Dialogue Works

Nima Rostami Alkhorshid:Why did the latest talks between Steve Witkoff and Hamas fail, and why does the U.S. seem unwilling to accept Hamas’s requests for humanitarian aid in Gaza?Given Donald Trump’s statement that Hamas “wants to die,” do you see this as a genuine assessment or a justification for imposing surrender terms?Emmanuel Macron has announced intentions to recognize Palestine—do you believe this is a sincere move, and why delay it to September?Keir Starmer named Iran as a threat to the UK—do you understand why Iran would be considered a direct threat to Britain?With reports of an Israeli plan targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, was the real objective regime change, and what might a new attack aim to achieve?Trita Parsi:The U.S. and Israel aren’t negotiating peace but imposing surrender terms. Hamas asked for food and medicine, which Israel rejected as part of a strategy to starve Gaza—Witkoff, aligned with Israel, walked out.Trump’s narrative mirrors Biden’s: blaming Hamas while ignoring that Israel often rejects deals. This reflects donor influence—like Miriam Adelson—and ideological Zionism within the administration.Macron’s recognition is symbolic. The real effort was a June conference delayed after Israel bombed Iran. France may be acting now due to rising Gaza starvation and domestic pressure to escape complicity.Iran is not a military threat to the UK. European views shifted due to Iran’s support for Russia in Ukraine, but direct threat claims are exaggerated—unless mismanagement pushes Iran toward nuclear weapons.The goal isn’t regime change but regime collapse—decapitation without responsibility. Israel wants to fragment Iran, create internal chaos, and achieve air dominance, similar to its strategies in Lebanon and Syria.Ambassador Chas Freeman:The U.S. negotiates with Israel about Palestinians, not with Palestinians themselves. The current approach is about imposing Israeli terms, not peace.Israel’s actions—starving Gaza, denying medical care—are part of a deliberate strategy. Their denials are fabrications, increasingly disbelieved globally.Recognition of Palestine is symbolic. Without Israeli consent, it changes nothing. By September, there may be few Palestinians left in Gaza to recognize.The idea that Iran threatens the UK is laughable. Britain overestimates its relevance. The real danger is that U.S.-Israeli actions are pushing Iran toward nuclear weapons for self-deterrence.Israel seeks not regime change but regime removal—chaos and fragmentation. They failed to decapitate Iran’s leadership, but will likely try again. Iran is resilient and will respond hard, risking a far worse conflict.

Nima Rostami Alkhorshid:What is your assessment of Donald Trump’s statements about NATO expansion and U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding Russia and Ukraine?Do you believe the U.S. military-industrial complex benefits in the long term from ongoing conflicts like the war in Ukraine?How do you view the Trump administration’s approach to disarming Hezbollah in Lebanon, and is this strategy addressing the root causes of regional instability?Given the recent fatwa issued by an Iranian cleric calling for the assassination of Trump and you, how do you assess the current escalation and credibility of such threats?What is your reaction to Israel’s foreign minister condemning Russian attacks on civilians in Ukraine, while Israel conducts a similar campaign in Gaza?Larry C. Johnson:NATO expansion is the root cause of the current conflict with Russia. Since the Clinton era, the U.S. has provoked Russia by pushing NATO to its borders, ignoring Russian security concerns, leading to the current de facto war.The military-industrial complex benefits financially—defense contractors receive more government funding and deliver high-priced, often ineffective weapons—but the strategic outcome is flawed, as seen in Ukraine with expensive systems like Patriot missiles being used inefficiently.Hezbollah is not the cause but a symptom of the failure to achieve Palestinian self-determination. The West misrepresents the group as religious fanatics, ignoring their fight for freedom and political rights.Yes, a fatwa was issued days ago by Iran’s top cleric calling for the assassination of Trump and me. Hezbollah also targeted our home with a drone attack—this is serious, not fiction.Israel’s condemnation of Russia’s actions in Ukraine is pure hypocrisy. They are committing the same atrocities in Gaza—starving children, killing civilians—mirroring Nazi crimes, yet wrap it in religious justification.Col. Larry Wilkerson:The idea that NATO will increase defense spending to 5% is unrealistic—it would require massive cuts to social programs, which European populations won’t accept. It’s a political fantasy.The U.S. arms industry produces over-engineered, expensive weapons that don’t perform well in real combat. Compare this to simpler, effective systems like the T-34 tank or Iranian drones.The war in Gaza is causing a humanitarian catastrophe—children are starving, images resemble Nazi concentration camps. This is a deliberate policy, and the world is finally waking up.Netanyahu’s claim of a “12-day war” with Iran was delusional. Iran responded with a highly effective missile and drone attack, exposing Israel’s vulnerability and damaging its military prestige.Many Israelis support Netanyahu’s actions in Gaza despite opposing his domestic policies. This reflects deep-seated hostility toward Palestinians, encouraged by leaders like Bibi and enabled by allies like the U.S.

