I’ve counted it, there have been nine separate military strikes by

44:36

US drones or missiles on supposed Venezuelan drug runners. The

44:43

war against drugs isn’t a new war against uh a target in the United

44:49

States. I wrote a book 50 years ago uh about the wars against drugs since 1880

44:57

and 90 in California. Nothing new there. This time the drug

45:03

war is a camouflage, a smokeokc screen for regime change in Venezuela. Everybody listening understands that. Um

45:11

but the attacks themselves and Trump has shown off um the skill, the video of

45:19

hitting a a a speedboat or an alleged submarine and blowing it up. None of

45:26

them have been identified with any exact geographical coordinates. We know at

45:31

least two of the nine occurred in the in the in the Pacific Ocean. Now, Venezuela

45:37

doesn’t have a Pacific coastline. Um, so there’s no reliable mapping to

45:45

show that the people on board were in Venezuelan waters as claimed. I’m just

45:51

flipping my page to look at a couple of maps that I’ve put up on the website. So

45:57

investigative reporting which is principally Spanish media not the US media not even the alternative media in

46:05

the United States have come up with the evidence but the evidence is there’s no evidence of drug smuggling drug cargos

46:14

or the capacity of these speedboats to move any cargo

46:20

a thousand nautical miles north to the nearest Florida coastline. So the claim

46:26

that they represented the United States is a lie. It’s a fake.

46:31

Um what we do know and it’s very interesting from the two survivors of the October 16 so-called submarine

46:39

strike were their nationality. One of them a man called Andres Fernando

46:45

Tofino is Ecuadorian and he’s been sent back.

46:50

He’s lucky he wasn’t killed on board the US ship that rescued him or killed in

46:55

the water because he provides evidence that he wasn’t in Venezuelan waters and

47:04

wasn’t part of any kind of Venezuelan scheme. Of course, they Ecuadorians

47:10

including his family and CNN to its credit has published an interview with his sister

47:16

claims he was a simple fisherman. Well, simple fishermen don’t get paid very much in these countries and may very

47:23

well carry cargos that are contraband. Cornwall as a county in England uh had

47:29

several hundred years of living off contraband. Is there a threat drug threat from

47:37

Venezuela um from Mr. Tofino? No, there wasn’t.

47:43

Was he acting with Ecuadorian and or Colombian uh drug smugglers

47:50

towards the United States? Maybe he was, but he was not Venezuelan. The other

47:55

survivor was Colombian, a man called Orban Orando Perez. He’s been uh

48:02

repatriated to Colombia in serious uh condition, physical condition, but

48:09

there’s no evidence that either of them were either Venezuelan in origin or hit

48:17

attacked in Venezuelan waters or represented what Trump is using as his

48:25

case for war against Venezuela. So even if one went to the trouble of doing more

48:31

than I’ve just quoted you based on El Pais and other media investigations

48:37

showed that Trump is a liar. Trump is faking. Uh what’s what’s new about Russ

48:44

of the United States going to war against countries with fakes after all. Lyn and Baines Johnson fabricated the

48:50

so-called Vietnamese attack on a US warship in the Gulf of Tonkin in order to uh justify

48:58

the so-called surge into Vietnam that began the major Vietnam war operations

49:05

in which the Vietnamese resistance the Vietkong and the North Vietnamese army defeated the US army. So the we have

49:13

reached stage three with Viet with Venezuela and the question is will they be able to

49:19

defend themselves uh against the kinds of attacks that will come and what will come is it a

49:28

massive show of strength in order to frighten the Venezuelan people but will

49:33

not be used to attack. Um, that’s a possibility and where Trump would try to

49:40

mobilize Mrs. Machado to have some form of internal disruption

49:49

protest trigger some uh uh demonstration

49:54

um casualties self-inflicted possibly if if um

50:00

Maduro’s police don’t open fire. But uh agitators working for the CIA do and

50:07

we’ve seen that is is a is a a maidan type provocation to occur. If that were

50:15

to occur, we could very well understand the American uh script. Mrs. Machado may

50:22

be wounded. Um others may be killed and she will appeal for US intervention to

50:28

save lives. And then we can imagine Trump announcing to the American people

50:34

in the world, he’s intervening to save lives. And that’s what might happen. The

50:41

question then is whether the two principal powers be supporting the

50:49

Venezuelan economy, China, which is the heaviest in foreign investor in

50:54

Venezuela and the major recipient of Venezuelan oil. Um and Russia will

51:00

enable and help Maduro f first to deter such an American air intervention, the

51:08

dropping of special forces and so forth to deter it or to combat it because were

51:18

Trump to pull such an intervention would Trump be facing a bay of pigs and

51:26

that’s where we have to remind everybody. The one thing Trump thinks in

51:32

his three-stage war making is that he can demonstrate such an um a power to

51:39

obliterate. His word applied to Iran. Um that he can achieve peace through war.

