[000:00:00;00] news, [000:00:00;00] the wealth engine was a part a few years ago at close, connected conflicts with soldiers killing each other in near proximity. what's considered obsolete at least among militarily, advance nations. it was stopped on a remotely controlled west funds or part knuckles diploma. so you could deliver

a desired outcome without much blood spilling. but the war in ukraine clearly defied. that's wishful thinking. how is it changing the character of more than warfare? we'll discuss that. i'm now joined by alexander hills professor of military history at the university of calgary. professor hill is great to talk to you. now, i'm sure that when you were just embarking on this a specialization, academic specialization, you perhaps saw that wars bink worst for a thing of the past. at least, you know, wars that involve or a fact that there was directly and nowadays it's somewhat different. i wonder what it's like for and military historian to observe and try to analyze a war in which your country is also indirectly involved in real time. yeah, i mean it's simple to remember the west has been involved in a lot of for since i've seen one area. yeah. but i didn't impact. i assume they didn't impact your lifestyle demand. no, not particularly obviously they tend to be show was in some of them that the,

the enemies had a reasonable technological level. but i think that that's the main thing. but the west of the opponents didn't have was the murano often. now that doesn't apply necessarily say to the serbs, you know, if you look in detail of what happened to mucous lafayette, you know, this for example sub united defense is well, much more effective than say those in a rack for example. but you know, it was a short war. iraq, obviously the, it's not the most recent technology and 90 well, actually considered a war or was it something like uh, you know, some operation on the other side of the globe that, oh, i mean they were cold was and i think people treated them as was um, but was over the rather the was over here, i think obviously, i mean in canada for example, and in the u. k. unit they were seen as far away was where was obviously the war

and ukraine in europe. people say very differently. now conflicts have certain dynamics and people like yourself study those dynamics to hopefully you know, a bird, their worst case scenarios. and i wonder if that's still the case in the west, because i know people in many countries like and practiced in india, in china. the military is studying what's going on the front lines uh, between russian ukraine and very diligently. but i get a sense that the west only uses the the warfare for propaganda reasons do the inducing b specialist actually looking into it in a productive terms for their, their own sake. so that's a good question. i mean, uh, i was asked once by the american army to give a talk on the russian way of war. and i gave a talk and i don't know how well it went, went down, but i don't think it went down very well because i don't think i said what they want to hear. so i think in a way, i'm agreeing with you that you know that they want to,

that the study to some extent is changed by propaganda. even best study within the military. as i said, when i spoke to these, they said it was a sort of arms length organization from the american military. i said, you know, don't be, don't be fooled by what happened to the beginning of the war. that sort of thing often happens in the russian case, or in any way is what it is. i've heard the last thing. yeah. things go wrong with the beginning. the what you need to look at is how in the past is have recovered. and then look from what's going on. and i said this was back more than a year ago while a near to the year and off i said, and i loved the russian military because you've seen it recover and they look, they have a history of loading. they know how to learn from a conflict, and sure enough, this was, this was i think just after the ukrainian counter attacks. and there was this idea

or in west, the military's all we need to do is give the ukrainians a few more times and they'll be in moscow next week out. so that was clearly upset and i said it was going to be upset because, you know, i know i, i, i have knowledge about the russian military. i knew that, you know, things didn't necessarily go a 100 percent on the kids marxist bots. well, west and observe as ignore the is the actually things went quite well elsewhere. you know, in the don't boss, russia getting a lot of territory. and the important thing to remember is rush, it didn't have overwhelming number of troops. they only have roughly the same numbers ukrainian, so actually at the beginning of the war west of the west, the military. so focusing on, oh, this dash, the key of didn't work out what they ignored was that the russian army go a lot of territory very quickly. in other parts of you, frank, i know that you are an expert on uh, soviet military history and in soviet times um there was such a phrase as