Nima Rostami Alkhorshid:What were the outcomes of the latest round of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine?How should we interpret the recent protests in Ukraine, and what implications do they have for Russia?Does the West, particularly the US and Europe, care about who governs Ukraine after a settlement, and how do their differing approaches affect the situation?What is the significance of the Zangazur corridor, and could the US play a role in managing it, impacting Russia and Iran?How can we understand Turkey’s complex and often contradictory behavior in the region, especially regarding Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the Middle East?Dmitry Orlov:The talks occurred but achieved little—both sides remain too far apart for substantive negotiations. Russia proposed short humanitarian ceasefires to recover the dead and wounded, which Ukraine said they would consider. The Ukrainian delegation no longer follows Zelensky’s demands, signaling a shift toward more realistic, albeit limited, engagement.The protests in Ukraine are not organic but orchestrated "AstroTurf" events, funded and organized by political rivals like Poroshenko and Klitschko to challenge Zelensky. Participants are mostly young, paid individuals; older men avoid protests due to fear of conscription. This reflects Ukraine’s political instability and lack of genuine democratic process.Europe and the US have divergent interests: Europe takes an ideological stance, while Trump focuses on economic leverage. Trump pressured Europe to fund Ukraine’s war effort after the US withdrew support, exposing Europe’s inability or unwillingness to pay. This shift allows the US to blame Europe if Ukraine collapses, marking a strategic win for Trump and a diplomatic loss for Europe.The idea that the US will manage the Zangazur corridor is baseless "fake news." The corridor is strategically important for Iran as a cultural and recreational outlet, and for Azerbaijan as a land link to Turkey. However, merging Azerbaijan with Turkey risks destabilizing both due to deep ethnic and regional divisions within Azerbaijan, making such integration problematic.Turkey’s behavior stems from its fractured identity—balancing secular Ataturk-era nationalism with Islamist influences like the Muslim Brotherhood. Historically prone to internal betrayal, Turkey is now less controllable by the US, especially since Putin helped Erdogan survive a coup attempt. Russia manages Turkey as an untrustworthy neighbor, expecting betrayal but avoiding overreaction.