51:48

But the one thing that curbs that ambition is the prospect of losing. The

51:55

prospect of facing casualties. The prospect that a US aircraft will be

52:00

downed. That a a marine or special forces or commando landing in Venezuela

52:08

will be met by unexpectedly heavy defense that wipes them out. A bay of

52:14

pigs. Can President Trump risk with Venezuela a bay of pigs? A bay of pigs

52:23

uh could be resisted by John F. Kennedy, though he himself didn’t last very long

52:28

after it. But Trump could not. A defeat of the Bay

52:34

of Pigs type on a Venezuelan shore would be dramatically damaging to the Trump

52:41

regime and to its entire three-stage war making means peacemaking

52:47

uh ideology. INTERVIEWER: Yeah,

52:52

John, we’ve learned yesterday from we’ve learned that a Russian aircraft

52:59

previously linked to Wagner group and

53:05

arrived in Venezuela which would bring some sort of question what is Russia doing in Venezuela or if Venezuela is

53:12

receiving some sort of aid from China, Russia, maybe Iran

53:18

and do you think Looking at the global south and their

53:25

reaction to what’s going on in Venezuela, do you think they reacting

53:31

in a proper way? HELMER:  Proper? Uh

53:38

we’ve entirely the world has lost propriety. No. uh we’re at war,

53:46

as you’ve said, throughout the global south, in Europe, and in the Far East

53:52

because there’s no end to these three-stage Trump wars mean peace operations. Called them imperialism for

54:00

short. Um, I have published for our audience to

54:08

follow up if they wish uh an account of of of Russian

54:14

uh relations with um the Maduro regime, the Maduro government and before that

54:22

the Chavez government. Um the

54:27

I’ve looked at the the terminology of commitments in the Russian Venezuelan

54:35

strategic partnership agreement which has just been ratified by the Russian side. It was ratified a month or so ago

54:43

on the Venezuelan side and signed earlier this year. Mr. Maduro was one of

54:48

the guests at the May 9 uh Red Square military parade.

54:55

Um there’s a reluctance on the part of the

55:01

Russian side and a even bigger reluctance on the part of the Chinese

55:07

side to explicitly um take Venezuela’s side in defense

55:16

against the United States. And our audience may have better documentation

55:22

than I have for tonight or this morning or this afternoon depending on where you are um of Chinese statements in support

55:31

of Venezuela under attack. But I haven’t seen any.

55:36

That doesn’t mean that secretly, quietly, both the the big powers and other

55:43

smaller powers with much greater uh capabilities of resistance like Iran

55:50

aren’t doing what they can. The issue remains secrecy and I have to say I

55:56

don’t myself know. Um, the issue for the

56:02

United States is what do their intelligence capabilities tell them

56:09

about the rising defense capability of

56:15

Venezuela to inflict a level of casualties which the United States uh

56:22

cannot accept cannot accept. A Bay of Pigs possibility.

56:28

Uh I don’t know the answer to that either. Uh

56:33

what President Putin is intent on doing is trying to resolve

56:40

the third stage war fighting threats from Trump right now and trying to hold

56:48

as much third world bricks uh support for um understanding his attempts to

56:56

negotiate a second stage settlement with Trump have failed. And as they fail,

57:06

the Russian side has to demonstrate its goodwill in seeking to defend itself.

57:13

Um, it is acting in all sorts of ways to

57:18

support Iran quietly. There is a let’s call it more explicit

57:26

strategic partnership with Iran but not as explicit in mutual defense as there

57:33

is between Russia and North Korea. That’s the strongest. Uh, an attack on

57:40

one is an attack on the other. Article five of the NATO pack type.

57:46

One for all, all for one uh security arrangement that exists between Russia

57:52

and North Korea, but hasn’t been tested yet. It does not exist

57:59

on the surface on the papers with Iran, but it is being tested to a level of

58:06

Russian uh deterrent capability against Israel

58:11

and another form of US attack. Is it being developed very quietly and

58:17

secretly with Venezuela? I don’t know.

58:27

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.