a manageable uh confrontation. uh, this'll be in to the russians to i think of, i paid a lot of attention to making sure that even if there are in, in rivalry or inimical relationship with the west, that it's within the control. i wonder if the current level of conflict could be described as manageable? well, yeah, i mean, obviously there's a, there's a, there's a continued escalation that seems to be going beyond cold. well, no, i mean, obviously in the cold war there were many, many proxy was and that seems to have been a come section, particularly of the, the sort of skies of the cuban missile crisis that you reach a certain point and you don't go any further of interested in yeah, i mean, you don't, for example, you know, even if you've got some of mil, military personnel in a particular country, nominally fighting the other power, it's not something you publicize. it's all covert and preferably, you know, you, you, you, you help was

a side by providing them with weapons of equipment. and that's it. of course, we have a lot of rather dangerous tools at the moment in the west, off taking things further. i mean, obviously there's been escalation after escalation. we stopped it with all we're going to provide. there was a store for just defensive weapon rate. then it was offensive web for any of the tanks. of course, most of the defense, if the federally there was then that was do we send long range missiles? not then that was the at sixteen's which are going to get sent. and obviously this is, this continued escalation doesn't seem to be stopping for now, both the west and the same via credit and leadership. put the focus on military hardware. there is an assumption that if you will provide more military hardware than supposedly, if with keep the dynamic going or get some advantages for the ukraine is do you believe that to be the case? is that the, the biggest uh sort of field where they so waterville being lost for one. i'm not a 100 percent convince that west and miller trees are convinced that's all they need to do. obviously,

i was asked once to talk to them. they haven't asked me again, i don't think i said what they wanted me to. um, certainly the politicians have know what to run say they've already said that you know, we're in this until you train windows and so they have to keep supplying equipment whether or not they think it's actually going to lead to what they hope it well uh, behind the scenes and i've spoken to one to one or 2 military people. um, you know, they stop at the realize that the chances are that, that's what the politicians are saying. what would happen that, you know, as i would say, would you frame well, obviously be captive, certainly not from a, a certainly not much the don't boss. and in fact, i think now i must admit, in military circles in the west, there's this fear that actually, you know, the, your trains running out of manpower. and it doesn't really matter what we provide. you know, the russians are gaining ground bit by bit. and there's always a danger of a you finding and collapse of some sort. and then what, what would that mean for the west? well, that's where things get interesting, isn't it?

uh, that's when the crumbs sort of big ideas come in with the rest of the 1200 the well more because i, i mean, would they, would they send troops into the west of ukraine? would they sort of try and draw some line and say, you know, will send troops and if russian forces go beyond that line, i don't know, i didn't do you have a, any sense of the west having a strategy here because i mean, yours is uh, is it still the strategy of this is yeah, wars have been fought and won over centuries and you need to 1st of all understand what you're trying to figure out and whether you have the resources to get it. is there any, any signs that there is some calculus conscious calculus behind the scenes?

i get the impression there is okay, because the calculus a is that it's providing weapons to ukraine is a very cheap way in west, in terms of getting at russia. it doesn't really matter whether the ukrainians, when getting into russia, meaning exactly why well weakening russia. i mean, meaning, well, i'd really like some soldiers look to destroy in russian times, the more bold the better. hopefully they, you know, i think the west, the politicians hope they'll be obviously, and he can all make costs to russia having to spend more on defense, but hoping eventually they'll be a sort of political cost to too many soldiers being killed. and, you know, there is a, i mean it's become most a almost a cliche in the west, but this whole idea of a fight it to the last ukrainian there's some truth behind it. i mean, think about that for the american, the $60000000000.00 for the reason. a package. it's not a lot of money. a lot of that money stays within the united states in terms of the defense contract, as in the like, um, pulled up money that, you know,

they buy time, they prolong the wall. they keep rush of busy. you know, this is their, ultimately, that's what the west is doing, is all about you know, trying to preserve west and the heck again, many against the russian challenge. you pray that there's nothing, there were some challenges actually going after western hotel. no, that's the next the to there's a, there's a don't sense box way. but i mean, i, it's like a, it's the, it's about a russian challenge on the world stage. you know, cuz you know, i'm sure, obviously, but, you know, there was this feeling in the west after the, after the collapse of the soviet union that, you know, that were in amount of power the world. you know, that it's, that there's one world older. however, you want to phrase it, you're like what, what's difficult you understand about that is it's good to have power. it's good to have it done. and so i assume like if brings your any like many invited drugs, at least you would know how to use it for your own benefit. then when we look at the situation in the west,