Nima Rostami Alkhorshid:You believe NATO is escalating by planning to send 250,000 troops to Ukraine—what is the main reason you feel this way?Do you think the Trump administration or Donald Trump himself was influenced by European or U.S. establishment forces to continue the conflict?Given Germany’s economic decline, why is its government focusing on increasing military spending instead of fixing its domestic economy?Is the same dynamic happening within NATO, and what is the real necessity behind military pacts like the UK-Germany alliance?With Trump’s 50-day ultimatum toward Russia, do you see any realistic path to peace, or is this just escalating tensions further?Martin A. Armstrong:Ukraine is losing, and the West started this conflict—from Maidan to installing an unelected government, provoking civil war. The Minsk Agreement was a sham; Merkel admitted they never intended to honor it, only to build Ukraine’s army. Now, NATO seeks escalation because Europe is collapsing economically and needs an external enemy to distract from internal failures.Yes, it appears Trump has been influenced. I’m disappointed—he was supposed to end endless wars, but Europe has sabotaged every peace effort. The EU is falling apart due to its flawed structure, disastrous policies (COVID, climate, sanctions), and now uses war to maintain control and divert public anger from collapsing economies and pension systems.Germany is acting like any failing government—blaming an external enemy. Sanctions on Russia backfired, destroying German industry and causing record bankruptcies. Instead of fixing the economy, they’re pushing military spending and ideology, ignoring reality. This is centralization gone wrong—like Stalin, they prioritize control over people’s lives.NATO should have been disbanded after the Cold War. It survives by manufacturing threats—keeping Putin as the enemy to justify its existence and funding. The UK-Germany pact and others aren’t about defense; they’re about provoking war. They don’t want diplomacy—no one has even called Putin to negotiate. Their goal is conquest, fueled by delusions of reviving European dominance.The 50-day deadline is meaningless bravado. Trump likely thinks he can scare Putin, but after Minsk, why would Putin trust any deal? NATO and Europe have no credibility. This isn’t about Ukraine—it’s about NATO vs. Russia. The real goal is to provoke a response, trigger Article 5, and drag the U.S. into war. There is no peaceful solution in sight—only escalation.

Nima Rostami Alkhorshid:What is your take on Donald Trump’s claim that BRICS is fading and his threat to impose 10% tariffs on member nations?How do current U.S. policies, especially under Trump, affect the global standing and value of the dollar?Can you explain the significance of the Financial Times article showing declining foreign holdings of U.S. Treasuries, especially by China?What explains the sharp rise in U.S. Treasury holdings reported by the Cayman Islands?How are global political shifts, such as rising nationalism in Japan and Europe, influenced by U.S. economic and trade policies?Michael Hudson:Trump’s policies—tariffs, inflation, monopoly tolerance—are driving foreign investors out of dollar assets, accelerating the dollar’s decline despite higher interest rates.The dollar is falling because investors see U.S. policy as destabilizing; they’re moving into gold, Bitcoin, and other safe assets, not because of economic strength but fear of loss.The Cayman Islands’ rising Treasury holdings reflect offshore financial flows, often from illicit sources like tax evasion, dictators, or crypto scams funneled through U.S. bank branches.U.S. weapon systems are being exposed as ineffective in Ukraine and the Middle East, undermining the arms export economy that was meant to sustain global dollar demand.The post-WWII Bretton Woods system is unraveling; just as the U.S. replaced the British pound, emerging powers are now building alternatives to dollar dominance, which U.S. threats can’t stop.Richard Wolff:Trump’s belief that devaluing the dollar boosts exports ignores that the U.S. has deindustrialized—there’s little left to export, making the policy self-defeating.Harsh U.S. immigration and ICE policies are deterring tourism and foreign real estate investment, reducing demand for dollars and contributing to its decline.Countries like Japan and Canada are using non-tariff barriers—cultural and political resistance—to reject U.S. goods, despite trade deals, showing limits of American leverage.The U.S. is alienating allies with tariffs and erratic policies, pushing them toward BRICS and new economic alignments as a defense against American economic instability.The decline of American empire is clear in military weakness (e.g., inability to sustain long wars) and loss of ideological influence, mirrored in the rise of left and right nationalist movements abroad.

Nima Rostami Alkhorshid:While the U.S. was negotiating with Iran, Israel launched an attack. Donald Trump claimed he knew about it in advance. What was the outcome of that attack, and how has it affected Iran’s trust in negotiations?Given the attack during negotiations, what message does this send to other countries considering diplomatic engagement with the U.S. or Israel?The attack was said to target Iran’s nuclear program. What was its actual strategic outcome—did it hinder Iran’s ability to build nuclear weapons?How should we interpret Iran’s current nuclear capabilities in light of the attack and its aftermath?You mentioned that Iran may now be considered an undeclared nuclear weapons state. Can you explain the evidence behind this assessment?Prof. Ted Postol:The attack severely damaged Iran’s enrichment facilities, but it failed in its core objective: preventing Iran from building nuclear weapons. In fact, Iran now has the capability to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for approximately 10 atomic bombs.Any country in a tense relationship with Western powers must now question the credibility of diplomatic negotiations, given repeated instances—like Minsk II and the Iran talks—where agreements were undermined or abandoned unilaterally.Iran has produced around 400+ kilograms of 60% enriched uranium and over 13,000 centrifuges. Even if only a small fraction are hidden, they could quickly enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels, making Iran a de facto undeclared nuclear weapons state—similar to Israel.The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) found uranium enriched to 83.7%, which is functionally equivalent to 90% weapons-grade material. This indicates Iran has likely tested its final enrichment steps, confirming its technical readiness to build bombs.Iran doesn’t need a large or visible facility to produce a bomb. A small cascade of centrifuges (e.g., 174 units) in a 60-square-meter space, powered by something as small as a Prius generator, could complete final enrichment in weeks—making detection nearly impossible and deterrence a reality.

Nima Rostami Alkhorshid:What is your assessment of the Istanbul talks between Ukraine and Russia, and what do each side want?Are the protests in Ukraine primarily about opposition to Zelenskyy, or are they signaling a desire for new leadership?Do you see signs that Germany is beginning to understand the realities of the war in Ukraine, especially in public opinion and media?Is there evidence that British intelligence is preparing Zaluzhny to replace Zelenskyy as president of Ukraine?What is your view on the situation in Gaza, particularly regarding Israel’s humanitarian claims in Ukraine while conducting a military campaign in Gaza?Ray McGovern:The Ukrainian delegation likely attended the Istanbul talks under U.S. pressure, as Zelenskyy is in deep trouble politically and financially. Trump reportedly warned him it was his “last chance” to negotiate before U.S. support ends, suggesting a shift toward Europe.The protests in Ukraine may reflect a desire for new leadership, possibly someone from the hard-right Azov faction, which ironically aligns with Russia’s stated goal of “denazification.” This puts Ukraine in a difficult position.German public opinion is heavily brainwashed on Ukraine. Even suggesting understanding Putin’s perspective is taboo—Angela Merkel was attacked for advocating it. The destruction of Nord Stream has hurt Germany’s economy, but awareness of U.S. role in this is still limited.Zaluzhny is reportedly close to the Azov movement, which makes him problematic. While the British may be backing him, the succession plan is unclear. Zelenskyy may be kept temporarily to accept an unpopular peace deal to shield a new leader from blame.The hypocrisy of Israel condemning Russian actions in Ukraine while committing atrocities in Gaza is staggering. The U.S. remains the key enabler, and moral authority is absent. Younger generations, including Jewish Americans, are increasingly rejecting this double standard.Graham E. Fuller:The Istanbul talks reflect a moment of truth. Western narratives of Ukrainian victory are collapsing. The U.S. and Europe must now manage a retreat from their own propaganda, and Zelenskyy may lose his position as a result.The real issue behind the protests is the collapse of Western promises. Zelenskyy may be used as a “fall guy” to accept a humiliating peace, sparing a successor from the political cost of surrender.Germany’s current government is weak, but rising populist, anti-war, and anti-NATO movements may force a political shift. Economic hardship could eventually push Germany to reassess its foreign policy dependence on the U.S.The British have historically influenced U.S. foreign policy and are likely playing a key role in shaping Ukraine’s leadership transition. Boris Johnson previously sabotaged peace talks, indicating deep British involvement in prolonging the conflict.Israel’s actions in Gaza are indefensible, especially given its public stance on Ukraine. While some European institutions and media are beginning to speak more honestly, real change will require U.S. congressional action—which is blocked by massive pro-Israel lobbying. The situation is morally bankrupt but politically entrenched.