i myself having cited there and having many friends there. i don't get a sense that's west and looters are using it for their own advantage. it's. it's almost like a, you know, an old curse. you have access to lots of power, but they are using it in a way that's totally destroyed as your society from with them. well, i agree that there might be long term consequences, but i think, you know, any politician knows that the short term gain to be had. but you're not some sort of uniting against anatomy, an external letting me. and so, you know, in a way that they loved the idea of russia being the extra atlanta may because the cold well, wasn't that long ago, lots of people remember it, particularly in north america. i say, i get the feeling that the cold war was taking a bit more seriously. need to say britain and to, you know, they were almost piggybacking on people's feelings from the previous cold war. and, you know, it's, it distracts people's attention from domestic politics. when you know, oh, you know, we've got to think about ukraine struggle for democracy that we,

you know, we thought to be a nice it in the face of the axis of evil. i've heard one of my colleagues describe, you know, russia, iran, china. so just the recent reports coming out of washington, the white house. yeah, i mean they understand the conception of, of that sort of axis of evil. but it's good to, you mentioned the, the issue of feelings i want to return to it. but after a short break,

we'll be back in just a few moments speech in the hi, i'm receptive and i'm here to plan with you whatever you do. do not watch my new show . seriously. why watch something that's so different. little opinions that he won't get anywhere else. welcome to please or do the have the state department c i a weapons makers, multi 1000000000 dollar corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead. change and whatever you do. don't want my show stay main street because i'm probably going to

make you, i'm comfortable. my show is called stretching time. but again, it's not. we don't want to watch it because it might just change the way inside the the welcome back joins the parts with alexander hills professor in the military history,

university of calgary for 1st. so she wasn't before the break. we started talking about the emotions and sort of uh, redirecting the old stereotypes of the soviet union as they say, nuclear armed boogeyman. and we see that trenton russia to uh, just nomics down because uh, the ethers of the grace, patriotic war has been resurrected the, during this complex. and i know this is one of your preferred subjects of study the soviet period. the, during the, or rather the soviet involvement in the 1st world wars. how do you think, uh, or those past experiences are affecting what's going on today between russia and the west, both militarily on the battlefield. and in terms of propaganda and messaging, there was a little bit talk in the west uh, in the, even into the early 2000. so, you know,

the russian army was outdated. and even within russia there was this idea that it was updated. they were obviously dennis was on the some extent and that they were there, they were the reform started at the end of in sort of 2008, 2009 period. and, you know, you know, in a way rush, the rushing on for us to stop, to, to move multiple, just sort of west and model of the more nimble of forces capable of dealing with terrorist threats. you know, smaller units getting rid of divisions of one point down, just making brigades. but i think it's fortunate, probably, militarily for russia though, that process didn't go too far because obviously, you know, it found itself fight to get more conventional war. it didn't go too far because of, for us has concerns about the nature of the schools and, you know, very soon they were recreating divisions and even color again. of, thankfully, you know, you, you and i both know the, in russia there's a sort of tendency to safe things for

a rainy day. and obviously the russian on forces save lots of equipment from the soviet period. and you know, that equipment still useful to pay in a wall, but is in some ways quite similar to the 2nd world war, obviously with chet technological changes. but you know, it's still relies on off hillary. and it doesn't really matter. whereas about that, some of this off hillary was manufactured in the seventy's or in the last 10 years it's still very useful kind of some whatever else. and i think it has a very um, russian and different from the west understanding of petrol, a component because just stay on the day put in was talking about how it's fun, the whole caught, which industry also has made drones that civil and fiercely as construct in san to the military unit. so there is a nation wide engagement in this war in either military sense or in like non governmental civil sense. people are collecting money,