Nima Rostami Alkhorshid:What is happening in Ukraine with the recent protests against corruption, and why are we seeing public dissent now after years of silence during the war?How do you explain the mainstream media coverage of protests in Ukraine by outlets like Bloomberg, Financial Times, and Al Jazeera? Are they trying to build a narrative to remove Zelensky from power?What is the significance of the peace negotiations in Istanbul, and what are Russia’s true objectives in these talks?Why does Europe seem more engaged and connected with Ukraine compared to the United States, which appears less involved under Trump?Donald Trump claims the U.S. is producing more missiles and ammunition than any country in history—how accurate is this, and what does it say about U.S. military capabilities compared to Russia?Andrei Martyanov:The protests in Ukraine are not genuine mass movements but orchestrated, paid events funded by Western organizations like Soros and anti-corruption NGOs. They are theatrical, reminiscent of the Maidan, and designed to create a false narrative. There is no real popular uprising because the population only acts when paid. The Zelensky regime is corrupt, and Ukrainian leadership has historically focused only on stealing resources, not governing.The media narrative is shifting because Washington and London are looking to replace Zelensky with another figure, like Zaluzhny, thinking a personality change will serve their goals. But this is superficial. The strategic aim remains the same: to use Ukraine as a future bridgehead against Russia. These Western actors don’t understand real policy or strategy—they only shuffle individuals, not change objectives. Russians see this clearly and are not fooled.The Istanbul negotiations are mostly for show and PR. Russia’s demands haven’t changed since 2021: NATO must roll back to 1997 borders, Ukraine must be demilitarized and neutral, and territorial realities on the ground must be recognized. Talks focus on humanitarian issues like POW exchanges. Real negotiations require dealing with serious actors, not puppets like Zelensky. A Putin-Trump summit may happen, but only after significant groundwork—and even then, Trump is not trusted.Europe is deeply brainwashed and driven by a Russia-hating frenzy. Its elites, losing power, are inciting war sentiment. Countries like Germany, despite weak militaries, are pushing for confrontation. This is dangerous and delusional. Russian officials, like Maria Zakharova, have warned Germany it could be wiped out. Much of Europe, especially the West, is culturally conformist and easily manipulated, while only a small minority (10–15%) truly understand the danger.Trump’s claims about missile production are childish and false—typical narcissistic boasting from someone disconnected from reality. The U.S. military-industrial complex is weak, especially in artillery and missile production. Russia produces high-precision weapons at an order of magnitude greater than all of NATO combined. U.S. systems like ATACMS are outdated and easily shot down. Russia’s air defense (S-400, S-500) and hypersonic missiles (Kinzhal, Zircon, Kh-BD) far surpass anything the U.S. has. Trump lives in an alternate universe, and his statements are a national embarrassment.

Nima Rostami Alkhorshid:What is the main goal of the Russians in the upcoming third round of negotiations in Istanbul?Do you think Ukraine will have a presidential election soon, and could that facilitate negotiations?Is General Zaluzhny a viable candidate to replace Zelensky, and would he be more open to negotiation?How do the Russians view the issue of "denazification" in Ukraine, and can it be achieved without removing the current leadership?How do the Russians perceive Donald Trump, and do they believe he has a coherent strategy, or are they confused by his actions?John Helmer:The Russian goal in Istanbul may be a surprise maneuver—offering a ceasefire tied to a delay in Western arms deliveries and pushing for regime change in Kyiv, possibly aligning with a potential Trump-Putin meeting in Beijing around September 3rd.Ukrainian elections are unlikely soon; Zelensky is actively consolidating power and suppressing anti-corruption protests, which are likely Western-manipulated. Regime change is a key Russian priority, but internal Ukrainian politics remain opaque.While Zaluzhny is favored by the British as a potential replacement, he is unlikely to win an election as a peacemaker. Russia’s military leadership believes true regime change requires the complete destruction of Ukraine’s military capacity, not just a leadership swap.Russians see "denazification" as impossible without changing the underlying interests driving hostility. Military victory is seen as necessary to dismantle the ideological base, potentially leaving Western Ukraine (e.g., Lvov) isolated in a demilitarized zone, while eastern and southern cities are integrated into Russia.Russian views on Trump are mixed: while he’s seen as preferable to Biden, his erratic behavior is noted. However, Moscow is no longer seeking American approval—the war has revealed deep hostility from the U.S. and NATO, ending any illusion of coexistence.