they are sending military aid that like it involves the whole population and i get a sense of the, for the west. and it's, it's a totally different war. it's a, it's a propaganda worth of work. persuasion, you know, using all those stereotypes about, you know, the russians as orks and by a robot, etc. but without actually explaining to the people why this effort is important to the level. because for the russians it's, it's clear why, why they're fighting the this, what do you think people in the west understands why their money, you know, the money for those who haven't been gone into schools and yeah, this and why it's going there. i think, i think that the beginning people were willing to accept the idea that, you know, this is defending democracy. there's some sort of wall of democratic countries that rush just trying to smash through, you know, stopping with ukraine. but i don't think those those ideas are necessarily working in the west as well as they were. one of the reasons i think is, is what the,

because the war and when the boring causes started. because then then i think we, you know, when, when west and television showed, you know, thousands and thousands of civilians and goals are getting killed and fairly staunch west and support these riley side. i think that stopped it to undermine the sort of wide belief. and i'm on a minute what is what we're being told really accurate. i think people started to question more partly because about the reason being because although the west sort of prides itself on having this open press and whatever else. very difficult in the west for say something and get it in the mass media country to a sort of established political life squares on the gauze issue. that was a bit easier. and that sort of broke into that, that sort of broke, broke, this whole the media had on, on people. and it allows it really went out, or maybe you, if you mentioned people's believe that they leave in democracies,

but do they actually have the tools or, you know, any leverage to influence uh, what is being done in the name and the behalf. oh yeah. i mean, obviously a lot of people understand the democracy doesn't really allow a lot of info of west and style democracy doesn't allow a lot of influence for the people on the street. and then as in any country, some people say, oh, well whatever i, i'll just going with my life and i'm not really interested in international affairs, others across the united states that they think that they are concerned about it, but i feel, i suppose disenfranchised. i mean, if i take the example of canada, all 3 political major political policies, essentially pro war against russia. so yes, there's no voice in parliament. i've told saying, hang on a minute. we said donald as they canada doesn't spend as much on the wars the u. s, so the u. k. about, you know, nobody's really questioning. is this the right thing to do? it's a, it's a to boot. and yeah, i think

a lot of people just feel powerless. you know, there isn't a premium here in russia. that's one of the things that distinguishes western and rushing out to shoot through this war is the factor of fear. because russia having lost so much during the world war 2. and you know, e, you do not metabolize the collector of trauma like that in 2 or 3 generations. so like, visceral sierra would still be within the, like people's psych it is. yeah. and this is troubling because fear is actually, you know, it's a live saving motion. this is something that protects you against the, you know, decisions that would be too big as we have in, during the world war 2. so in a sense, i see it as a, as a contradiction that you say that's the old steward. types of the russians are being resurrected. you know, the fear factor is being resurrection, but somehow it's totally absent in decision making. that is, this fear and this fear obviously rushes

a long way away from canada. bit close to the britain. it's still, but the weapons still the quickly. i mean, i think the west, the military. well, the people who, what obviously they're a nuclear weapons that obviously there's some political reaction to the possibility there might say, even though we know the russian that has no funds to protect canada, for example, it's threatening the state, but kind of, there's has such a few in the army, it's no position to threaten anybody. suppose they have purity army bread. the allowed boy is allowed for the rest of the rest of his golf is allowed to, but it's, it's a lot of box but not much by but i mean obviously kind of this chosen for example, to finally spend money on the $35.00. that's billions of dollars is a huge piece of expenditure. and, you know, i hope that they wouldn't, is their own much better things to spend the money on this even talking canada of canada, buying new fis, upgrades which they've never had. now that may not have,

but it depends how long you know these tensions go on. so i think that is enough enough people have bought into this fear high data for that to be politically acceptable in canada. it's an abstract. there is a fear of do payable, but i mean the west and governments have been very careful to sort of play down the possibility of nuclear war because they want to keep escalates again. they realize that the fear of gabriel ball is one thing that names what might make west and population to start to question what's going on. so it's instrumental, i fear if, if you're for the politicians to get what they want. oh, you don't think it was, but if you like to disclose it is so yeah, they want to, they want to play off the, the sort of conventional threat that's, you know, if you're trying falls then special take the both the public some. but i really wants to play down the nuclear threat because they realize that something that people might get really concerned about. and you know,

they might be public pressure. it's all negotiations. but this is something that the number of freshman hardliners have raised recently that they, they need to be some real strife, perhaps with tactical nuclear weapons. so that this fear becomes a little bit more concrete ties for the western populations to put pressure on that leaders and stop, you know, sending weapons and the right pushing into our neighborhood. what do you think about that there the hotline is booted? there's no odd line there. in fact, one thing that i think west and audiences don't understand this in many ways. by the way, i purchased quite a moderate character, absolutely, the se allowed for western alliance. and they to alliance to push in the workforce . i don't know, that's why russia didn't invite me really weren't less of a hard like pull to be making those have had the ukrainian war. i mean, if you drew the line a little bit earlier. yeah, that's right. so, you know, pictures i'm old. right. he's in no rush to clearly to use nuclear weapons. you

know, i think, i think increasingly i, i get the impression and just from watching a lot of russian television speeches, you know, i think a lot to me putting feels a lot more in control of the situation. and perhaps you did, you know, earlier on in the wall and, you know, the west crude escalates, but, you know, they're reaching the point that there might be more serious consequences from an escalation. i mean, i personally don't think, but, you know, we're in the talking about tactical nuclear weapons, but my colleagues and i sometimes my sort of more reasonable colleagues and i sometimes talk about what would happen say if from states then some troops into it . right? so the height of nobody's going to use a nuclear weapon out for that. but for example, russia might, could use a few cruise missiles, feel a few french soldiers and say, hey, we're serious about this. you know, not a huge loss of life, but just to sort of cross cross the red line and say, you know what, you guys need to stand off. i think us, but sort of scenarios a lot more likely than nuclear weapons is big. talk about, you know,

maybe russia could explode a tactical nuclear weapon over the baltic, just the, so to show people, i think we're a long way away from that. well, if fruit is in charge of, i say he's the mother. he says, you know, he's looking very controlled, he's got control of the situation to fail. the task. obviously he's got pressure from the sort of hotline is, but you know, if they don't rule the right, i don't think he easily yields to pressure. but ultimately, you know, i think most moral ends and people would wanna this war to and in some sort of a compromise that would be good for the russians, for the ukrainians and for the west. and i wonder, and i guess this is my last question here. as long as the worst continues fighting this proxy war with the trying to get something without really enduring any consequences? do you think it's possible? well, i mean for the west it is as long as the ukrainians keep fighting and dying for them, then they can keep providing money. now ultimately,

i think the frame unami will, would collapse with me. clearly. you know, you train just doesn't on fairly simple level, it simply doesn't have the population to stay in the you're suggesting is just the sitting i've lee and waiting for, for you for where the, where the west stop the, with the, in some ways that situation because like there are those in the west is a rush or is being kept busy or it's not doing something else. i'm not sure what else russia would be doing, but you know it's, it's literally it's sort of, you know, we just want to hurt rusher and food in and you know, if the ukrainians want to suffer for it then then let them by the way, why do you think the premium is one to suffer for it because it's also a very puzzling point issue from the historical perspective. not many countries a read it's, you know, compromise itself and to such an extent, how do you understand it? yeah, i mean, i mean sort of a,

i think part of the problem for the ukrainians is that obviously the most nationalistic part of ukraine is in the west. and that's the power. okay. but it also is, yeah, yeah, yeah, and that's the pop is least touched by the war. so to some extent, even within your train, you know, the west consult, the pretend was not is obviously much more real for people in the cap on the east. obviously, those reality is a striking home. now, as you're training a new prescription is ramping up. this started to get younger people. you know, that's trying to get people from abroad. you know, slowly but surely i, you know, i, i think it was time even with the fact of ukrainian government is clearly controlling the message within ukraine. very costly. i mean, i'm sure it's only a matter of time before they'll be preference pressure if there's some sort of compromise based that will involve, you know, acceptance, but, so the dumbass and from a, a russian and then they can stop talking about, you know, the nitty gritty things, you know, what sort of relationship movie refrain have with nato,

those thoughts of all the issues. but, you know, i think it's only a matter of time. full of, hopefully we will not have to wait until the last tier crane in, uh, you know, yeah. but it's time for us to leave it there. thank you very much for the people haven't really spent pleasure. thanks. thank you for watching and hope to, sir. again, it was a part of the, [000:00:00;00]